DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 3, Figures 15-18, claims 11-20 and 24, in the reply filed on March 9, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 and 21-23 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 9, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 11 (line 14) “the side wall” should recite –the first side wall--.
For the purpose of examining the application, it is assumed that appropriate correction has been made.
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.
Claims 11-20 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.
Claim 11 (lines 7-8,13-14) recites “a second side wall adjacent to the fist side wall, each of the first and second side walls extending downwardly from the planar body of the inner part… at least two slots being defined by the planar body of the outer part, each of the slots having a wider portion configured to allow insert of the side wall of the inner part”.
It is unclear as to which “sidewall” of the inner part is received within the slots of the outer part. Furthermore, it is unclear as to which direction each of the first and second sidewalls of the outer part extend relative to the first and second sidewalls of the inner part, and unclear as to how the first and second sidewalls of the inner part structurally engage the slots and/or planar body of the outer part, such that one of the sidewalls of the inner part can be received within a slot of the outer part without interference between the other sidewall of the inner part and the planar body of the outer part. Claims 2-20 depend from claim 11 and are likewise rejected as being indefinite.
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 11-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wilson et al. (US 11,817,687).
As to claim 11 as best understood, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly for connecting two adjacent wire basket cable trays, the splice plate assembly comprising:
an inner part comprising:
a planar body X (Figure 22 reprinted below with annotations);
a first side wall 584 extending transversely from the planar body, the side wall terminating in an outwardly extending tab Y;
a second side wall 584 adjacent to and first side wall, each of the first and second side walls extending downwardly from the planar body of the inner part; and
an outer part comprising:
a planar body 502;
first and second side walls Z extending downward from the planar body of the outer part away from the inner part;
at least two slots A being defined by the planar body of the outer part (Figure 23 reprinted below with annotations), each of the slots having a wider portion B configured to allow insertion of the first side wall of the inner part, and a narrower portion C configured to lock the inner part into the outer part by preventing passage of the tab of the side wall of the inner part (Figures 21-27).
[AltContent: textbox (YY)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (XX)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (ZZ)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Z)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Y)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (X)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
247
475
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (B)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (C)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (A)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
229
297
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claim 12, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the first and second side walls Z of the outer part 502 each have an upward extending protrusion ZZ (Figures 21-27).
As to claim 13, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the inner part X comprises four side walls 584,XX, wherein adjacent side walls of the four side walls define slots extending through the inner part and configured to receive a wire from the cable tray (Figures 21-27).
As to claim 16, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the inner part X and the outer part 502 define a space between the planar bodies of the inner and outer parts configured to receive transverse wires of adjacent cable trays (Figures 21-27).
As to claim 17, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the planar body X of the inner part defines an opening in a central portion of the planar body of the inner part, the opening being configured to aid in installation and modularity (Figures 21-27).
As to claim 18, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the planar body 502 of the outer part defines an opening in a central portion of the planar body of the outer part, wherein the openings in the central portions of the planar bodies align when the inner and outer parts are coupled (Figures 21-27).
As to claim 19, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the planar body 502 of the outer part comprises a central protrusion YY in a central portion of the planar body of the outer part, wherein the central protrusion extends through the opening in the central portion of the planar body X of the inner part when the inner and outer parts are coupled (Figures 21-27).
As to claim 20, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the narrow portion C of the outer body slots A has a curved-shape (Figures 21-27).
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 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson et al. in view of Krondorfer et al. (US 7,077,735).
As to claim 24, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly for connecting two adjacent wire basket cable trays, the splice plate assembly comprising:
an inner part comprising:
a planar body X;
a side wall 584 extending transversely from the planar body; and
an outer part comprising:
a planar body 502;
first and second side walls Z extending downward from the planar body of the outer part away from the inner part;
at least two slots A being defined by the planar body of the outer part, each of the slots having a wider portion B configured to allow insertion of the side wall of the inner part, and a narrower portion C configured to lock the inner part into the outer part by preventing passage of the tab of the side wall of the inner part (Figures 21-27).
Wilson et al. fail to disclose a splice plate assembly wherein the side wall of the inner part has a bottom edge that is angled in one direction such that one side of the side wall is longer than the other side of the side wall, the angled bottom edge terminating in an outwardly extending tab.
Krondorfer et al. teach an assembly wherein a side wall 32 of an inner part 62 has a bottom edge 78 that is angled in one direction such that one side of the side wall is longer than the other side of the side wall, the angled bottom edge terminating in an outwardly extending tab 22; the angled tab clamping against a planar body of outer part 70 in a rotatably locked position, securely retaining the inner part in the locked position and preventing inadvertent unlocking thereof (Figures 2-5). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the splice plate assembly disclosed by Wilson et al. wherein the side wall of the inner part comprises an angled bottom edge and an angled tab, as taught by Krondorfer et al., in order to securely retain the inner part in the locked position and to prevent inadvertent unlocking thereof.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 14, Wilson et al. disclose the claimed splice plate assembly with the exception of wherein the first side wall of the inner part is a first side wall of a pair of first opposing side walls, the second sidewall of the inner part being one of a second pair of opposing side walls, the first pair of opposing side walls each terminating in an outwardly extending tab, the second pair of opposing side walls each terminating with a concave end, wherein each concave end is configured to receive a wire of a separate cable tray.
There is no teaching or suggestion, absent the applicant’s own disclosure, for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the splice plate assembly disclosed by Wilson et al. to have the above mentioned elemental features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 07, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to claim 11, Attorney argues that:
Wilson et al. fail to disclose a splice plate assembly comprising an inner part comprising a second side wall adjacent to and first side wall, each of the first and second side walls extending downwardly from the planar body of the inner part, as tabs 508 and grips 584 of the Wilson et al. reference extend in opposite directions.
Examiner disagrees. As to claim 11 as best understood, Wilson et al. disclose a splice plate assembly comprising an inner part comprising a second side wall 584 adjacent to and first side wall 584, each of the first and second side walls extending downwardly from the planar body X of the inner part (Figure 22 reprinted above with annotations; Figures 21-27).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (10:00 am-7:00 pm EST).
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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571)270-5788. 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.
9/01/26 /MICHAEL P FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights