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 .
Amendment Acknowledgement
Acknowledgement of Amendment is here made of applicant’s amendments of November 24, 2025, wherein amendments have been made to the drawings and specification. The merits of the application have been fully reconsidered in view of applicant’s amendments. However, the previous rejection based on 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b) has not been overcome and therefore the claim is again rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b). Since the applicant’s amendments necessitated new grounds of rejection, this office action is made final (see MPEP 706.07 (a)).
Claim Rejection - 35 USC § 112(a)&(b) - FINAL
The rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b), as lacking in enablement for the
reasons set forth in the previous action have not entirely been overcome. Therefore, the claim
is again and FINALLY REJECTED under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b). Since the applicant has not
overcome the rejection under 35 USC 112 (a) and (b) this action is made final (see MPEP 706.07
(a)).
That is, the claim is rejected 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 applicant regards as the invention.
Inconsistencies
There are inconsistencies throughout the disclosure:
In Figure 1.1 the spout holder handle is shown with a thicker surface surrounding the
center end, compared to much thinner surface shown on Figure 1.3. See annotated drawings below with area shaded in grey for identification. It is therefore recommended that all such features be shown clearly and consistently throughout the disclosure.
PNG
media_image1.png
516
954
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Unclear Parts/Scope
Figures 1.3, 1.4 and 1.8 have been amended to have unclear parts removed from the claim by converting to broken lines. However, the broken lines have been rendered in a way that could cause confusion. Specifically, the broken lines are rendered at a scale too small and with a dot – dot line style in which the dots are too close together in which they cause confusion in regard to the scope of the claim. It should be obvious, at a glance, which lines are solid and which lines are meant to show shading and broken lines. Broken lines should employ an even, consistent rhythm in the breaks, even on curves and angles, with the dashes being larger than the spaces between. Extra care is required in areas of tight detail regarding broken lines due to the tendency of the broken lines and dashes to merge to solid line when reduced for publication. All drawings must be rendered at a scale in which the line weights are thin enough to show the details when reduced in size to two-thirds in reproductions. For clarity in the claim, and in order to overcome this rejection, amended drawings should be submitted that consistently illustrate appropriate line quality for the broken lines within the disclosure. See annotated drawings of areas for identification of the surfaces in question.
PNG
media_image2.png
430
868
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
566
696
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
347
476
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Alternatively, applicant may cancel views if such does not have a negative impact on an overall
understanding of the claimed design.
Because of the inconsistencies and 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 non-enabled. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the design be shown
clearly and consistently among the views. All inconsistencies should be remedied or otherwise
satisfactorily explained, amended to form no part of the claim, or figures cancelled [if such does
not negatively impact understanding of the remaining disclosure]. Inconsistency that cannot be
either corrected or satisfactorily explained should be amended to form no part of the claim
with lightweight broken lines. However, care must be taken to not introduce new matter.
Replacement Reproductions
Any amended replacement reproduction 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 reproduction should not be labeled as amended.
If a 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 reproductions for consistency.
Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining
figures. If all the figures 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 figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the
amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the reproductions. 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 reproductions, be careful to avoid introducing new
matter. New matter is prohibited by 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.
REPLY GUIDELINES
Signature required
Applicant is reminded that any reply to this action 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).
Responding to official USPTO Correspondence
The USPTO transacts business in writing. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only
by:
Online via the USPTO Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only).
See https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-
guidance-and-resources
By mail: Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450;
By facsimile via the USPTO official fax number (571-273-8300); or
By hand-carry to the USPTO Alexandria, Virginia, Customer Service Window.
For more information, see https://www.uspto.gov/patents/maintain/responding-office-actions.
Email communications
Replies to Office actions may not be submitted via email. 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. See MPEP
502.03.II for further information.
Discussions regarding the merits of an 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.
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. A
registered practitioner "not of record" must 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 further information.
If a pro se applicant or registered practitioner located outside of the United States wishes to
communicate by telephone, the examiner may be contacted directly via email to arrange a time
and date for the telephone interview. When proposing an interview appointment, include
proposed days and times for the proposed call, and confirm who will initiate the call. For the
examiner’s work schedule, see Examiner Contact Information.
Conclusion
The claim stands rejected under 35 USC 112(a) and (b). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a))
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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE M ACHEN ZIMMERMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1995. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 TO 5.
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 Ulsh can be reached at 571-270-1433. 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.
/C.M.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 2922
/CATHERINE S POSTHAUER/Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2922