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 .
Foreign Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in IT on April 12, 2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the IT Application No. 402024000001123 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. In the case of a design application, the certified copy must be filed during the pendency of the application, unless filed with a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(g) together with the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(g), that includes a showing of good and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the certified copy of the foreign application. If the certified copy of the foreign application is filed after the date the issue fee is paid, the patent will not include the priority claim unless corrected by a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and 37 CFR 1.323.
Claim Refusal -— 35 U.S.C 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(s) regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite and nonenabling for the following reasons:
A) The exact configuration of the oval features in 1.1-1.7 (1.1 and 1.6 are shown below as examples) cannot be understood because there is not enough information provided in the views in which they are shown. The complete shape and contours of the oval features cannot be determined due to the layering hiding large portions of the features. Highlighted below are the area/features that cannot be understood and are therefore non -enabled. Applicant may disclaim the areas or portions of the design which are considered indefinite and nonenabling in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 above by converting them to broken lines.
PNG
media_image1.png
490
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (1.1)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
250
654
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (1.7)][AltContent: arrow]
Replacement Reproductions
Replacement reproduction sheets must include all of the reproductions appearing on the prior version of the sheet, even if only one reproduction is being amended. However, if the applicant cancels a reproduction, follow these steps:
Do not include the canceled reproduction on the replacement reproduction sheet.
Make appropriate changes to the reproduction descriptions for consistency.
Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show renumbering of the remaining reproduction.
If all the reproductions on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required.
A marked-up copy of the reproduction sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the reproductions on that reproduction sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the reproductions.
Label the replacement reproductions in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the examiner rejects the amended reproductions, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action.
When preparing new or replacement reproductions, be careful to avoid introducing new matter. New matter is prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121 (f).
Discussion of the Merits of the Application
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 Common 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 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 https:/www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms-patent-applications- filed-or- after-september-16-2012, 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 web page 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 Vanessa.Martinez1@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 last paragraph 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 Online via the USPTO's Patent Center (Registered eFilers only)
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center
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
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 the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b).
Conclusion
The claim is refused as set forth above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8335. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5PM.
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, Dana K. Weiland can be reached at (571) 270-0253. 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.
/V.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2914
/T Chase NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2926