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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 10-20 is/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 1 recites “a rivet passageway is positioned between each slot of the plurality of slots” (see last line of claim 1). Original claim 12 recited “a plurality of rivet passageways positioned below each slot of the plurality of slots.” The written specification and drawings do not support the amended claim 1 limitation. The examiner suggests amending the claim to recite the original limitation recited in claim 12 or show proper support in the specification filed on March 24, 2023.
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 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “bellow” in claim 1 is used by the claim to mean (appears to examiner to mean) “a cutout or notch” while the accepted meaning is “a shout in a loud voice, or a loud, deep sound made by a cow or large animal” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claim 1 further recites in line 12-13 “the cross beam is positioned on an inner edge of each support beam and below the grab bar…” It appears to the examiner that applicant may be referring to the cross beam of the support assembly. For clarity the examiner suggests amending the claim limitation to –the cross beam of the support assembly is positioned on an inner edge of each support beam and below the grab bar—in order to avoid confusion with the cross beam of the pair of extension beams.
Allowable Subject Matter
The indicated allowability of claim 12 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to Flynn US 2004/0182019. Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow.
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) 1, 4-5, 10-11, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bradley et al. US 2001/0029715 in view of Keller US 6857836 and Flynn US 2004/0182019.
Bradley discloses a wallboard jack assembly (10) comprising: an extension beam (22) with a plurality of adjustment notches (26), each adjustment notch (Bradley, 26) of the plurality of adjustment notches are passageways extending through each extension beam (Bradley, 22); a support beam (18) with an extension passageway extending a length of the support beam; a locking mechanism (30) extending through the support beam; a back plate (38); and a top plate (40,42) with a bellow (45) located in a central region of the top plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
638
422
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
710
428
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bradley does not specify wherein the jack assembly comprises a pair of extension beams, a cross beam positioned between the pair of extension beams, a pair of support beams, a grab bar positioned between the pair of support beams and a back plate with a plurality of slots.
PNG
media_image3.png
710
486
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
750
518
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Keller teaches a jack assembly having a pair of extension beams (150) with a plurality of notches (156); a cross beam (not labeled but shown in Fig. 2 extending between 150) of the pair of extension beams (150) positioned between each extension beam on an inner edge of each extension beam of the pair of extension beams; a pair of support beams (140,142) with an extension passage extending a length of each support beam (formed by 141), a cross beam (143) of a support assembly (140) is positioned between each support beam; a locking mechanism (152, 154); and a grab bar (top cross bar between 142) positioned between each support beam of the pair of support beams, the cross beam (143) of the support assembly is positioned on an inner edge of each support beam and below the grab bar. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the jack assembly of Bradley from a single extension beam and support beam to a jack assembly with a pair of extension beams, a pair of support beams, and a grab bar as taught by Keller in order to provide additional support and rigidness to the jack assembly while lifting the panel and/or drywall to be secured to a stud.
Bradley does not specify wherein the jack assembly’s back plate has a plurality of slots (first, second, third, fourth, fifth). However, Flynn teaches a jack assembly for lifting a drywall having a hinged plate (10, 12) having a plurality holes (14) capable of being used as slots and/or passageways for attachment of the jack assembly to a drywall or object, wherein the plurality of holes are positioned adjacent to one another and below one another. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the backplate of Bradley to include a plurality of slots and passageways as taught by Flynn in order to provide a means for temporarily securing the jack assembly to the drywall or object to be lifted.
PNG
media_image5.png
262
550
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As for claim 4, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the cross beam of the pair of extension beams and each extension beam form about a 90-degree angle (Keller, Fig. 2).
As for claim 5, the modified Bradley teaches wherein each support beam has a circumference larger than a circumference of each extension beam of the pair of extension beams (adjustable telescopic members taught by Bradley).
As for claims 10 and 11, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the second (14) and the third slot (14) of the plurality of slots (14) are capable of being positioned at about 16’’ on center from the first slot. It would have been an obvious matter of design through routine engineering to provide the slots being positioned at about 16” or 24” on center from the first slot as the standard placement/spacing of wall studs is typically between 16’’ and 24’’ apart.
PNG
media_image6.png
416
466
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As for claim 13, the modified Bradley teaches wherein a pair of ends (end walls of 40 and 42) of the top plate (40,42) are wider than the central region (cutout portion used to receive stud, gap area 45) of the top plate.
As for claim 14, the modified Bradley teaches wherein an upper portion of each support beam is joined (Bradley, via 44) to the back plate (Bradley, 38).
As for claim 15, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the top plate (Bradley, 40,42) is positioned on each support beam of the pair of support beams and joined together (Bradley, via 44).
As for claim 16, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the top plate (Bradley 40,42) is positioned and joined to the back plate (Bradley, 38) forming about a 90 degree ledge (see Figure above).
As for claim 17, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the wallboard jack assembly is capable of being lowered in height by lowering each support beam towards a lowest adjustment notch of the plurality of adjustment notches (Bradley, ¶0023).
As for claim 18, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the wallboard jack assembly is raised in height by raising each support beam towards a highest adjustment notch of the plurality of adjustment notches (Bradley, ¶0023).
As for claim 19, the modified Bradley teaches wherein the wallboard jack assembly further comprises a lever (Bradley, 110).
As for claim 20, the modified Bradley teaches wherein a downwards pressure is applied to the lever while the wallboard jack assembly is lifted in an upwards direction (see Figs. 6-7).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4-5 and 10-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for 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 TYRONE V HALL JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5948. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at (571) 272-4475. 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.
/TYRONE V HALL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723