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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/11/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's did not submit arguments with the request for continued examination filed 12/11/2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 3, on line 3 “on sink area” appears to be a grammar error which should state -on a sink area- or -on what sink area-.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-4, 6-12 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Claims 1-4, 6-12 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 1 recites the limitation "wherein said holding prongs attach to an owner-specified location" and it is not clear what object the owner specified location refers to and further if that object is being positively claimed as part of the device. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "top” but only previously recited “top edge”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 states “that accommodate objects” which include a term “objects” rendering the claim indefinite as it is not clear what would or would not be required by the term object, and further if these objects are being positively claimed as part of the device. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 states “is mounted to a specific surface adjacent to the sink”. It is not clear if this limitation is claiming a process step “is mounted” in an apparatus claim which would render the claim indefinite, or should be written in functional language (“is mountable”) and further the claim lacks antecedent basis for “the sink”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 states “attached easily” which is considered a relative term (“easily”) rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the mounting surface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 states “will provide more efficient use” which is considered a relative term (“more efficient”) rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 states “requires minimal space” which is considered a relative term (“minimal”) rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 states “more efficient use” which is considered a relative term (“more efficient”) rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 6, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
In claim 7, the phrase “creating a horizontal drag point that results in cantilevered strength” is unclear because the use of the term horizontal drag point is not described in the specification and as best understood the plain meaning of a drag point would involve fluid motion of an object and not static objects. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 states “heavy objects” which is considered a relative term (“heavy”) rendering the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 8-12 all utilize the term “will” in will be attached or will be manufactured limitations. It is not clear if these instances positively require the attaching or manufacturing (i.e. “is attached” or “is manufactured”) or are intended as functional limitations that could be written as “can be attached” or “can be manufactured”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 8 and 10 state “available to the market” and it is clear what would be required to meet the limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-4, 6-12, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by O’Hara (US 2008/0185352).
Regarding claim 1, O’Hara (hereafter “D1”) discloses a vertical holding rack (20; as in the embodiment of figure 2 or 3) having a front side, two edge sides and a top edge side with a half back side cantilever support leg (22), holding prongs (30, 40) and attachment prongs (supports 24), wherein the holding prongs (at 24/26 or 124/126) are attachable to a selected location (sink or counter side) and wherein the front side, side edges, and top edge have holding prongs that can receive objects (30/40 or 130/140/150/160 are configured to receive stemware – [0023]).
Regarding claim 2, D1 discloses wherein the vertical holding rack is mountable to a surface adjacent to the sink (figure 1), and allows re-attachment without damaging the mounting surface as well as adjacent surfaces, making the vertical holding rack reusable (discloses use of suction cups or only a resting attachment over a sink edge –[0020]).
Regarding claim 3, D1 discloses wherein the said vertical holding rack is configured to promote efficient use of countertop area or sink area it is mounted to ([0020]).
Regarding claim 4, D1 discloses wherein the vertical holding rack has a vertical design, and when mounted to a sink only overlaps with a countertop the width of the rack or less (figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, D1 discloses where the said vertical holding rack attaches to a surface in or adjacent to a sink leaning over the sink and draining to the sink, therefore eliminates the need for a water catching device such as a dish drain pan that may be prone to collecting water, encouraging the growth of mold (figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, D1 discloses wherein when installed, the back half side cantilever support leg (at 22) is supported by a vertical surface (at walls 4 or 6), and the attachment prongs (24 or 26) attach to the top of an adjacent horizontal surface (with 22), creating a horizontal friction, allowing the vertical holding rack to support objects (figure 1).
Regarding claims 8 and 10, D1 discloses wherein said vertical holding rack is manufactured using nonporous materials (plastic, metal disclosed – [0029]).
Regarding claims 9, 11-12, D1 discloses wherein the vertical holding rack attachment prongs are attachable to a countertop, backsplash or sink lip using outdoor rated 10 pound self-adhesive hook and loop fastener (D1 discloses attachment to countertops and is capable of use with hook and loop material).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK D HAWN whose telephone number is (571)270-5320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-6.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728227. 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.
/PATRICK D HAWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631