www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`29/706,360
`
`09/19/2019
`
`Robert D. BRUNNER
`
`3581.0150006(P25245USC4)
`
`1949
`
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`1100 NEW YORK AVENUE,N.W.
`WASHINGTON,DC 20005
`
`GREENE, PAULA ALLEN
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2912
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/23/2020
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`Apple-eOA @sternekessler.com
`e-office @ sternekessler.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CC) Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) Single Claim is/are rejected.
`S)
`) O Claim(s)___is/are objected to.
`C) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)C The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 11/20/2019 is/are: a)(¥) accepted or b)( objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)(1) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`cc) None ofthe:
`b)LJ Some**
`a)L) All
`1.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.4) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date (2) 11/20/2019.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`Other: Annotated Drawing
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20201020
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`29/706,360
`BRUNNER etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`PAULA Allen GREENE
`2912
`No
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s)filed on Preliminary Amendmentasfiled 11/20/2019.
`CO) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)(J This action is FINAL. 2b))This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\(Z Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 29/706,360
`Art Unit: 2912
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AlAfirst to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`The claimed design is Replacement Drawing Figures 1 through 6 filed
`
`11/20/2019.
`
`Acknowledgementis made of applicant’s claim for priority of U.S. Design
`
`Patent Applications 29/642633 filed March 30, 2018, 29/574209filed August 12,
`
`2016, 29/504827 filed October 9, 2014, 29/464539 filed August 18, 2013,
`
`29/426082 filed June 29, 2012, and, 29/410585filed January 9, 2012, all content
`
`of which is herein incorporated by referencein its entirety.
`
`It is understood that
`
`any material in the U.S. Design Patent Applications that is not presentin this
`
`application forms no part of the claimed design.
`
`The two (2) Information Disclosure Statementsfiled 11/20/2019 have been
`
`reviewed.
`
`The claim is rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Lee et al D643833 (Lee 833). Although the invention is not identically
`
`disclosed or described as set forth in pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102, if the differences
`
`between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that
`
`the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 29/706,360
`Art Unit: 2912
`
`Page 3
`
`was made to a designer having ordinaryskill in the art to which said subject
`
`matter pertains, the invention is not patentable.
`
`Lee 833 has an overall ornamental appearance showing design characteristics
`
`that are basically the same as that of the claimed design in that Lee 833 is a
`
`circular exterior headset with downwardsloping rim, inward sloping surface, and
`
`central flat surface. The difference in scope does not negate the obviousness of
`
`the headset of the cited reference to Lee 833. The slight difference in the central
`
`circular flat surface with rim of Lee 833 would be considered by one of ordinary
`
`capability who designs articles of this type to be a mere manifestation of the
`
`same basic design rather than characteristically different designs.
`
`The overall ornamental appearance ofthe claimed design would have been
`
`obvious to a designer of ordinaryskill not later than the effectivefiling date of the
`
`present claimed invention in view of Lee 833. That is, the claimed design fails to
`
`present a distinctive appearance over the reference to Lee 833 to warrant
`
`patentability. The slight difference in scope is considered minute and does not
`
`render the claim patentable thereover. The claimed design and the reference to
`
`Lee 833 would be considered by one of ordinary capability who designs articles of
`
`this type to be a mere manifestation of the same basic design rather than
`
`characteristically different designs.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 29/706,360
`Art Unit: 2912
`
`Page 4
`
`It is well settled that it is unobviousness in the overall appearance of the
`
`claimed design, when compared with the prior art, rather than minute details or
`
`small variations in design as appearsto bethe case here,that constitutes the test
`
`of design patentability. See In re Frick, 275 F.2d 741, 125 USPQ 191 (CCPA 1960)
`
`and In re Lamb, 286 F.2d 610, 128 USPQ 539 (CCPA 1961).
`
`The claimed design is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) for the reasons given.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from
`
`the examiner should be directed to PAULA Allen GREENE whose telephone
`
`number is (571)272-2623. The examiner can normally be reached on M,Tu,Th,F
`
`from 6:00 to 4:00.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
`
`examiner’s supervisor, Sandra Snapp, can be reached at telephone number 571-
`
`272-8364. The fax phone number for the organization wherethis 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 29/706,360
`Art Unit: 2912
`
`Page 5
`
`http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access
`
`to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-
`
`217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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 i
`
`/PAULA Allen GREENE/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2912
`
`