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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 10/3/25 is acknowledged.
Applicant indicated claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/3/25.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 12 and all claims depending therefrom 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 12 recites the limitation "the wedge". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-7,12-15,17,18,21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Baron (10053875).
Claim 1. Baron discloses a beam assembly for a shoring system that includes a shore, the beam assembly comprising:
a drophead (8) configured for attachment to the shore, wherein the drophead includes a central shaft (as seen in the figures);
a load plate that comprises a receiving area (as seen in the figures) and that is movable relative to the central shaft between a higher position and a lower position; and
a slide plate (34) for supporting the load plate in the higher position;
a first beam (4) comprising a first end coupled to the drophead and comprising a channel (as seen in figure 7) extending along a side of the first beam; and
a second beam (5) having a second end, the second end comprising a lip (at 29a,32b) that is engaged in the receiving area or the channel (as noted in the figures and disclosure).
Claim 2. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein, when the first beam is coupled to the drophead, the channel is vertically aligned with the receiving area (as seen in the figures).
Claim 3. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein the lip is engaged in the channel (as seen in figure 2); the first beam comprises a bumper protrusion (generally near 14 at the upper end as seen in figures 7, 3 or the outer side of top plate as seen n figure 7) that is above the channel, and an abutment surface (at 21a) associated with the second end is adjacent the bumper protrusion (as seen in figure 2).
Claim 4. The beam assembly of claim 3, wherein second beam end comprises a notch (as seen in figure 8) located between the abutment surface and the lip.
Claim 5. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein the lip is engaged in the receiving area and the lip engages a top surface of the load plate (as seen in figures 3, 18-25).
Claim 6. The beam assembly of claim 5, wherein the receiving area is adjacent to a fin (33 in either the embodiment of figure 5 or 35) of the load plate.
Claim 7. The beam assembly of claim 6, wherein the load plate includes two endstops (each side of the fin as noted in the annotated figures below) located at opposite sides of the fin, and wherein the endstops each have an inner surface (facing each other) configured for engaging an outer surface of the second end (as seen in the figures).
PNG
media_image1.png
968
940
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
648
595
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 13. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein the drophead includes a first abutment surface (generally at 12 as seen in the figures) that corresponds to a second abutment surface on an endpiece of the first beam such that the first abutment surface is adjacent to the second abutment surface (as seen in figures 2,3,12).
Claim 14. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein the first beam comprises a first nailstrip retained in a nailstrip channel (the channel formed between the ends).
PNG
media_image3.png
717
925
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 12. The beam assembly of claim 14, wherein the wedge of the slide is disengaged from the central shaft when the load plate is in the lower position (as noted in the disclosure).
Claim 15. The beam assembly of claim 14, wherein the first beam comprises a cavity (as noted in the figure below) beneath the nailstrip and configured to receive a portion of a faster driven into the nailstrip (where it is capable of receiving a portion of fastener).
PNG
media_image4.png
268
371
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 17. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein the channel of the main beam is a first channel, and wherein the main beam further includes a second channel located above the first channel (as noted in the annotated figure above).
Claim 18. The beam assembly of claim 17, wherein the second channel is configured to receive a portion of a panel of the shoring system (2, as seen in figure 6); and wherein the panel comprises a removable corner (where the corner can be removed from one location to another and/or where the panel can be removed from the beam and therefore the corner as part of the panel is removable).
Claim 21. The beam assembly of claim 1, wherein the central shaft comprises a rectangular tubular body (as seen in the figures); and wherein the load plate comprises a fin or a tab (33) for engaging a beam, the fin or tab being oriented at an angle of about 45 degrees relative to a wall of the central shaft (as seen in figures 5,35).
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) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron (10053875) in view of McCracken (6832746).
Claim 8. Baron discloses the beam assembly of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the slide plate comprises a runner received within a groove of the load plate, and wherein the groove of the load plate is located on a bottom of the load plate.
McCracken discloses that it is known to have a runner (30) received in a groove (22,24) to connect a slide plate to a load plate in a beam assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the beam assembly of Baron to have the slide plate comprise a runner received within a groove on a bottom of the load plate to attach the parts of the beam assembly in an easy to assembly attachment that doesn’t require additional fasteners or steps and that accommodates the slide mechanism.
Claim 9. The beam assembly of claim 8, wherein the slide plate includes at least one of an impact knob (35) and an impact protrusion (as noted in the annotated figure above) configured to receive an input force for moving the slide plate linearly relative to the load plate.
Claim 10. The beam assembly of claim 8, wherein the slide plate includes a wedge (as noted in the annotated figure below) configured to at least partially overlap a central opening of the load plate (as noted in the disclosure).
Claim 11. The beam assembly of claim 10, wherein the wedge of the slide plate engages the central shaft of the drophead when the load plate is in the higher position (as seen in the annotated figure below and noted in the disclosure).
PNG
media_image5.png
628
847
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron (10053875) in view of Avery (3899152).
Claims 16. Baron discloses the beam assembly of claim 14, but does not disclose wherein the channel comprises an upper surface and a lower surface, and wherein the nailstrip is retained between the upper surface and the lower surface and is impeded from uplift by the upper surface.
Avery discloses a first beam (14 or 14a) comprising a nailstrip (50) retained in a nailstrip channel (52,51,53), wherein the channel comprises an upper surface (53) and a lower surface (51) and wherein the nailstrip is retained between the upper surface and the lower surface and is impeded from uplift by the upper surface (where it is retained and impeded via 61 in 53).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the first beam of Baron to have a nailstrip retained in nailstrip channel having an upper and lower surface wherein the nailstrip is retained between the upper surface and lower surface and is impeded from uplift by the upper surface as taught by Avery to achieve the predictable result of providing a surface for attaching the panel (2) of Baron to the beam assembly in an easily installed manner with conventional fasteners that does not require additional steps and/or elements to secure the panel to the beam assembly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-8228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571.270.3238. 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.
JESSICA L. LAUX
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/JESSICA L LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635