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 .
Status of the Claim
Claim 1-14 are pending in the claims.
Claims 7-14 have been withdrawn (see below) from current consideration as being drawn to a nonelected species.
Claims 1-6 remain under current consideration by the Examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A (Figs. 1-4), corresponding to claims 1-6, in the reply filed on 24 April 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Applicant alleges there is no serious search burden on the Examiner to search all species present in the application. This is not found persuasive because each of the species includes mutually exclusive characteristics (i.e. that are not present or compatible with the other species) and thus a proper search for one species would not overlap in scope with a proper search for all species. Further, the different species have different manners of operation and functionality. For example, Species A (Figs. 1-4) includes support members 12 that extend across the barrier to opposing panels, not present in any other species. As another example, Species C (Fig. 6) includes a height extender 55, not present in any other species. Further, Species D (Figs. 8a-8b) includes a rotatable deterrent chassis 59, not present in any other species. Therefore, it is clear that a search for one species need not overlap in scope with a search for any other species and thus a serious search burden exists for the Examiner if all species are required to be searched.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 7-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 24 April 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities:
Photographs and color drawings are not accepted in utility applications unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2) is granted. No such petition has been filed or granted and thus the use of photographs is not acceptable. The following drawings are objected to because they are either photographs or they contain excessive shading such that their reproduction in unclear upon publication (see US Patent Application Publication 2023/0358073):
Figs. 1-12
Several of the lead lines for reference characters improperly cross each other (see 37 CFR 1.84(q). See at least the following lead lines:
Ref. nos. “4”, “8”, and “12” in Fig. 1
Ref. nos. “44”, and “150” in Fig. 5
Ref. nos. “50”, and “60” in Fig. 5
The lead lines for the following ref. nos. improperly interfere with the reference character itself:
Ref. nos. “2” and “22” in Fig. 3
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The abstract exceeds the 150 word limit
Each of the sentences of the abstract are incomplete sentences
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Appropriate correction is required.
In line 3 of parag. [0033], “first panels 6” should be replaced with --first panels 4--.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Appropriate correction is required.
Re Claim 6: Claim 6 should be amended as follows since a plurality of first and second panels was previously introduced in the claims:
--6. The method of Claim 5, further comprising:
engaging a deterrence feature, the deterrence feature coupled to at least one of the group consisting of the first panels and the second panels.--
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 2 is 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.
Re Claim 2: Claim 2 recites the following limitations for which there is a lack of proper antecedent basis:
"the first panel of each expandable barrier" in line 2;
“the adjacent first panel of the adjacent expandable barrier” in line 3;
"the second panel of each expandable barrier" in lines 3-4; and
“the adjacent second panel of the adjacent expandable barrier” in line 5
Examiner notes that, while there is antecedent bases for a “plurality of first panels” and a “plurality of second panels” of “an expandable barrier” in claim 1, there is not proper antecedent bases for a particular “the first panel” or “the second panel”.
Further, it is not even clear if the “plurality of expandable barriers” introduced in claim 2 are meant to require all the particulars of the “expandable barrier” of claim 1.
For examination purposes, for this Office Action only, the Examiner will interpret claim 2 as though it were amended as follows:
--2. The barrier system of Claim 1, further comprising a plurality of expandable barriers as recited in claim 1, wherein a first panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding third connector connecting to an adjacent first panel of an adjacent expandable barrier, and wherein a second panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding fourth connector connecting to an adjacent second panel of the adjacent expandable barrier such that a continuous chain of expandable barrier systems is formed.--
Clarification and correction are required.
Examiner notes that any prior art rejections made in this Office Action are made in view of the claims, as best understood by the Examiner, in view of the above indefiniteness rejections.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heselden ‘349 (WO 2010/029349).
PNG
media_image1.png
530
745
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 1: Heselden ‘349 discloses a barrier system comprising:
a container (30; see Fig. 7); and
an expandable barrier (1) structured to be stored in the container, the expandable barrier comprising:
a plurality of first panels (2a, 2b, 2c; Figs. 1a-1b) and a plurality of second panels (3a, 3b, 3c);
a plurality of first hinged connectors (24; Fig. 3) connecting adjacent first panels and a plurality of second hinged connectors (24) connecting adjacent second panels;
a plurality of support members (9, 10), each support member having first and second sides, wherein the first side of each support member is connected to a corresponding first hinged connector and the second side of each support member is connected to a corresponding second hinged connector so that each support member extends between a pair of adjacent first panels and a pair of adjacent second panels;
wherein, in a first position (see Fig. 1b) in which the expandable barrier (1) is stored in the container and in an unexpanded state, the first panels (2a, 2b, 2c) are positioned in a stacked arrangement and the second panels (3a, 3b, 3c) are positioned in a stacked arrangement with each support member (9, 10) sandwiched between adjacent first and second panels; and
wherein, in a second position (see Fig. 1a) in which the expandable barrier is fully deployed from the container and in an expanded state, the first panels (2a, 2b, 2c) are positioned in a linear arrangement and the second panels (3a, 3b, 3c) are positioned in a linear arrangement parallel to the first panels with each support member (9, 10) extending perpendicularly between a pair of adjacent first panels and a pair of adjacent second panels.
Re Claim 3: Heselden ‘349 discloses a barrier system, further comprising at least one deterrence feature (for example, geotextile cover 17; Examiner notes that the geotextile cover 17 can be considered a “deterrence feature” since it can function as a further barrier against breach, either physically or visually, from one side of the barrier system to the other).
Re Claim 4: Heselden ‘349 discloses a method for providing a barrier, the method comprising:
providing a barrier system comprising:
a container (30; Fig. 7); and
an expandable barrier (1) structured to be stored in the container, the expandable barrier comprising:
a plurality of first panels (2a, 2b, 2c) and a plurality of second panels (3a, 3b, 3c);
a plurality of first hinged connectors (24; Fig. 3) connecting adjacent first panels and a plurality of second hinged connectors (24) connecting adjacent second panels;
a plurality of support members (9, 10), each support member having first and second sides, wherein the first side of each support member is connected to a corresponding first hinged connector and the second side of each support member is connected to a corresponding second hinged connector so that each support member extends between a pair of adjacent first panels and a pair of adjacent second panels; and
placing the expandable barrier (1) in the container in an unexpanded state (see Fig. 1b), wherein the first panels (2a, 2b, 2c) are positioned in a stacked arrangement and the second panels (3a, 3b, 3c) are positioned in a stacked arrangement with each support member (9, 10) sandwiched between adjacent first and second panels.
Re Claim 5: Heselden ‘349 discloses a method, further comprising:
deploying the expandable barrier from the container such that the expandable barrier is in an expanded state (see Fig. 1a), wherein the first panels (2a, 2b, 2c) are positioned in a linear arrangement and the second panels (3a, 3b, 3c) are positioned in a linear arrangement parallel to the first panels with each support member (9, 10) extending perpendicularly between a pair of adjacent first panels and a pair of adjacent second panels.
Re Claim 6: Heselden ‘349 discloses a method, further comprising:
engaging a deterrence feature (for example, geotextile cover 17; Examiner notes that the geotextile cover 17 can be considered a “deterrence feature” since it can function as a further barrier against breach, either physically or visually, from one side of the barrier system to the other), the deterrence feature coupled to at least one of the group consisting of the first panel and the second panel.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heselden ‘349 (WO 2010/029349), as applied to claims 1 and 3-6 above, and further in view of Heselden ‘425 (US Patent 10,738,425).
Re Claim 2, as best understood by the Examiner: Heselden ‘349, as discussed for claim 1 above, discloses a barrier system significantly as claimed except it does not explicitly disclose further comprising a plurality of expandable barriers as recited in claim 1, wherein a first panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding third connector connecting to an adjacent first panel of an adjacent expandable barrier, and wherein a second panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding fourth connector connecting an adjacent second panel of the adjacent expandable barrier such that a continuous chain of expandable barrier systems is formed.
Heselden ‘425 teaches the use of a barrier system comprising an expandable barrier (1) comprising a plurality of first panels (5, 6, 7) connected by a first hinged connection (18; Fig. 4; see annotated Fig. 5A below), a plurality of second panels (15, 16, 17) connected by a second hinged connection (18; Fig. 4; see annotated Fig. 5A below), and a plurality of support members (12, 13, 14), wherein the barrier is expandable from a first state (see Fig. 3) to a second state (see Figs. 1-2), and further comprising a plurality of expandable barriers (1a, 1b, 1c), wherein a first panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding third connector (see annotated Fig. 5A below) connecting to an adjacent first panel of an adjacent expandable barrier, and wherein a second panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding fourth connector (see annotated Fig. 5A below) connecting to an adjacent second panel of the adjacent expandable barrier such that a continuous chain of expandable barrier systems is formed, for the purpose of extending the length of the barrier system.
PNG
media_image2.png
468
840
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Heselden ‘349, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that it further comprises a plurality of expandable barriers as recited in claim 1, wherein a first panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding third connector connecting to an adjacent first panel of an adjacent expandable barrier, and wherein a second panel of each expandable barrier is connected to a corresponding fourth connector connecting an adjacent second panel of the adjacent expandable barrier such that a continuous chain of expandable barrier systems is formed, as taught by Heselden ‘425, for the purpose of extending the length of the barrier system.
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 MATTHEW R MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3067. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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 (571) 270-5281. 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.
/MATTHEW R MCMAHON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights