DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/03/2026 in regards to claims 1-2, 6, 26-28, 32-33 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Tankersley et al. does not disclose a mounting bracket comprising a saddle profile. Based on an interpretation or grouping of parts of Tankersley the mounting bracket is identified as the parts/members of figure 4 (less the A-profile frame 33) to include the base 41 with curved couplers 92 forming an open bottom channel and an upper saddle profile is formed by the shape of upper surface 58.
Applicant argues the cited bracket (111) of Tankersley et al. is not interposed between each of the pair of legs and coupled to the legs. Taking the claim at its broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, one of the bracket (111) exists in space at least partially at a location between the legs (71) and is coupled to both members (71) at least by way of intermediate members/portions (as legs 71 are part of a single piece – figure 5).
Applicant argues Tankersley et al. does not teach the legs having a bend adjacent to an end portion. Such a bend is seen in figure 9 indicated in the view through the slot 133. Applicant refers to figures of Tankersley et al. found in the application file which show a different view of the legs 71. It is held that the figure 9 of Tankersley et al. can be taken as disclosing a bend even if differing figures may show differing designs.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 26-28, 32-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Tankersley et al. (US 12,088,238).
Regarding claim 1, Tankersley et al. (hereafter “D1”) discloses a pier (ground engaging system/frame; figure 8) for a solar tracking system (title), comprising: a bearing housing assembly (cover 43, bolts to tabs 63 – col. 3, lines 35-38); a frame (33), the frame formed from a length of tube bent to form an A-profile (at 33 – figure 5), the A- profile comprising a pair of legs (71) and a crown (74) at a center portion thereof; and a mounting bracket (base 41, plate 52, couplers 92), the mounting bracket coupled to a portion of the crown of the frame at a first portion thereof and coupled to a portion of the bearing housing assembly at a second portion thereof (coupled to 33 via 92 and to cover 43 directly – figure 4; col. 4, lines 23-35), the mounting bracket comprising an upper surface (at 58/63) and two leg portions (legs of 92) extending downwardly from the upper surface to form a saddle profile (top of surface 58 forming a saddle profile) defining an open bottom channel between the two leg portions (channel between members 92; figure 4), the open bottom channel configured to receive the crown of the frame within a portion of the open bottom channel (crown of 33 received between 52 and 92 – figure 4).
Regarding claim 2, D1 discloses further comprising a fastener (bolts to/at 66 – col. 3, lines 35-38), the fastener coupling the bearing housing assembly to the mounting bracket (seen in figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, D1 discloses further comprising a support bracket (111), the support bracket interposed between each of the pair of legs of the frame, a first end portion of the support bracket coupled to a portion of a first leg of the pair of legs and a second, opposite end portion of the support bracket coupled to a portion of a second leg of the pair of legs (col. 4, lines 58-67).
Regarding claims 26, 28, and 32, see the discussion of claim 1, 2, and 6 above.
Regarding claim 27, D1 discloses wherein the end portion of each leg of the pair of legs further comprises a mounting hole (not indexed, see figures 10-11) for operably coupling to a piling (coupling to lower piling post).
Regarding claim 33, D1 discloses wherein each leg (71) of the pair of legs of the frame includes a bend formed adjacent to an end portion of the leg such that the end portions are aligned generally perpendicular to a ground surface (as seen in figure 9 leg bottom has a bend as seen through slot 133)).
Regarding claim 34, D1 discloses wherein the mounting bracket further comprises one of more fasteners (94) configured to couple the two leg portions (92) of the mounting bracket to the crown of the frame (figure 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7-11 are allowed.
Claims 3-5, 29-31 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not disclose or suggest any combination meeting the limitations of the indicated claims. Specifically, Tankersley et al. does not teach at least the claimed A-frame tripod arrangement (of claim 7) or the inclined washers (of claims 3-5, 29-31) and the prior art documents of record do not suggest a modification to meet these limitations.
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
Prosecution Insights