The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
FINAL REJECTION
Applicant's response with amendments received on 10/03/2025 is acknowledged, however, the 35 U.S.C. 112(a)(b) rejection dated on 04/03/2025 has not been fully resolved. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 112(a)(b) rejection dated on 04/03/2025 has been withdrawn, and a new rejection has been issued and made final below.
Rejection under 35 USC § 112, (a) and (b)
The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, (a) and (b) because the claimed invention is not described in such full, clear, concise and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains to make and use the same nor does it particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The claim remains indefinite and non-enabling for the following reasons:
1. The claim is indefinite and non-enabling since the scope appears to be inconsistent. Specifically, the drawings disclose evenly-spaced broken lines, however, there is no statement in the specification describing them. Therefore, it is unclear what is and is not part of the claimed design. In order to overcome this rejection, the examiner suggests including the following statement in the specification, following the figure descriptions and preceding the claim:
--The broken lines in the drawings depict portions of the Coffee Grinder that form no part of the claimed design.--
2. The exact shape and appearance of the area, shown by example shaded in grey, in 2.1 and 2.4 cannot be understood. Specifically, it cannot be determined if that area is a closed surface or an opening and due to the lack of additional corroborating view(s), it is left to conjecture.
PNG
media_image1.png
683
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
3. The exact shape, appearance and depth/location of the portion shown shaded in grey along with portion [B] in 2.6 and 2.7 (shown by example in 2.6) cannot be understood. Specifically, since 2.6 and 2.7 are illustrated in a 2-dimensional illustration technique, and due to the lack of additional corroborating view(s), exact features of the portion are unclear (e.g. one or more three-dimensional attributes such as depth, curvature, angle, placement, etc. are unknown) and is left to conjecture.
PNG
media_image2.png
670
537
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In an attempt to overcome this rejection, applicant may convert claimed rings [A] in 2.1 and 2.4 and portion [B] in 2.6 and 2.7 to distinctly broken lines.
Reproductions
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are suggested in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. All replacement sheets should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures.
When preparing new drawings in compliance with the requirement thereof, care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed to be new matter prohibited by U.S.C 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f).
Conclusion
The claim stands finally rejected for the reasons set forth above.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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.
The references cited are considered relevant to the claimed design. Applicant may view and obtain copies of the cited references by visiting: http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html and pressing the “Number Search” link in the PatFT: Patents column.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW KERR (571-272-2184). The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jae Liang can be reached on 571-270-0229.
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.
/ANDREW KERR/
Primary Examiner Art Unit 2917