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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 39 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 39, at Lines 3 and 4, delete the extra instances of “perimeter component.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, 20, 21, 24-27, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 10718133 to Maher (hereinafter “Maher”).
-From Claim 1: Maher discloses a connector for removably securing and vertically stacking perimeter components of a skating rink, the connector comprising:
an elongated body 404 extending a length from a first axial end to a second axial end along an axis thereof, the length being selected to span a height of at least two perimeter components 312;
a first anchoring feature 460 extending at least a portion of the length into or along a first lateral side of the elongated body; and
a second anchoring feature 460 extending at least a portion of the length into or along a second lateral side of the elongated body.
-From Claim 2: Maher discloses wherein the first anchoring feature comprises a first groove 460, and the second anchoring feature comprises a second groove 460.
-From Claim 3: Maher discloses wherein the first groove comprises a first slot defined by a first pair of opposing interior walls 422, and the second groove comprises a second slot defined by a second pair of opposing interior walls 422, wherein the first slot extends inwardly from the first lateral side towards the second slot, and the second slot extends inwardly from the second lateral side towards the first slot.
-From Claim 4: Maher discloses wherein the first groove comprises a first area of increased cross-section that extends inwardly from the first slot, and the second groove comprises a second area of increased cross-section that extends inwardly from the second slot.
PNG
media_image1.png
286
329
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Area increased Cross Section
-From Claim 5: Maher discloses wherein the first anchoring feature 460 is a mirror image of the second anchoring feature 460.
-From Claim 6: Maher discloses wherein the first anchoring feature 460 is oriented 180 degrees from the second anchoring feature 460.
-From Claim 8: Maher discloses wherein the elongated body is substantially hollow (see fill hole 471) and comprises a gusset configuration (i.e., the middle portion of the post on either side of the anchoring features. Examiner considers the term “gusset configuration,” without more specifics, to be broad enough to include this middle portion in Maher) connecting the first anchoring feature to the second anchoring feature.
-From Claim 9: Maher discloses wherein the elongated body comprises a front face and a back face that is substantially parallel to the front face.
PNG
media_image2.png
286
329
media_image2.png
Greyscale
-From Claim 10: Maher discloses wherein the front face and the back face are connected to one another by a gusset configuration (i.e., the middle portion of the post on either side of the anchoring features. Examiner considers the term “gusset configuration,” without more specifics, to be broad enough to include this middle portion in Maher).
-From Claim 11: Maher discloses wherein the first anchoring feature and the second anchoring feature are contained between the front face and the back face.
-From Claim 12: Maher discloses wherein the first lateral side comprises two first shoulders (below), and the second lateral side comprises two second shoulders, wherein the two first shoulders are configured to abut and stabilize at least two first perimeter components, and the two second shoulders are configured to abut and stabilize at least two second perimeter components.
PNG
media_image3.png
286
329
media_image3.png
Greyscale
-From Claim 20: Maher discloses wherein the first groove 460 extends the entire length along the first lateral side.
-From Claim 21: Maher discloses wherein the second groove 460 extends the entire length along the second lateral side.
-From Claim 24: Maher discloses a multi-stacked perimeter assembly for a skating rink, the assembly comprising: the connector of claim 1;
a first pair of first perimeter components 312 removably joined by the connector; and
a second pair of second perimeter components 312 stacked vertically on top of the first pair of first perimeter components and removably joined by the connector.
-From Claim 25: Maher discloses a third pair of third perimeter components 312 stacked vertically on top of the second pair of second perimeter components and removably joined by the connector.
-From Claim 26: Maher discloses a third perimeter component 312 stacked vertically on top of one of the second pair of perimeter components and removably joined to the connector.
-From Claim 27: Maher discloses a multi-stacked perimeter assembly for a skating rink, the assembly comprising: the connector of claim 1;
a first pair of first perimeter components 312 removably joined by the connector, and
at least one perimeter component 312 stacked vertically on top of one of the first pair of first perimeter components and removably joined to the connector.
-From Claim 37: Maher discloses wherein the length of the connector 404 is at least two times a height of any of the first pair of perimeter components 312, the second pair of perimeter components and the third pair of perimeter components.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 38-45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maher in view of US 6004218 to Keating et al. (hereinafter “Keating”).
-From Claim 38: Keating teaches a connector for connecting perimeter components, wherein the connector includes at least one pole support 26 removably joined to the connector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly.
-From Claim 39: Keating teaches the at least one pole support 26 is positioned horizontally between the first pair of first perimeter components and the second pair of second perimeter components, perimeter component the first pair of first perimeter components is a first row, and the second pair of second perimeter components is a second row.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly.
-From Claim 40: Keating teaches wherein the at least one pole support 26 is positioned horizontally between the second pair of second of perimeter components and a third pair of third perimeter components, which is a third row perimeter component.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly.
-From Claim 41: Keating teaches wherein the pole support 26 is integrally formed with the connector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly.
-From Claim 42: Keating teaches wherein the pole support 26 extends along a width of the connector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly.
-From Claim 43: Keating teaches at least one pole 34 vertically and removably secured in the pole support.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly.
-From Claim 44: Keating teaches a containment barrier 32 removably coupled to the pole.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly, such as a net 32.
-From Claim 45: Keating teaches wherein the containment barrier comprises a net system 32.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Maher by adding a pole support as taught by Keating in order to allow supplemental structures to be attached to the fence assembly to increase safety for persons around the fence during use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J WILEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7324. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-5pm PST.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 5712705281. 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.
/DANIEL J WILEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678 5/25/2026
Prosecution Insights