DETAILED ACTION
Because the extended examination of the application is necessitated by the allowance of 29/905,192 without the required rejoinder procedure, additional examination time is granted through this second final rejection, instead of following standard after-final process.
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 251 is repeated and made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 251
This application for reissue is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 based on the fact that the examiner is unable to identify any an error which has been corrected. In other words, the amended drawings look identical to the original drawings. The response explains that there are broken lines in the row of keys that appear as solid lines in the perspective views, which have been fixed so that they more clearly read as broken lines. While this is a reasonable error correctable via reissue, no changes have been found. Unless applicant can identify the changes that were made, it is recommended that the line along the bottom edge of the top most key be corrected so that it properly reads as a broken line.
PNG
media_image1.png
328
710
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 251
The issue regarding the declaration has not been addressed so it is repeated.
The reissue oath/declaration filed with this application is defective because it fails to identify at least one error which is relied upon to support the reissue application. See 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP § 1414.
MPEP 1414; “A reissue applicant must acknowledge the existence of an error in the specification, drawings, or claims, which error causes the original patent to be defective. In re Wilder, 736 F.2d 1516, 222 USPQ 369 (Fed. Cir. 1984). A change or departure from the original specification or claims represents an “error” in the original patent under 35 U.S.C. 251.”
MPEP 1414: “It is not sufficient for an oath/declaration to merely state "this application is being filed to correct errors in the patent which may be noted from the changes made in the disclosure." Rather, the oath/declaration must specifically identify an error. In addition, it is not sufficient to merely reproduce the claims with brackets and underlining and state that such will identify the error. Any error in the claims must be identified by reference to the specific claim(s) and the specific claim language wherein lies the error.”
The explanation that “whereas the reissue application presents a claim illustration a different combination of solid lines and broken lines” is not a sufficient statement of an error. The identified error is equivalent to “to correct errors in the patent which may be noted from the changes made in the disclosure”.
MPEP 1414: In specifically identifying the error as required by 37 CFR 1.175(a), it is sufficient that the reissue oath/declaration identify the claim being broadened and a single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid.
In design reissue practice, the “single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original claim” is interpreted as identifying a specific something in the specification or drawings. No such error has been identified.
Conclusion
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §251.
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 PHILIP S. HYDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2621.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Justin Jonaitis can be reached on 571-270-5150. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300’
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Dec. 2, 2025
/Philip S. Hyder/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2917