DETAILED ACTION
General Information
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment of 05/19/2026 is acknowledged.
Following the amendment of 05/19/2026, the applicant’s amendment has not properly addressed the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b). Therefore, the claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), and the rejection is MADE FINAL in the following office action.
Claim Rejection – 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b)
The claim is AGAIN AND FINALLY REJECTED 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 applicant regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite and nonenabling because the claimed design cannot be clearly understood from the combination of representations and written descriptions provided. The claimed subject matter is presented inconsistently and cannot be understood for the following reasons:
REPS. 1.5-1.8 show the article having a combination of pointed angular edges, smooth rounded edges, and smooth rounded edges ornamented with solid lines extending around the edges. Conversely, REPS. 1.2 and 1.3 show all visible edges having a noticeably pointed, angular configuration. Further, REP. 1.1 shows all inner and outer edges of the article having a rounded, smooth configuration, demarcated with solid lines extending around the edges. One must resort to conjecture on whether the outer and inner edges of the article are (a) pointed, angular edges, (b) smooth, rounded, unornamented edges, (c) smooth, rounded, wide edges, ornamented with solid lines extending around the edges, or (d) a combination of features (a) – (c). Therefore, the exact appearance of the claim is shown inconsistently and cannot be determined. See annotated representations:
PNG
media_image1.png
835
1070
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1038
1212
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
488
1018
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1114
2135
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s amendment and remarks filed on 05/19/2026 have been fully considered but do not address the issues raised in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) since the design is not consistently and accurately shown so the exact appearance of the design being claimed can be understood.
In order to overcome this rejection, applicant may attempt to amend the disclosure to fully and consistently show the elements considered to be nonenabling by clarifying the claim. Applicant may do so by providing a representation disclosure showing all features of the claim having a consistent appearance in all representations provided, in order to present an understandable claimed design. The inner and outer edges of the article MUST be shown consistently in ALL drawings provided.
If preparing new representations, care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything that could be construed to be new matter prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) is MADE FINAL.
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 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply 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 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Applicant is reminded that any reply to this Refusal must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL BOHANNON whose telephone number is 408-918-7663. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM, CST. 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, Jennifer Rempfer, can be reached at (571) 270-0248 or jennifer.rempfer@USPTO.GOV. 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.
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 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”, 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 “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.ho@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 take into account 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 an official correspondence issued by the USPTO, including refusals, 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
Mailing should be done sufficiently in advance to ensure the USPTO receipt prior to reply period expiration
• Facsimile to the USPTO's Official Fax Number (571-273-8300) (Do Not Fax Formal Drawings)
• Hand-carry to USPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service Window
For additional information regarding responding to office actions see:
https://www.uspto.gov/patents-maintaining-patent/responding-office-actions
Note that correspondence received will appear in Public PAIR, which may be viewed by the applicant at:
https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
/PAUL D BOHANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2932
Prosecution Insights