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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for priority to provisional application no. 62/864,114 filed 13 June 2019.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 24 November 2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The drawing objections have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 31 October 2025.
The specification objections have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 31 October 2025 except with regards to the outer proximity of the panel. See below.
The claim objections have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 31 October 2025.
The rejections of claims 21-40 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 31 October 2025 and are withdrawn.
The rejections of claims 21-40 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 31 October 2025 and are withdrawn.
Claims 1-20 have been canceled.
Claims 21-40 are still pending. An action on the merits follows.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“wherein the continuous frame loop has a beginning and an end” in claim 33.
“wherein the one side of the hexagonal panel, not outlined, borders a second panel” in claim 40.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing 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 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.” 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. Each drawing 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 drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
“wherein the continuous frame loop has a beginning and an end” in claim 33 lacks antecedent basis in the specification.
“an outer proximity of the panel” in claim 37 lacks antecedent basis in the specification.
“wherein the one side [of the panel] … is separated from the frame” in claim 38 lacks antecedent basis in the specification.
“wherein the portion of the series of individual tubular straight frame components outline all but the one side of the hexagonal panel” in claim 39 lacks antecedent basis in the specification.
“wherein the one side of the hexagonal panel, not outlined, borders a second panel” in claim 40 lacks antecedent basis in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 21, 26, 28-29, 31, and 36-37 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21, lines 8-9, “has the shape of” should read --is in the shape of--
Claim 26, line 8, “single” should read --the single--
Claim 26, line 10, “has a shape of” should read --is in the shape of--
Claim 28, lines 1-2, “each individual tubular straight frame component” should read --each individual tubular straight frame component of the series of the series of tubular straight frame components--
Claim 28, lines 2-3, “each individual tubular curved elbow frame component” should read --each individual tubular curved elbow frame component of the series of tubular curved elbow frame components--
Claim 29, lines 1-2, “the shape of the Archimedean polyhedron is a shape of a truncated octahedron” should read --the Archimedean polyhedron is a truncated octahedron--
Claim 31, line 10, “has a shape of” should read --is in the shape of--
Claim 36, lines 1-2, “the shape of the Archimedean polyhedron is a shape of a truncated octahedron” should read --the Archimedean polyhedron is a truncated octahedron--
Claim 37, line 3, “all sides of the panel” should read --all sides of a perimeter of the panel--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 33 and 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 33 recites the limitation “wherein the continuous frame loop has a beginning and an end” in lines 1-2. This limitation was not properly described in the original disclosure and is considered new matter. The original specification refers to the frame as “endless” and the drawings do not show the continuous frame loop having a beginning and/or an end.
Claim 38 recites the limitation “wherein the panel is a hexagonal panel including six sides, and wherein the one side, of the six sides of the hexagonal panel, is separated from the frame” in lines 1-3. This limitation was not properly described in the original disclosure and is considered new matter. The original specification does not describe a side of the panel being “separated from the frame” and the drawings show wherein all sides of the panels are attached to the frame by virtue of the panels being attached to the frame.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 24 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “wherein all joints are completely concealed” in lines 1-2. Claim 23, upon which claim 24 depends, recites “wherein all joints are partially concealed” in line 4. “Partially concealed” implies that the joints are not completely concealed, but dependent claim 24 then claims that they are completely concealed. It is unclear how partially concealed joints are completely concealed. Applicant is suggested to amend claim 23 to read --wherein all joints are at least partially concealed-- to include complete concealment, such that the limitation of claim 24 further limits the limitation of claim 23.
Claim 33 recites the limitation “wherein the continuous frame loop has a beginning and an end” in lines 1-2. It is unclear how a continuous loop has a beginning and an end. A continuous loop implies an uninterrupted loop that does not have a beginning or an end. Furthermore, throughout the specification, Applicant refers to the frame as “endless,” particularly in paragraphs [0064]-[0066], and the drawings do not show the continuous frame loop having a beginning and/or an end.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “wherein all joints are completely concealed” in lines 1-2. Claim 23, upon which claim 24 depends, recites “wherein all joints are partially concealed” in line 4. “Partially concealed” implies that the joints are not completely concealed, but dependent claim 24 then claims that they are completely concealed. Applicant is suggested to amend claim 23 to read --wherein all joints are at least partially concealed-- to include complete concealment, such that the limitation of claim 24 further limits the limitation of claim 23.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-23, 25-32, and 34-37 are allowable.
Claim 24 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 112(d) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
It is noted that claims 33 and 38-40 are currently rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach all of the structural and functional limitations of the claimed invention, further in view of the continuous frame loop forming the overall Archimedean polyhedral shape of the playground structure frame.
The closest prior art of record includes Satterthwaite (US 4,603,853).
Regarding claim 21, Satterthwaite teaches a playground structure frame (Fig. 1) comprising: a plurality of consecutively interconnected tubular frame components (legs 30, 32), wherein each tubular frame component, of the plurality of consecutively interconnected tubular frame components, is joined together, one after the other, in a single line, to form a continuous frame loop (Fig. 2 shows the legs 30, 32 interconnected into a single, continuous frame loop.).
Satterthwaite does not teach wherein the plurality of consecutively interconnected tubular frame components form an overall polyhedral frame shape of the playground structure frame; and wherein the overall polyhedral frame shape of the playground structure frame has the shape of [an Archimedean polyhedron].
Regarding claim 26, Satterthwaite teaches a playground structure frame comprising:
a series of tubular straight frame components and a series of tubular elbow frame components (Fig. 2 shows a series of straight frame components and a series of elbow frame components of the legs 30, 32.), wherein each tubular straight frame component, of the series of tubular straight frame components, interconnects with a respective tubular elbow frame component, of the series of tubular elbow frame components, one after the other, to form a single continuous loop (Fig. 2 shows the legs 30, 32 joined together to form a single continuous loop.);
Satterthwaite does not teach wherein the single continuous loop forms an overall frame shape of the playground structure frame; and wherein the overall frame shape of the playground structure frame has a shape of an Archimedean polyhedron.
Regarding claim 31, Satterthwaite teaches a playground structure that includes a frame, wherein the frame comprises: a series of individual tubular straight frame components and a series of individual tubular curved frame components (Fig. 2 shows a series of straight frame components and a series of elbow frame components of the legs 30, 32.); wherein each individual straight frame component, of the series of individual tubular straight frame components, is connected end-to-end to each individual curved frame component, of the series of individual curved frame components, one after the other in a single line to form a continuous frame loop (Fig. 2 shows the legs 30, 32 joined together to form a single continuous loop.).
Satterthwaite does not teach the continuous frame loop having a particular desired overall frame shape; and wherein the particular desired overall frame shape has a shape of an Archimedean polyhedron.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because Applicant’s amendments have resulted in the allowability of the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Catrina A Letterman whose telephone number is (303)297-4297. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8am - 4pm MT.
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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at (571) 272-4966. 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.
/C.A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784