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 .
Acknowledgement of Amendment
Acknowledgement is here made of applicant’s amendments of June 17th, 2026, 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 amended drawings introduce new matter under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a), not supported by the original disclosure. Since the applicant’s amendments necessitated new grounds of rejection, this office action is made final (see MPEP 706.07 (a)).
Objection – Reproductions
Quality of Reproductions
The amended reproductions show a reduction in quality of the lines. The lines are pixilated and jagged, with some areas of arbitrary separation, creating further difficulty in clearly understanding the exact scope of the claim. Furthermore, stray markings are shown around the solid lines. Moreover, stray marks are shown over the drawings. Stray marks also known as machine marks can be caused by a copy or a fax machine. It is extremely important in design patent applications only original drawings be submitted to ensure the highest quality lines. Each sheet must be reasonably free from erasures and must be free from alterations, overwritings, and interlineations (see 37 CFR 1.84 (e)).
Reproductions shall be of a quality permitting all the details of the industrial design to be clearly distinguished and permitting publication. See MPEP 2909.02, subsection (2) (a); Hague Rule 9.
Corrected reproductions of a sufficient line quality are therefore required in response to the office action. See arrows in annotated reproductions below for examples of insufficient line quality.
PNG
media_image1.png
644
760
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
582
821
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejection 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) – Final
The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) for failing to comply with the description requirement. The original disclosure does not reasonably convey to a designer of ordinary skill in the art that applicant was in possession of the design now claimed at the time the application was filed. See In re Daniels, 144 F.3d 1452, 46 USPQ2d 1788 (Fed. Cir. 1980; In re Rasmussen, 650 F. 2d 1212, 211 USPQ323 (CCPA 1981).
Specifically, there is no support in the original disclosure that permits the introduction of Figures 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6.
PNG
media_image3.png
866
1595
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In the previous office action, it was noted that the exact shape and appearance of the article is unclear due to the limited views, wherein only perspective views of the front and rear were provided. Specifically, it was noted that it is unclear if all of the high points are level with one another, and further if all the recesses are flush with one another, or if variations in configuration of these features exist from section to section. Further, though the specification indicates the article has the shape of a triangle when viewed from above and further is divided into three parts, that further may be folded by way of grooves, there is no indication that these sections are of the same length, or if there are variations in dimension of each section.
A change in the configuration of the design is considered a departure from the original disclosure and introduces new matter (37 CFR 1.121(I). See in re Salmon, 705 F.2d 1579, 217 USPQ 981 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
To overcome this new matter rejection, applicant may attempt to demonstrate that the original disclosure establishes that he or she was in possession of the amended claim or make the drawings consistent with the original disclosure.
Conclusion
The claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a). THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL (see MPEP 706.07 (a)). Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE TO THIS FINAL ACTION IS SET TO EXPIRE THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ACTION. IN THE EVENT A FIRST RESPONSE 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 EXTENSION FEE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) WILL BE CALCULATED FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THE ADVISORY ACTION. IN NO EVENT WILL THE STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE EXPIRE LATER THAN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS FINAL ACTION.
The references are cited as pertinent prior art. 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.
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 Interviews
A telephonic 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 :/ywww.uspto.gov/‘patent,'forms/forms-patent-applications-fiied-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
catherine.posthauer@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 consider 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 USPTO's Patent Center: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/#!/
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/paterits-niaintaining-pateni/responcirig-office-actlons
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Catherine Posthauer whose telephone Number is (571) 270-0233. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday EST.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Center, https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/#!/. Status information for published applications may be
obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for unpublished
applications are available through Patent Center only. For more information about the Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would
like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CATHERINE S POSTHAUER/Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2922
Prosecution Insights