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 .
Comment to Amendments/Remarks
Applicant’s amendments filed on 11/4/2025 have been reviewed and considered. It is the examiner’s position that the prior rejection of record under 35 USC § 112(a) and (b) was not overcome by the amendments. The applicant failed to show the design in a way that could be understood completely without resorting to conjecture.
REFUSAL
Claim Rejection - 35 USC § 112(a) & (b)
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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 (or, for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant) regards as the invention.
The scope of a claim is definite only when it is supported by an enabling disclosure. When the scope of protection sought exceeds what is enabling in the disclosure, the claim is indefinite.
The claim scope must be less than or equal to the scope of the enablement. The scope of enablement, in turn, is that which is disclosed in the specification and is understandable to a designer of ordinary skill in the art without resorting to conjecture.
Specifically:
Due to the poor quality of the drawings, the claim is indefinite and non-enabled because the disclosure as shown in the drawings is insufficient. It is not believed that the drawing of record is sufficient to accurately and completely convey the appearance of the claimed design. The exact shape(s), appearance, and configuration are subject to multiple interpretations and cannot be determined without resorting to conjecture.
In order to attempt to overcome the rejection, applicant may submit a new reproduction set that consistently shows the scope, shape and appearance of the claimed design. Applicant is further cautioned to render any corresponding drawing details clearly and consistently in all applicable views.
The examiner recommends using a lossless file format when submitting drawings through EFS-web (e.g., TIFF, PNG, GIF, BMP). EFS-web PDF Guidelines may be found at https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-pdf-guidelines
Replacement Drawing Information
Any corrected reproductions submitted in response to this Office action must be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d). The corrected reproductions must not contain new matter. 35 USC 132 and 37 CFR 1.121.
Applicant is reminded that the numbering of the reproductions and legends must follow the Hague Administrative Instructions Section 405(a) consisting of two separate figures separated by a dot (e.g., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. for the first design, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, etc. for the second design, and so on) (see 37 CFR 1.1026 and MPEP 2909.02). 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.
Care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed as new matter prohibited by 35 USC 132 and 37 CFR 1.121 when preparing amended reproductions.
Refusal 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 Applicant. If Applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b).
Conclusion and Contact Information
The claim stands finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), as set forth above.
The references are cited as art of record. Applicant may view and obtain copies of the cited references by visiting <http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html> and pressing the “Patent Number Search” button.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin Johnson whose telephone number is (571) 272-5730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday at 8:00 a.m. to 4:00p.m. 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, George Bugg, can be reached at (571) 272-2998. 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.
/J.A.J./Examiner, Art Unit 2911
/GEORGE A BUGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2911