REFUSAL
The present application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections:
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the lines of the drawings are blurry and pixelated. The drawings do not meet the requirements of 37 CFR 1.84 because the lines, numbers and letters are not uniformly thick and well defined, clean, durable and black. 37 CFR 1.84(1). All of the Figures must be redrawn using a process that insures conformance with rule 37 CFR 1.84(1).
The drawings are objected to because the drawing sheets are not standard paper sizes. All drawing sheets in an application must be the same size. The size of the sheets on which drawings are made must be: 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4), or 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8 1/2 by 11 inches). 37 CFR 1.84(f).
The drawings are objected to because the figure labels and figure images extend into the margins of the page. Each drawing sheet must include a top margin of at least 1 inch (25 mm), a left side margin of at least 1 inch (25 mm), a right side margin of at least 5/8 inch (15 mm), and a bottom margin of at least 3/8 inch (10 mm), thereby leaving a sight no greater than 6 15/16 by 9 5/8 inches (176 mm by 244 mm) on Standard Letter Size, 8.5 by 11 inch, drawing sheets or a sight no greater than 170 mm by 262 mm on ISO paper size A4, 210 mm by 297 mm, drawing sheets. 37 CFR 1.84 (g).
Corrected drawing sheets are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application.
Specification
The specification is objected to because the figure descriptions do not describe the views in the drawings. The figure descriptions should be amended to read as follows:
1.1 : Front view
1.2 : Back view
1.3 : Left view
1.4 : Right view
1.5 : Top view
1.6 : Bottom view
1.7 : Perspective view
The specification is objected to because the broken line statement does not clearly identify the purpose of the broken lines. Consider amending the broken line statement to read the following:
--The broken lines depict portions of the prayer mat that form no part of the claimed design. –
Claim Rejections--35 USC § 112
The claim is 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 applicant regards as the invention.
The claim is indefinite and nonenabling because the thickness of the mat and the fringe elements vary across figures:
Reproductions 1.3-1.4 show a thick fringe that is the same height as the body of the mat. In reproduction 1.6, the fringe is taller than the body and extends below the mat. However, in reproduction 1.7, the fringe is paper thin and is shown only extending from the very top edge of the mat.
PNG
media_image1.png
179
1170
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
504
305
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
527
646
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The body of the mat is also proportionally thinner in reproduction 1.5 compared to reproduction 1.3 and 1.4. However, the body of the mat is substantially thicker in 1.7
PNG
media_image4.png
484
817
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The drawings should be amended to show the design consistently.
Applicants should exercise caution when preparing new drawings and/or amending the specification to avoid introducing matter that does not comply with the description requirement of 35 CFR 112(a).
Any amended replacement drawing 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 drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as “Replacement Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d).
If a drawing 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 drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. If all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings.
A reply to the Office action is required to avoid abandonment of the application.
Conclusion
The claim stands rejected for the reasons set forth above. The references cited but not applied, are considered cumulative art related to the claimed design.
Reply Reminder
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).
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.
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 SPTO'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 SPTO's Alexandria, Virginia Customer Service
Windowhttps://www.uspto.gov/patents/maintain/responding-office-actions
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARE ANN GANNON whose telephone number is (571)270-0212. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 10 am to 5pm EST. To act on behalf of the applicant in most situations, a properly executed power of attorney must be present in the application file. See MPEP 402.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, George Bugg can be reached on (571) 272-2998. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/status/private_pair/index.jsp.
For questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CLARE ANN GANNON/Examiner, Art Unit 2911
Prosecution Insights