DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgement of Foreign Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in World Intellectual Property Organization Application No. WIPO139003, filed on March 28, 2024.
Multiple Embodiments
This application discloses the following embodiments:
Embodiment 1 - Figs. 1.1-1.7
Embodiment 2 - Figs. 2.1-2.7
Embodiment 3 - Figs. 3.1-3.7
Multiple embodiments of a single inventive concept may be included in the same design application only if they are patentably indistinct. See In re Rubinfield, 270 F.2d 391, 123 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1959). Embodiments that are patentably distinct from one another do not constitute a single inventive concept and thus may not be included in the same design application. See In re Platner, 155 USPQ 222 (Comm'r Pat. 1967).
The above identified embodiments are considered by the examiner to present overall appearances that are basically the same. Furthermore, the differences between the appearances of the embodiments are considered minor and patentably indistinct, or are shown to be obvious in view of analogous prior art cited. Accordingly, they are deemed to be obvious variations and are being retained and examined in the same application. Any rejection of one embodiment over prior art will apply equally to all other embodiments. See Ex parte Appeal No. 315-40, 152 USPQ 71 (Bd. App. 1965). No argument asserting patentability based on the differences between the embodiments will be considered once the embodiments have been determined to comprise a single inventive concept. Failure of applicant to traverse this determination in reply to this action will be considered an admission of lack of patentable distinction between the above identified embodiments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (a) and (b)
The claim is rejected under 35 USC 112 (a) and (b), 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 regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite because the applicant has included break lines in the drawings but has not defined them in the specification. Break lines may not be used to indicate an indeterminate length. As such, the following statement should be added to the specification, to ensure that the claim will be interpreted in a definite manner: “The drawings contain symbolic break lines in Fig. 1.1-1.5; 2.1-2.5; 3.1-3.5. Any portion between the break lines forms no part of the claimed design.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (a) and (b)
The claim is rejected under 35 USC 112 (a) and (b), 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 regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite and non-enabling for the following inconsistencies:
Fig. 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6; 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6; 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, and 3.5 show broken lines on linear markings over curved corners on the front of the vertical axis. It is unclear to the examiner whether the broken lines are meant to convey that the portions of the linear markings are unclaimed or whether the linear markings and the portion of the front between the broken lines are unclaimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
635
738
media_image1.png
Greyscale
To overcome this rejection, the applicant should clarify whether the linear markings or the linear markings and the areas between them are unclaimed. If the space between the markings is unclaimed, the applicant should submit replacement drawings with horizontal broken lines between the unclaimed linear markings. See below for an example.
PNG
media_image2.png
635
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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
The claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a)&(b).
A response is required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amendment submitted in response to this Office action must be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY ANNE ARNTZEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM 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, 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.
/M.A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2914 /BRETT MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 2934