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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 25, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 35, 37, 40-41, 43-46, and 53-54 have been cancelled. Claims 55-67 have been added. Therefore, claims 55-67 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed June 4, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 55-67 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitrovic (US20110158766A1), hereinafter "Mitrovic", in view of Rimmel (DE102011011239A1), hereinafter "Rimmel".
Regarding claim 55, Mitrovic teaches an apparatus (Figs 17-18, bolt 175) comprising:
a baseplate (Fig 17, section 182) defining a top surface (Fig 17, side 186) and a bottom surface (Fig 17, side 185);
a post (Fig 17, section 190) projecting (see Fig 17, Paragraph 0061) from the bottom surface (185) and defining a screw (see Fig 17, Paragraph 0061, Examiner notes first section forms a screw-like thread 192 which tapers to a point as defining a screw);
a neck portion (Fig 17, section 184) projecting (see Fig 17, Paragraph 0061) from the top surface (186), being externally cylindrical (see Figs 17-18), and defining an open top (see Fig 18, Examiner notes a top of bolt 175 at end 180 having turning means 196 as defining an open top); and
wherein:
a length (see Fig 17, Examiner notes a length of section 184 perpendicular to section 182 as a length) of the neck portion (184) from the top surface (186) to the open top (see Fig 18) is larger (see Fig 18) than an external diameter (see Fig 17, Examiner notes an outer diameter of section 184 as an external diameter) of the neck portion (184); and
the neck portion (184) defines a recessed tool port (Fig 18, turning means 196) adjacent (see Figs 17-18, Paragraph 0061) the open top (see Fig 18) configured to receive (capable of receiving, i.e. this is a functional recitation) a tool for rotating (Paragraph 0061, Mitrovic indicates turning means 196 comprises a multi-sided end socket that can be engaged by a turning tool, for example an Allen key).
Mitrovic fails to teach a blind bore extending from the open top into the post and being at least partially threaded.
However, Rimmel teaches a blind bore (Fig 2, hole 4) extending (see Fig 2) from the open top (see Figs 1-2, Examiner notes a top of anchor 1 adjacent projection 15 and having hole 4 as the open top) into the post (Fig 1, shaft 2) and being at least partially threaded (Fig 2, thread 10).
Therefore, as evidenced by Rimmel, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an adequately sized and shaped blind bore extending from the open top into the post and being at least partially threaded as taught by Rimmel to Mitrovic. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to facilitate attaching of further components (Rimmel, Paragraph 0035).
Regarding claim 56, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 55 and further teaches wherein the baseplate (182) comprises a circular washer (see Fig 18).
Regarding claim 57, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 55 and further teaches wherein the neck portion (184) is externally unthreaded (see Fig 17, Examiner notes a portion of section 184 adjacent section 182 without threads as is externally unthreaded).
Regarding claim 58, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 55 and further teaches wherein the post (190) defines a lag screw (Paragraph 0061, Examiner notes bolt 175 which is particularly useful when the support to which the structure is to be attached is made of wood as defines a lag screw).
Regarding claim 59, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 55 and further teaches wherein the blind bore (4) terminates (Rimmel, see Fig 2) in a closed end (Rimmel, see Figs 1-2, Examiner notes an end of hole 4 distal from projection 15 as a closed end) internally defined by the post (190).
Regarding claim 60, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 59 and further teaches wherein the recessed tool port (196) is multilateral (Paragraph 0061, Examiner notes multi-sided end socket that can be engaged by a turning tool, for example an Allen key, as is multilateral).
Regarding claim 61, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 55 and further teaches wherein the baseplate (182), the neck portion (184), and the post (190) are integrally joined (see Fig 17) to form a one-piece component (see Fig 17).
Regarding claim 62, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 55 but fails to teach further comprising: a base structure; and an outer layer overlying the base structure; wherein: the baseplate is disposed between the base structure and the outer layer; the post penetrates the base structure; and the neck portion penetrates the outer layer.
However, Mitrovic in an embodiment of Fig 6, teaches a base structure (Fig 6, base 74); and an outer layer (Fig 6, plate 16) overlying (see Fig 6) the base structure (74); wherein: the baseplate (Fig 6, flange 84) is disposed between (see Fig 6) the base structure (74) and the outer layer (16); the post (Fig 6, member 72) penetrates (see Fig 6) the base structure (74); and the neck portion (Fig 6, portion 90) penetrates (see Fig 6) the outer layer (16).
Therefore, as evidenced by Mitrovic in the embodiment of Fig 6, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an adequately sized and shaped base structure and outer layer as taught by Mitrovic to modified Mitrovic. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to provide assembled components having a desired height and positioning to be utilized with the bolt (Mitrovic, Paragraph 0049).
Regarding claim 63, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 62 and further teaches wherein the outer layer (16) is flush (Paragraph 0053, Examiners notes plate 16 is then placed on top of the connecting member and the nut 76 so that it rests on the flange 84 of the nut as is flush) with the top surface (186).
Regarding claim 64, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 62 and further teaches wherein the neck portion (184) occupies a circular opening (Fig 6, hole 30) in the outer layer (16).
Regarding claim 65, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 62 and further teaches wherein the open top (see Fig 18) is flush (see Fig 6) with an outermost surface (see Fig 6, Examiner notes a surface of plate 16 distal from base 74 as an outermost surface) of the outer layer (16).
Regarding claim 66, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 62 and further teaches wherein the post (190) threadably engages (see Fig 6) the base structure (74).
Regarding claim 67, modified Mitrovic teaches the apparatus (175) of claim 62 but fails to teach further comprising a gasket between the baseplate and the base structure.
However, Rimmel in an embodiment of Fig 5, teaches it is known to provide comprising a gasket (see Fig 5, Paragraph 0041, Examiner notes a ring-shaped seal as comprising a gasket) between the baseplate (Fig 5, flange 16) and the base structure (Paragraph 0041, Examiner notes a material having the screw hole as the base structure).
Therefore, as evidenced by Rimmel in the embodiment of Fig 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an adequately sized and shaped gasket between the baseplate and the base structure as taught by Rimmel to modified Mitrovic. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to provide additional protection against moisture penetrating the screw hole (Rimmel, Paragraph 0041).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 55 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOCK WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am - 5:00pm (ET).
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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.
/J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675