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 .
DETAILED ACTION
ELECTION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Election of Group III, Embodiment III was made without traverse in the reply dated 08/04/2025. Groups I, II and IV are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 C.F.R. 1.142(b), as being for the nonelected design.
REPRODUCTION OBJECTION
The reproductions are objected to because the details of the design are not clear enough to permit accurate reproduction by the public. Photographs or computer-rendered images submitted as the drawing disclosure must be of the highest quality so that all details of the claim are enabling disclosed, 37 CFR 1.84(b); MPEP 1503.02 V. The renderings are of poor quality and contain jagged lines and portions of the design appear to be washed out. Applicant is advised that photographs, including photocopies of photographs are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent application. The Office will accept photographs in utility and design patent application, however, if photographs are the only practicable medium for illustrating the claimed invention. Drawings in design applications are normally required to be submitted in black ink on white paper (see 37 CFR 1.84 (a) (1)) –whereas, photographs are acceptable only in application in which the invention is not capable of being illustrated in an ink drawing or where the invention is shown more clearly in a photograph (e.g., photographs of ornamental effects are acceptable). See also 37 CFR 1.81(c), and MPEP 608.02. See annotated renderings below for identification of insufficient quality.
Photographs or computer-rendered images submitted as the drawing disclosure must be of the highest quality so that all details of the claim are enabling disclosed, 37 CFR 1.84(b); MPEP 1503.02 V.
In addition, the views are suggested to be larger in scale for better visibility. As required by 37 CFR 1.84(k), the quality of the drawings must be such that all details in the drawings are reproducible in the printed patent when reduced in size to two-thirds in reproduction.
Further, the Examiner understands the reproductions to contain shadows, however, the shadows should not obscure full understanding of the design. The Examiner suggests the shadows to be removed in order to fully and clearly disclose the design.
PNG
media_image1.png
1122
1056
media_image1.png
Greyscale
REPLACEMENT REPRODUCTIONS:
Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the reproductions appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one reproduction is being amended. The reproduction or reproduction number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing reproduction is to be canceled, the appropriate reproduction must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining reproductions 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 reproductions. If all the reproductions on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the reproductions on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or the remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. 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. When preparing new or replacement drawings, be careful to avoid introducing new matter, 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f). This pertains to either: the addition to, or the removal of, any elements shown in the originally disclosed design.
SPECIFICATION OBJECTION
An international design patent application designating the United States must include a specification as prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 112 and preferably include a brief description of the reproductions pursuant to Rule 7(5)(a) describing the view or views. For a clear understanding of the claimed design, the specification should be amended to provide clear and accurate descriptions for the reproductions.
TITLE OBJECTION
The title of the design being claimed is objected to because it must identify the article in which the design is embodied by the name generally known and used by the public (see MPEP 1503.01). “Brush for body care” does not meet the above standard and, in view of the applicant’s election and the title of the grouping seen in the original specification, the title should be amended to read:
-- Dishwashing Brush--
Any amendment to the title must also be made at each occurrence thereof throughout the application, original oath or declaration excepted. If the title of the article is not present in the original figure descriptions, it is not necessary to incorporate the title into the descriptions as part of any amendment to the language of the title.
CLAIM OBJECTION
The claim is objected to as the title is not unified with the title of the instant application. For unity with the instant application, and in view of the Applicant’s election (MPEP 1503.01 § III), the examiner suggests the following language:
-- CLAIM: The ornamental design for [Applicant’s Chosen Title], as shown and described. –
CLAIM REJECTION - 35 USC 112 (a) AND (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 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.
The claim is indefinite and non-enabled because the scope of the disclosure as shown in the drawings is unclear. The precise scope of the claimed design is lost when a clear line of demarcation between the claimed scope and subject matter that is not part of the claimed design is not maintained. Specifically, the exact scope of the nested circles seen in 3.5 is unclear because it is unclear if they are raised, indented, or flush with the surface below. The exact scope is subject to multiple interpretations and cannot be determined without resorting to conjecture. Please refer to arrows in the next annotated drawing.
PNG
media_image2.png
579
1024
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Because of the insufficient information in the drawings provided, the claimed design is in fact subject to multiple interpretations, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reproduce the design without the use of conjecture. This renders the claim indefinite and nonenabling. In order to overcome this rejection, Applicant may fade out, but not fully obscure, any areas determined to be indefinite and nonenabling, add a border of broken lines between the faded out area forming no part of the claim and areas forming part of the claimed design, and remove any and all surface shading from within the area. Surface shading should not be used on unclaimed subject matter, shown in broken lines, to avoid confusion as to the scope of the claim. See MPEP 1503.02 § II, III. If broken lines are added to the drawings, a broken line statement must be added to the specification following the figure descriptions and preceding the claim. The following statement is suggested:
-- In the drawings, the broken lines and faded out areas illustrate portions of the article and form no part of the claimed design. --
If applicant chooses to exclude portions of the design from the claim by converting those portions of the article to broken lines, the amendment must meet the written description requirement of 35 USC 112(a). It must be apparent that applicant was in possession of the amended design at the time of original filing. When preparing new or replacement drawings, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f).
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b). The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant may view and obtain copies of the cited references by visiting <https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/static/pages/ppubsbasic.html> and pressing the “Patent Number Search” button.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evin F Ershock whose telephone number is (571)272-1833. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Christian Mclean can be reached at (571) 270-1996. 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.
/E.F.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2923
/LAUREN D MCVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2921
Prosecution Insights