DETAILED ACTION
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 Election
Examiner acknowledges applicant's election of Group I, Embodiment 1 (Reproductions 1.1-1.7) without traverse and cancellation of Group II in response received 06/02/2026. Group II is withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being for a nonelected invention. The corresponding reproduction descriptions have been cancelled. The Specification has been amended to read:
--Design No./Product(s):
1. Locking Device
Description of the Reproduction(s):
: Perspective
: Top
: Front
: Left
: Right
: Back
: Bottom –
Examiner notes the broken lines between the two sides of the design have been converted to solid line. It is acceptable to convert portions of the design from broken line to solid line, but examiner notes the design as currently presented claims a bifurcated locking device rather than a locking device with a symbolic break in its length.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement thereof since the addition of word descriptions under the figure labels is not supported by the original disclosure. The original disclosure does not reasonably convey to a designer of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor 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. 1998); In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 211 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981).
Specifically, there is no support in the original disclosure for the addition of the view labels in the drawing disclosure, as the Reproductions had no descriptions in the original figures.
To overcome this rejection, applicant may attempt to demonstrate (by means of argument or evidence) that the original disclosure establishes that the inventor had possession of the amended claim or by removing the written descriptions from the drawing disclosure.
Claim Rejections - 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, in reproductions 1.1, 1.3, and 1.6, broken lines that are not described in the specification, and the scope of the claimed design cannot be determined.
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 dash-dot broken lines in the reproductions illustrate portions of the Locking Device that form no part of the claimed design.--
Conclusion
The application is refused. References cited and not applied are considered pertinent to the appearance of the claim.
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:
Online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only) https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply ®
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
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.
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”, available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms-patent-applications-filed-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 “Responding to Official USPTO Correspondence” above.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA GABRIELLE COSDEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2980. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:30am to 5:30pm 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, Wendy Arminio can be reached at (571)270-0221. 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.
/CHRISTINA GABRIELLE COSDEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2923
Prosecution Insights