Bracelet

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 . Hague - Reply Reminder Applicant is reminded that any reply to this Refusal must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b). Indication of Allowability Withdrawn The indication of allowability set forth in the previous action is withdrawn and prosecution is reopened in view of the following new ground of rejection. Applicant’s Response Acknowledgement is here made of Applicant’s Remarks and Amendment of 04/02/2026. The merits of the application have been carefully reconsidered in view of Applicant’s Remarks and Amendment of 04/02/2026. Election Acknowledgement Election of Group II was made without traverse per response dated 04/02/2026. Groups I and III-VIII are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being for non-elected designs. Specification Objection The amended specification acts to overcome the previously given specification objection. Drawing Objection The amended reproductions act to overcome the previously given drawing objection. Claim Refusal - 35 USC 112(a) and (b) The claim is refused under 35 U.S.C. 112, (a) and (b), 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 regards as the invention. The claim is indefinite and non-enabling because the exact and complete appearance of the Jewelry cannot be determined because Reproduction 2.8 and 2.9 are not consistent with reproductions 2.1-2.7. Specifically, Reproduction 2.8 has a transparent appearance that is not shown in Reproductions 2.1-2.7 or 2.9. See diagram below. PNG media_image1.png 568 854 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 742 786 media_image2.png Greyscale Furthermore, Reproduction 2.9 shows threading and a leather-like detailing along the band that does not appear in Reproductions 2.1-2.8. Additionally, the photograph in reproduction 2.9 shows color, but the statement in the specification states that the color is not part of the claim. It is unclear what is intended to be included in the claim. See diagram below which highlights the inconsistent threading and leather-like detailing. PNG media_image3.png 687 769 media_image3.png Greyscale To overcome this rejection and as “Reference views” are understood not to have any special meaning in a design application. Applicant’s may consider deleting these reproductions, their corresponding descriptions and the statement that “color and material shown in the drawings form no part of the claimed design” from the disclosure. Conclusion The claim is refused under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) and (b), as set forth above. Notes on Correspondence Discussion of the Merits of the Application Applicant is reminded that any reply to this communication must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity or has at least one party which has a domicile that is not located within the United States or its territories, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b). All discussions between the applicant and the examiner regarding the merits of a pending application will be considered an interview and are to be made of record. See MPEP § 713. The examiner will not discuss the merits of the application with applicant's representative if the representative is not registered to practice before the USPTO. Appointment as applicant’s representative before the International Bureau pursuant to Rule 3 of the Regulations under the Hague Agreement does NOT entitle such representative to represent the applicant before the USPTO. Furthermore, an applicant that is a juristic entity or has at least one party which has a domicile that is not located within the United States, or its territories must be represented by a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Additional information regarding interviews is set forth below. Telephonic or in person interviews A telephonic or in person interview may only be conducted with an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO ("registered practitioner") or with a pro se applicant (an applicant who is the inventor and who is not represented by a registered practitioner). The registered practitioner may either be of record or not of record. To become "of record," a power of attorney (POA) in accordance with 37 CFR 1.32 must be filed in the application. Form PTO/AIA /80 "Power of Attorney to Prosecute Applications Before the USPTO," available at www.uspto.gov/PatentForms, may be used for this purpose. See MPEP § 402.02(a) for further information. Interviews may also be conducted with a registered practitioner not of record provided the registered practitioner can show authorization to conduct an interview by completing, signing and filing an "Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form" (PTOL-413A) (available at the USPTO webpage indicated above). See MPEP § 405. For acceptable ways to submit forms to the USPTO, see "When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence" below. If a pro se applicant or registered practitioner located outside of the United States wishes to communicate by telephone, it is suggested that such person email the examiner at sarah.ault@uspto.gov to arrange a time and date for the telephone interview. Please include proposed days and times for the proposed call. When proposing a day/time for the interview, please take into account the examiner’s work schedule indicated in the contact information section of this communication. The email should also be used to determine who will initiate the telephone call. Email Communications The merits of the application will not be discussed via email (or other electronic medium) unless appropriate authorization for internet communication is filed in the application. Form PTO/SB/439 “Authorization for Internet Communications in a Patent Application or Request to Withdraw Authorization for Internet Communications” may be used to provide such authorization and is available at the USPTO web page indicated above. The authorization may not be sent by email to the USPTO. For acceptable ways to submit the authorization form to the USPTO, see “When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence” below. See MPEP 502.03 II for further information. When Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence When responding to official correspondence issued by the USPTO, including a notification of refusal, please note the following: The USPTO transacts business in writing. All replies must be signed in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33(b). Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.33(b)(3), a reply submitted on behalf of a juristic applicant must be signed by an attorney or agent registered to practice before the USPTO. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only by: Online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only): https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-guidance-and-resources Mail: Commissioner For Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450 Facsimile to the USPTO's Official Fax Number (571-273-8300) Hand-carry to USPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service Window: https://www.uspto.gov/patents-maintaining-patent/responding-office-actions Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sarah Ault whose telephone number is (571)272-9278. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00am to 2:00pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ian Simmons, can be reached at (571)272-2658. 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. 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. /SA/Examiner, Art Unit 2913 /IAN SIMMONS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2913