Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
The examiner recognizes applicant’s attempt to correct a number of the previously existing issues through amendments; however, a number of issues remain, with some additional created by the amendments.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the left-hand locking components in the right-hand locking components” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1, line 10 recites “two insertion rods in each crossbar pedal”, and then in lines 12-13 recites “an elastic member with one end connected to the insertion rod and a hook member movably connected to the insertion rod”, without identifying which of the two insertion rods these elements are attached to, or if there is an elastic member and hook connected to each of the insertion rods.
Additionally, with respect to the “two insertion rods” (claim 1, line 10), the remainder of claim 1 primarily refers to a singular “the insertion rod”. Overall, there is inconsistency throughout the claims as to if limitations are directed to both rods or one rod (or one hook or both hooks, etc etc). For example, the limitation in claim 1 lines 37-38, “two insertion rods in the lower crossbar pedal are released, moves outward, and are inserted into the lower insertion hole” suggests that two rods are inserted into a single hole.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, the phrase "in this case" (which is akin to using the phrase “for example” in a claim) is still present and renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). While applicant removed the phrase some claims, it remains in claim 1, lines 23 and 28 and claim 7, line 8.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the clamping portion” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that the clamping portion is claimed in claim 2, but claim 7 depends from claim 1.
Again, it is noted that the claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. The above are non-limiting examples. Applicant is required to thoroughly review all claim language and clarify the language where needed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. NOTE: this indication of allowability is based on the claims as best understood, in light of the above 112(b) issues indicated above. Should the amendments change the scope of what is claimed there may be applicable prior art. Applicant is welcome to reach out the examiner should they have any questions regarding forming of the amendments to clarify the claim language.
Reasons for allowance were provided in the previous Office Action.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE whose telephone number is (571)272-6289. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM-4:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
COLLEEN M. CHAVCHAVADZE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3634
/COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights