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 .
Non Final Rejection
Election
This application has been examined. Note is made of the election by applicant of the design shown in Group 1, Embodiments 1,2 (Figs. 1-14). Accordingly, the designs shown in Group 2, Embodiment 3 (Figs. 15-21), Group 3, Embodiment 4 (Figs. 22-28) and Group 4, Embodiments 5,6 (Figs. 29-42) stand withdrawn from further prosecution before the Examiner, the election having been made without traverse in the papers received 04/24/2024. 37 CFR 1.142(b).
35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b)
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), first and second paragraphs, as the claimed invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the same, and fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite and nonenabling for the following reasons.
1) FIG. 1 front view: the features disclosed on the inside back of the beverage dispenser to the left of the portafilter cannot be determined by the examiner without resorting to conjecture. Because only one frontal view of these features is provided, the configuration including depth and three dimensionality of the features cannot be understood by the examiner without resorting to conjecture. See examiners illustration below:
2) FIG. 7 bottom view: the three dimensional nature, location and configuration of the central portion of the bottom of the coffee machine cannot be determined by the examiner without resorting to conjecture. Is it flush with the outer walls of the central portion of the coffee machine which can be seen in side, front and back views, or is it indented/recessed? See examiner’s illustration below:
PNG
media_image1.png
661
825
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
739
579
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Because of the inconsistencies and inadequate visual disclosure of the figure drawings, the claimed design is subject to multiple interpretations such that one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reproduce the design without resorting to conjecture. This renders the claim indefinite and non-enabled.
To attempt to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the applicant submit replacement
drawings of the claimed design that disclose the design clearly and consistently across all
views. If non-enabled portions of the design cannot be enabled without the introduction of new
matter, the applicant may remove from the claim those areas or portions of the design that are
considered indefinite and nonenabling by converting them to broken lines.
If new drawings are submitted in an attempt to overcome this rejection, care must be exercised to avoid the introduction of anything which could be construed to be new matter prohibited by 35 USC 132 and 37 CFR 1.121. The original drawing disclosure represents the claimed design. All features, elements, and lines as presented are the basis from which examination of the claim is conducted. It is critical that the original disclosure filed with the office be of the highest quality, and be the most accurate rendering of the claimed design as possible. The overall design as well as that of individual features must be rendered in such a way that no amount of conjecture is necessary in understanding the claim. New matter is anything (structure, features, elements) which was not apparent (seen) in the drawings as originally filed. It is possible for new matter to consist of the removal as well as the addition of structure, features or elements. It is possible that the removal of lines showing changes in elevation in CAD drawings, which cannot be clearly understood to be such without resorting to conjecture, may also introduce new matter. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action.
Conclusion
In conclusion this application stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Darryl Dardenne whose telephone number is 571-272-9967. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-5:00PM EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in person, and via 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, Sandra Snapp, can be reached at 571-272-8364. 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). For assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/D.J.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2912
/JONATHAN J HAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2912
Prosecution Insights