NOTIFICATION OF REFUSAL
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 .
Election
In the paper received 07/15/2026, applicant elects without traverse the design shown in Group II (Figs. 2.1-2.8). Accordingly, the design shown in Group I (Figs. 1.1-1.8) stands withdrawn from further prosecution. 37 CFR 1.142(b). Original Fig. 2.9 has also been canceled, and original Figs. 2.1-2.8 have been renumbered as Figs. 1.1-1.8 and remain in this application.
Foreign Priority
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s claim to the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. §119 to Chinese application No. 202530203405.4. The elected drawings in the present application correspond to the drawings in the Chinese application No. 202530203405.4.
A second certified copy has also been filed for Application No. 202430657570.2. However, applicant is advised that the elected drawings in the present application do not appear to correspond to the drawings in the second certified copy, Chinese application No. 202430657570.2.
Drawings and Specification
The Drawings and specification are objected to as follows:
The amendments dated 07/15/2026 changed the Design numbering from “FIGS. 2.1-2.8” to “FIGS. 1.1-1.8” and the new numbering scheme does not align with the design numbering as filed and the requirements indicated per Hague Administration Instruction section 405, paragraph (a) (as per 37 CFR 1.1026 and MPEP 2909.2). Thus, the drawings and brief description in the specification should be renumbered “FIGS. 2.1-2.8”.
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 or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite and nonenabling because the claim is not consistently or clearly disclosed. Specifically:
The disclosure does not provide certainty to the exact appearance and 3-Dimensional configuration of the portions shown shaded and pointed to below in Figs. 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 (also shown in Fig. 1.7) without resorting to conjecture. Specifically, the internal shaded surfaces in Fig. 1.1 (and 1.7), and the shaded surfaces in Figs. 1.3, 1.5, 1.6. The exact 3-Dimensionality of the portions cannot be understood from the disclosure.
Applicant may overcome this portion of the refusal by converting the portions to broken lines, thus disclaiming those portions.
PNG
media_image1.png
892
1120
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1162
846
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
811
635
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1299
1029
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets of the reproductions are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet of the reproductions should include all of the views appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one view is being amended. The view of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended”. If a drawing view is to be canceled, the appropriate view must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining views must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbered of the remaining views. Each drawing sheet of reproductions 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). Applicant is reminded that the numbering of the reproductions and legends must follow the Hague Administrative Instructions Section 405(a) consisting of two separate figures separated by a dot (e.g., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. for the first design, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, etc. for the second design, and so on) (see 37 CFR 1.1026 and MPEP 2909.02). 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.
Care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed as new matter prohibited by 35 USC 132 and 37 CFR 1.121 when preparing amended reproductions.
Conclusion
The claim stands refused 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. The additionally cited references show the state of the art. Applicant may view and obtain copies of the cited references by visiting http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html and pressing the “Number Search” button.
Discussion of the Merits of the Case
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”, may be used for this purpose:
https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms-patent-applications-filed-or-after-september-16-2012
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 nick.buffa@uspto.gov to arrange a time and date for the telephone interview. Please include proposed days and times for the proposed call. 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 an official correspondence issued by the USPTO, including refusals, ex parte Quayle, Notice of Allowances, or Notice of Abandonments, please note the following:
The USPTO transacts business in writing. Applicants may submit replies to Office actions only by:
Online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only)
https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-guidance-and-resources
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
/NJB/
Examiner, Art Unit 2932
/BAO-YEN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2954
Prosecution Insights