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. Drawings New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the provided Drawings Figs. 2 and 5 are shown in dark color failing to clearly show the important subject matter (i.e., extenders 130, Upper riser support 112, shackles 150, 150, connecting brackets 136), of the instant application. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “ a plurality of risers, a first end of each of the risers affixed to a lengthwise side of the shelf; a plurality of extension, each of the extensions affixed to a second end of the risers, the second end of the risers distal from the first end of the risers, ” and Claim 17 also recites the same structural elements with the detailed structural dimensions. Claims 1 and 17 further recite “ a connecting bracket affixed to the extensions and runs parallel to the shelf , the connecting bracket having two shackles for connecting cables .” The applicant describes “ the bracket 134 fills the space between the connecting brackets 136 ” in paragraph [0032] as shown in Fig. 3. [0032] Referring to FIGS. 7 and 8, elevational views of brackets 136/134 of the apparatus for lifting elongated objects 100 are shown. The connecting bracket 136 has an orifice 137 through which the shackle 150 is connected by a fastener 152 (e.g., a bolt). The bracket 134 fills the space between the connecting brackets 136 , though it is equally anticipated that a single bracket 136/134 be used spanning the full set of extenders 130 and having two orifices 137. Applicant’s provided Figs. 4 and 6 (see above) shows “ the connecting brackets 136 for h aving two shackles for connecting cables .” It appears that “ the connecting brackets 136 ” is not connected or affixed to “ the extensions (130) based on the provided Figs. 4 and 6. Therefore, t he recitation of “ a connecting bracket affixed to the extensions and runs parallel to the shelf” is confusing and not clearly understood as to how “ a connecting bracket ” is affixed to “ the extensions ” while “ the connecting bracket ” having two shackles for connecting cables . Note that the structural relationship between “ a connecting bracket (136) and “ the extensions (130)” is confusing and unclear. Claims 2-16 and 18-20 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected independent claim s 1 and 17 . 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 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 1 , 3, 6, 13, and 14, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen (10,654,545 ). RE claim 1, Allen (10,654,545) discloses a n apparatus (10) (see Figs. 1-18) for lifting elongated objects, the apparatus comprising: a shelf ( 120 of Fig. 3A, see Col. 5, lines 38-50 ) (see Exhibit A ) for supporting the elongated objects, the shelf having an elongated length and a width; a plurality of vertical risers ( 120 of Figs. 2A & 3B; 138 and 140 of Figs. 3A and 3C ) , having a first end of each of the risers affixed to a lengthwise side of the shelf (See Fig. 3C) ; a plurality of extension (120 of Fig. 3A, 130 of Fig. 3C) , each of the extensions affixed to a second end of the risers (see Fig. 3A) , the second end of the risers distal from the first end of the risers; and a connecting bracket (see Exhibit A ), being located between and affixed to the extensions ) and runs parallel to the shelf . Note that Fig. 8 discloses the connecting bracket (being located between the extensions adjacent of the connecting bracket) having two shackles (262) and connecting cables (1520, 1520) to the apparatus for lifting the elongated objects. -171450 337185 Upper Supporting Beam or Extension (120, 130) 0 0 Upper Supporting Beam or Extension (120, 130) Exhibit A 5153025 860425 Connecting Bracket 0 0 Connecting Bracket 2295525 1089025 3486150 1174750 1314450 536575 -447675 1273175 Riser (Vertical Support (120) 0 Riser (Vertical Support (120) 2628900 3282950 Lower Supporting Shelf 0 0 Lower Supporting Shelf 1181100 473075 285750 1711325 1676400 2301875 RE claims 1 and 3, Allen ’s apparatus (10,654,545) is intended to carry or lift various cargos (902, 903, 2000, 3000), but is silent about the specific structural dimension of each element such as the length and a width that is less than four feet or others . However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the structural dimension of each element, to be less than four feet or other preferred dimension , on the Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545 ) to facilitate to effectively carry the preferred items or objects to a user. RE claim 6, Fig. 1 of Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) shows a plurality of shelf supports (500, 600, 700, 800, and 900) , each shelf support affixed below the shelf and is perpendicular to the elongated length of the shelf. RE claims 13 and 14, Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) , as presented above, provides the structural elements as recited above, show cables (1520 of Fig. 8) connected to a lifting crane (1500) (See Fig. 8), to shackles (262, 264) and lift the apparatus. Claim s 2 and 16, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) in view of Varon (3,600,030). Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) , as presented above, does not specifically show one guide loop for securing a rope or cable to for safety during lifting of the elongated objects. However, Figs. 4-6 of Varon (3,600,030) show one guide loop (51). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide one guide loop on the rise or shelf of Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) as taught by Varon (3,600,030) to safety secure the cable or rope. Claim s 7 , 8, 17, 18, and 20 , as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) in view of Erickson et al. (4,662,669). RE claims 7 and 8, Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) , as presented above, does not specifically show at least two of the plurality of shelf supports are sized and configured to accept tines of a forklift . However, Fig. 2 of Erickson et al. (4,662,669) teaches a lifting apparatus having a plurality of s helf supports (532, 534) to accept tines of a forklift. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a plurality of shelf supports (532, 534) on the shelf of Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) as taught by Erickson et al. (4,662,669). to facilitate to allow the fort lift to stabilize the apparatus or lift the apparatus for transferring. RE claim 17, Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) , as presented above, shows the structural elements as recited in claim 1, but does not specifically show the connecting bracket is being made of steel. However, Erickson et al. (4,662,669) shows a lifting device being made of steel tubes (See Col. 5, lines 39-49). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide steel on the Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) as taught by Erickson et al. (4,662,669) to provide a strong and reliable lifting apparatus to a user. RE claims 8 and 17, Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) does not specifically show about the specific structural dimension of each element . However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the structural dimension of each element on the Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) to facilitate to effectively carry the preferred items or objects to a user. RE claims 18 and 20, Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) does not specifically show a plurality of cross braces between the connecting members. However, Fig. 1 of Erickson et al. (4,662,669 ) teaches a triangular shape member (see Fig. 1) between a vertical member (552) and a horizontal member (528) to strengthen the connection. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the mechanical engineering art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a triangular shape member between the two connecting members (that is between a rise and shelf) of Allen’s apparatus (10,654,545) as taught by Erickson et al. (4,662,669) to strengthen the connection s. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 5, 9-12, 15 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT PAUL T CHIN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272- 6922. The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 9:00-5:30 PM . 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, Robert Hodge, can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-2097. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have 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. /PAUL T CHIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654