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 § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-9, 11-19 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birchler (US 2007/0077122) in view of McKinnon (US 7,871,109).
Regarding claim 1, Birchler (figs. 10-13B) discloses a coupling joint for connecting a set of septic chambers, comprising:
a first septic chamber 100 having a generally arch-shaped cross section and opposing first and second end coupling sections 110, 120, wherein said second end coupling section 120 is shaped to overlap and connect with said first end coupling section 110 of a second septic chamber having a generally arch-shaped cross section and the same said first and second end coupling sections 110, 120;
said first end coupling section 110 having an upstanding outer wall portion (outer wall portion of inspection port 112);
said second end coupling section 120 including an inner wall portion (inner wall of inspection port 122); and
said second end coupling section 120 of said first septic chamber, when seated in overlapping relation to said first end coupling section 110 of said second septic chamber (paragraph 77).
Birchler further discloses overlapping ends 1434A and B resisting vertical separation (fig. 13B) but fails to disclose the vertical separation resistance being achieved by:
forming a locked coupling joint between the coupling sections 110, 120 which permits limited horizontal angular movement of said second septic chamber relative to said first septic chamber; wherein
the upstanding outer wall portion discussed above including a flexible, resilient locking member that projects outwardly therefrom;
the inner wall portion having a retention pocket formed therein for receiving said locking member of said first end coupling section.
However, McKinnon teaches an upstanding outer wall portion 120 including a flexible locking member 122 that projects outwardly and an inner wall portion having a retention pocket or ridge formed therein for receiving said locking member 122 (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to substitute the overlapping ends of Birchler, with clamping members provided the upstanding outer wall portion and the inner wall portion, a locking member and a retention pocket, as taught by McKinnon, because McKinnon teaches a known mechanical securing mechanism for joining adjacent structural members to resist separation. Substituting one known coupling mechanism for another to secure modular chamber sections would have been an obvious design choice yielding predictable results. Placing the clamping members at the end coupling sections would have been a routine application of a known fastening technique to achieve predictable joint stability.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Birchler further discloses said first end coupling section 110 includes a first raised connecting feature 112 with a tapered, curvilinear sidewall which incorporates said locking member (fig. 11).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 includes a complimentary shaped second raised connecting feature 122 which fits closely over said raised connecting feature of said first end coupling section 110 and includes said inner wall portion with said retention pocket (fig. 11).
Regarding claim 4, Birchler further discloses said first and said second raised connecting features 112, 122 of said first and said second end coupling sections 110, 120 are substantially circular in cross section along a horizontal plane extending therethrough (fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5 the modified Birchler further discloses said locking member 122 being cantilevered along a top supporting edge thereof to provide flexibility and resilience thereto (fig. 12 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Birchler further discloses said locking member 122 being formed by an opening extending through said outer wall along opposite sides and a lower end thereof (fig. 12 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Birchler further discloses said inner wall portion of said second end coupling section includes a circumferentially extending shelf 112 formed therein which facilitates formation of said retention pocket and provides a catch for said locking member 112 (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Birchler further discloses said locking member 122 being adapted to flex inwardly upon engagement with said shelf and snap resiliently outward thereafter into said retention pocket of said second end coupling section (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 9, Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 being solid throughout so as to cover said first end coupling section 110 when seated in overlapping relation to said first end coupling section 110 (fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Birchler further discloses said first end coupling section 110 and said second end coupling section 120 are connectable in locking engagement through solely vertical transition and placement of said second end coupling section upon said fist end coupling section (figs. 11-13B).
Regarding claim 12, Birchler (figs. 10-13B) discloses a coupling joint for connecting a set of septic chambers, comprising:
a first septic chamber having a generally arch-shaped cross section and opposing first and second end coupling sections 110, 120, wherein said second end coupling section 120 is shaped to overlap and connect with said first end coupling section 110 of a second septic chamber having a generally arch-shaped cross section and the same said first and second end coupling sections;
said first end coupling section 110 having a first raised connecting feature 112 with a tapered, curvilinear sidewall;
said second end coupling section 120 including a second raised connecting feature 122 which is complimentary in shape to and fits closely over said first raised connecting feature 112 of said first end coupling section 110; and
said second end coupling section 120 of said first septic chamber and said first end coupling section of said second septic chamber, when connected in overlapping relation, forming a locked coupling joint therebetween which permits limited horizontal angular movement of said second septic chamber relative to said first septic chamber (paragraph 77).
Birchler further discloses overlapping ends 1434A and B resisting vertical separation (fig. 13B) but fails to disclose the vertical separation resistance being achieved by:
the first raised connecting feature 112 discussed above incorporating a flexible, resilient locking member projecting downwardly and outwardly from an upper peripheral portion thereof;
said second raised connecting feature 122 of said second end coupling section 120 including a retention pocket formed in an inner wall portion thereof which is adapted to receive in locking relation said locking member of said first end coupling section.
However, McKinnon teaches an upstanding outer wall portion 120 including a flexible locking member 122 that projects outwardly and an inner wall portion having a retention pocket or ridge formed therein for receiving said locking member 122 (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to substitute the overlapping ends of Birchler, with clamping members provided the upstanding outer wall portion and the inner wall portion, a locking member and a retention pocket, as taught by McKinnon, because McKinnon teaches a known mechanical securing mechanism for joining adjacent structural members to resist separation. Substituting one known coupling mechanism for another to secure modular chamber sections would have been an obvious design choice yielding predictable results. Placing the clamping members at the end coupling sections would have been a routine application of a known fastening technique to achieve predictable joint stability.
Regarding claim 13, Birchler further discloses said first end coupling section 110 being comprised of a generally arch-shaped flange member having a substantially smooth upper surface from which said first raised connecting feature 112 extends, said first raised connecting feature 112 being generally circular in shape with said sidewalls tapering upwardly from said flange member (fig. 11).
Regarding claim 14, Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 being comprised of a generally arch-shaped flange member having a substantially smooth underside surface which is adapted to rest upon and engage said smooth upper surface of said flange member of said first end coupling section 110 when said second end coupling section 120 of said first septic chamber is connected in overlapping relation to said first end coupling section 110 of said second septic chamber (fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 15, Birchler further discloses said first raised connecting feature 112 of said first end coupling section 110 and said second raised connecting feature 122 of said second end coupling section 122are generally circular in shape (figs. 10-11).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Birchler further discloses said locking member 122 being formed by a generally U-shaped opening extending through said sidewall of said first raised connecting member, thus forming a flexible cantilever joint along an upper edge of said locking member (fig. 12 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Birchler further discloses said inner wall portion of said second raised connecting feature includes a circumferentially extending shelf 112 formed therein which facilitates formation of said retention pocket and provides a catch for said locking member 112 (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Birchler further discloses whereupon vertical placement of said second end coupling section 120 upon said first end coupling section 110 causes said locking member to flex inwardly during movement over said shelf and resiliently snap outward thereafter into said retention pocket of said second end coupling section (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 19, Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 is solid throughout so as to cover said first end coupling section 110 when seated in overlapping relation to said first end coupling section (figs. 10-11).
Regarding claim 21, the modified Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 of said first septic chamber being connectable in locking relation to said first end coupling section 110 of said second septic chamber through solely vertical inter-engagement thereof (figs. 11-12 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 22, Birchler (figs. 10-13B) discloses a coupling joint for connecting a set of septic chambers, comprising:
a first septic chamber having a generally arch-shaped cross section and opposing first and second end coupling sections 110, 120, wherein said second end coupling section 120 is complimentarily shaped to overlap and connect with said first end coupling section 110 of a second septic chamber of the same configuration;
said first end coupling section 110 having a generally smooth outer surface portion with a first circular shaped connecting feature 112 extending upwardly therefrom, said first connecting feature 112 having a tapering sidewall;
said second end coupling section 120 having a generally smooth underside surface portion and a second circular shaped connecting feature 122 adapted to overlap in close-fitting relation said smooth outer surface and said first connecting feature 112 of said first end coupling section 110; and
said second end coupling section being solid throughout so as to cover said first end coupling section when seated in overlapping relation thereto.
Birchler further discloses overlapping ends 1434A and B resisting vertical separation (fig. 13B) but fails to disclose the vertical separation resistance being achieved by:
the tapering sidewall of said first connecting feature 112 incorporating an outwardly protruding flexible locking member with an open relief formed about two opposite sides and a lower end thereof; and
said second raised connecting feature 122 of said second end coupling section 120 including a retention pocket formed in an inner wall portion thereof which is adapted to receive in locking relation said locking member of said first end coupling section.
However, McKinnon teaches an upstanding outer wall portion 120 including a flexible locking member 122 that projects outwardly and an inner wall portion having a retention pocket or ridge formed therein for receiving said locking member 122 (figs. 11-12 and paragraph 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to substitute the overlapping ends of Birchler, with clamping members provided the upstanding outer wall portion and the inner wall portion, a locking member and a retention pocket, as taught by McKinnon, because McKinnon teaches a known mechanical securing mechanism for joining adjacent structural members to resist separation. Substituting one known coupling mechanism for another to secure modular chamber sections would have been an obvious design choice yielding predictable results. Placing the clamping members at the end coupling sections would have been a routine application of a known fastening technique to achieve predictable joint stability.
Regarding claim 23, the modified Birchler further discloses a top surface portion of said first connecting feature 122 defining a first engagement member which is adapted to mate with a second engagement member formed in said second raised connecting feature, where said first and said second engagement members are adapted to cooperatively interact to strengthen the coupling joint and resist separation of said first septic chamber from said second septic chamber along an axis extending therebetween (figs. 11-12 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 of said first septic chamber and said first end coupling section 110 of said second septic chamber, when connected in overlapping relation, form a locked coupling joint therebetween which resists vertical separation and permits horizontal angular movement between said first septic chamber and said second septic chamber(paragraph 77 of Birchler and figs. 11-12 of McKinnon).
Regarding claim 25, the modified Birchler further discloses said second end coupling section 120 of said first septic chamber is connectable in locking relation to said first end coupling section 110 of said second septic chamber through solely vertical transitional engagement thereof (figs. 11-12 of McKinnon).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26 and 27 appear to define over the available prior art and are allowed.
Response to Amendment
The affidavit (of Carl Douglass) under 37 CFR 1.132 filed 8/8/25 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-9, 11-19, 22-25 as set forth in this Office action. The declarant states that introducing a snap-locking feature such as tat shown in Mckinnon into the chamber system of Birchler would likely fail, as the latching system of McKinnon would interfere with the required installation method of Birchler. However, this is not found persuasive because the rejection is premised on substituting the locking mechanism of Birchler with the known snap-locking clamping members taught by McKinnon.
The affidavits under 37 CFR 1.132 filed 8/8/25 are insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1-9, 11-19, 22-25 as set forth in the last Office action. Although the declarants Lloyd Cobb, Jason Carter, Blake Boswell and Jason Ahrenholz state that the claimed invention is structurally stronger, applies simple vertical pressure, requires less manipulation, includes a preferred snap-locking feature, is easier to install, and has achieved commercial success, these assertions do not rebut the teachings of the applied prior art. The statements do not demonstrate that the applied prior art fails to disclose or suggest the claimed features. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant’s argument that the invention is not just a simple matter of adding a locking element of the upstanding and inner wall portions of Birchler, it is noted that the rejection relies on substituting Birchler’s existing securing mechanism with the known snap- locking mechanism taught by Mckinnon.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAINE GIRMA NEWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-5275. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM- 5:00PM.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at 571-272-4561. 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.
/BLAINE G NEWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735