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 .
Foreign Priority Acknowledgement
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on application CN2024307966008 filed in People’s Republic of China on December 16, 2024. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Foreign Patent Documents Filed - Not Reviewed
Although foreign patent documents were filed by the applicant on June 27, 2025, no Information Disclosure Statement was filed according to CFR 1.97. Examiner notes that, in order for the relevant foreign patent documents to be reviewed and acknowledged, an Information Disclosure Statement must be filed according to CFR 1.97.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (b)
The claim is refused under 35 USC § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The visual disclosure is inadequate such that the scope of the design for which protection is sought cannot be determined or understood (MPEP § 1504.04), specifically:
Feature C is shown using solid line in Figs. 1.1 & 1.5-1.7 and broken line in Figs. 1.2 & 1.3. Fig. 1.1 is shown below compared to Fig. 1.2 as an example of this inconsistency.
PNG
media_image1.png
452
542
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1.1
PNG
media_image2.png
374
540
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1.2
Because of the inadequate disclosure, the claimed design is in fact subject to multiple interpretations, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to make and use the design without the use of conjecture. This renders the claim indefinite and non-enabled. To overcome this refusal, it is suggested that the applicant submit new reproductions of the claimed design that show the design clearly and consistently. However, if certain non-enabled portions of the design cannot be fully enabled without the introduction of new matter, the applicant may remove from the claim the areas or portions of the design that are considered indefinite and non-enabling by converting them to broken line and amending the specification to indicate those portions form no part of the claimed design.
Corrected reproduction sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. 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. 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. The objection to the reproductions will not be held in abeyance.
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).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) & (b)
The claim is refused under 35 USC § 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 non-enabling for the following:
Feature A is shown in Fig. 1.1 and 1.6 and not in Figs. 1.2 and 1.3. Fig. 1.1 is shown below compared to Fig. 1.2 as an example of this inconsistency.
PNG
media_image3.png
203
321
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1.1
PNG
media_image4.png
212
363
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1.2
The visual disclosure is inadequate such that the appearance and shape or configuration of the design for which protection is sought cannot be determined or understood (MPEP § 1504.04), specifically:
The depth of feature B is unclear. The feature is shown only in Fig. 1.7 wherein the feature is shown adjacent to other features with no indication as to whether or not they share the same plane. One of ordinary skill would not be able to replicate the design without significant questions as to whether the feature would have a flush or recessed appearance relative to the surrounding areas. Although the feature appears to be located somewhere within the body of the design, the feature could exist anywhere within the range indicated on annotated Fig. 1.2, below. Therefore, the exact location of the feature is open to conjecture due to lack of additional disclosure.
PNG
media_image5.png
300
302
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1.7
PNG
media_image6.png
397
780
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1.2
Because of the inconsistencies and inadequate disclosure, the claimed design is in fact subject to multiple interpretations, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to make and use the design without the use of conjecture. This renders the claim indefinite and non-enabled. To overcome this refusal, it is suggested that the applicant submit new reproductions of the claimed design that show the design clearly and consistently. However, if certain non-enabled portions of the design cannot be fully enabled without the introduction of new matter, the applicant may remove from the claim the areas or portions of the design that are considered indefinite and non-enabling by converting them to broken line and amending the specification to indicate those portions form no part of the claimed design.
Corrected reproduction sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. 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. 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. The objection to the reproductions will not be held in abeyance.
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).
Conclusion
The claim stands refused for the reasons set forth above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAYLOR MORTORFF whose telephone number is (571)272-9553. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-3:00.
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, Eric Goodman can be reached at (571)272-4734. 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.
/TAYLOR O MORTORFF/Examiner, Art Unit 2974
/KHAWAJA ANWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2964
Prosecution Insights