DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Restriction Requirement
The response of January 29, 2026 has been received and entered into the electronic case file.
In view of the election of Group III, Embodiment 3, Reproductions 3.1-3.7, set forth on January 29, 2026, Groups I, II, and IV are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being for the nonelected design. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 29, 2026.
The amendment to the reproductions and specification, which cancels the unelected embodiments, is acknowledged.
Objection to the Specification
The specification is objectionable because the description of reproduction 3.1 uses brackets in the description which could be confused for cancelled information. Descriptions of the figures are not required to be written in any particular format, however, if they do not describe the views of the drawing clearly and accurately, the examiner should object to the unclear and/or inaccurate descriptions and suggest language which provides a clear and accurate description of the views. See MPEP 2920.04(a)(II).
For clarity, the following is recommended:
-- 3.1 Top, front, and right side isometric --
Rejection under 35 USC 112(b)
The claim is rejected for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention as required in 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The claim is indefinite because the reproductions include broken lines that are not described in the specification, and the scope of the claimed design cannot be determined.
When utilizing broken lines in a drawing, a broken line description which clearly describes the use of the broken lines must be included in the specification, see 37 CFR 1.152 and MPEP 1503.02(III). Because broken lines can be used in design patent drawings for a number of reasons, the broken‐line description should expressly identify the purpose of the broken lines in addition to defining their relationship to the claimed design, see MPEP 1503.01(III). The practice set forth in MPEP 1503.02, subsections I-IV with respect to views, surface shading, broken lines, and surface treatment is generally applicable to nonprovisional international design applications (MPEP 2920.04(b)).
If the broken lines represent portions of the article or environmental structure for which protection is not sought, applicant may overcome this rejection by inserting a statement similar to the following into the specification immediately preceding the claim, provided such statement does not introduce new matter (see 35 U.S.C. 132):
-- The portions of the movable planter with partition shown in broken lines forms no part of the claimed design. --
OR
-- The broken line showing of [insert name of structure] is for the purpose of illustrating [insert either portions of the title of the claimed design OR environmental structure] that form no part of the claimed design. --
Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 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 claim is indefinite and non-enabling for the following reasons:
The scope and appearance of the claimed design cannot be understood because of several inconsistencies. These inconsistencies leave the exact configuration and scope open to conjecture.
In reproductions 3.1-3.5 the top edges of the front, rear, and side walls are shown in broken lines; however, in reproduction 3.6, they are not shown in broken lines.
PNG
media_image1.png
1172
1321
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reproduction 3.1 (left) and 3.6 (right) showing an example of the inconsistency.
In reproduction 3.1, there is more of the bottom interior surface shown than in reproduction 3.6.
PNG
media_image2.png
1172
1321
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Reproduction 3.1 (left) and 3.6 (right) showing the inconsistency.
The appearance of the claimed design cannot be understood because the exact configuration of the keystone-shaped feature with a circular feature in reproduction 3.4 cannot be understood from the view in which it appears. It is unclear how deep they are and what their relationship to each other is.
PNG
media_image3.png
885
255
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Reproduction 3.4 showing the feature that cannot be understood.
The appearance of the claimed design cannot be understood because the exact configuration of the bottom features cannot be understood from the view in which they appear. It is unclear at what depth they occur, if the surfaces are flat, angled, curved, or other and what their relationship to each other is.
PNG
media_image4.png
333
692
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Reproduction 3.7 showing some of the features that cannot be understood.
In order to overcome this rejection, the scope and appearance of the claim should be clarified. It is recommended to 1.) correct the inconsistencies and 2. & 3.) convert the above mentioned features to broken line. To convert the features to broken line, it is recommended to put a broken line around the areas identified above and to make the portions within those broken lines lighter in value by adding a transparent overlay or halftone (see example below). If a broken line is added with a transparent overlay, a statement must be inserted after the figure descriptions and before the claim describing the broken lines and lightened portions. The following is suggested: -- The broken lines and lightened areas bounded by the broken lines depict portions of the movable planter with partition that form no part of the claimed design. --
PNG
media_image5.png
245
649
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Rough example of broken lines and lightened portions in 3.7.
Any amendment must not introduce new matter and must meet the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a). That is, it must be apparent that applicant was in possession of the amended design at the time of filing. This pertains to the addition or removal of parts of the design, as well as the conversion of solid lines to broken lines and vice versa. See 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f) for new matter.
Replacement Reproduction Instructions
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 reproduction 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 reproduction 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 figures on that reproduction sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the reproductions. Each reproduction 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 into the disclosure, prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 C.F.R. 1.121(f). Additionally, any amendment must meet the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a). That is, it must be apparent that applicant was in possession of the amended design at the time of filing. This pertains to either the addition to, or the removal of, any elements shown in the original disclosure of the design.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), as set forth above. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence
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:
To file and manage patent submissions online in Patent Center (available to registered users), visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov.
See the Patent Center Quick Start Guide for international design application submissions available at: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Patent_Center_User_Guide_September_2023.pdf.
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/maintain/responding-office-actions
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRACE DOYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-9605. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. - 5 p.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, Sandra Snapp can be reached at (571)272-8364. 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.
/GRACE DOYLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2914