DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 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)(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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cui (CN 111093780 A).
Regarding claim 1, Cui teaches 1. A telescopic folding structural frame, comprising: a first structural member operable to telescopically insert into a second member via a connector and be held in place, See Fig. 2 which shows the telescopic members. Further, the connector 300 is also telescopic in nature. See "the connecting sleeve 300 generally connected such as a telescopic rod of the tent, has been widely generalized and used, so the detailed explanation is omitted of the structure.", the telescopic folding structural frame readily engageable to a screen to retain golf balls struck by a user therein. See Fig. 4; (400) which is a screen that is connected to the telescopic members for retaining golf balls.
Regarding claim 2, Cui teaches 2. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 1, further comprising a top telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 3, Cui teaches 3. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 2, further comprising a bottom telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 4, Cui teaches 4. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 3, further comprising a left telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 5, Cui teaches 5. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 4, further comprising a right telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 6, Cui teaches 6. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 5, wherein each of the top telescopic member, the bottom telescopic member, the left telescopic member, and the right telescopic member are readily expandable to allow for the expansion of the telescopic folding structural frame to permit releasable engagement with the screen in an expanded configuration. noting "Moreover, the rear vertical frame 211 divided into a plurality of, using the height adjusting member 250 is connected so as to be capable of adjusting the height. At this time, the height adjusting member 250 by screw buckle of the screw form. The front frame 220 includes a front left side frame is installed behind the left side of the frame 210 from the front 221, mounted on the rear frames 210 from the front right side of the right front frame 222. In addition, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 can be respectively divided into multiple, which is capable of adjusting the front and back length. Moreover, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 of length adjustment, are respectively divided into a plurality of frames, and the frame with the frame of the pipe shape connected in inserting mode. That is, the front left and right side frames 221, 222 are separated, connected in an insertion manner, so as to respectively adjust the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of length. Therefore, it is possible to adjust the front left side frame 221 and right front frame length of 222, can be adjusted and convenient to use according to the swing direction. Moreover, the adjusting the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of the length aspect, if reducing the front left, right frame 221, a length of 222, the net 400 is folded, folding, if the front left and right length extension of the frame 221, 222, the net 400 is tensioned." Which the telescopic adjustment allows the different sizes to be adjusted as claimed.
Regarding claim 7, Cui teaches 7. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 6, wherein each of the top telescopic member, the bottom telescopic member, the left telescopic member, and the right telescopic member are readily retractable to allow for the expansion of the telescopic folding structural frame to permit removable engagement with the screen in a retracted configuration. noting "Moreover, the rear vertical frame 211 divided into a plurality of, using the height adjusting member 250 is connected so as to be capable of adjusting the height. At this time, the height adjusting member 250 by screw buckle of the screw form. The front frame 220 includes a front left side frame is installed behind the left side of the frame 210 from the front 221, mounted on the rear frames 210 from the front right side of the right front frame 222. In addition, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 can be respectively divided into multiple, which is capable of adjusting the front and back length. Moreover, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 of length adjustment, are respectively divided into a plurality of frames, and the frame with the frame of the pipe shape connected in inserting mode. That is, the front left and right side frames 221, 222 are separated, connected in an insertion manner, so as to respectively adjust the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of length. Therefore, it is possible to adjust the front left side frame 221 and right front frame length of 222, can be adjusted and convenient to use according to the swing direction. Moreover, the adjusting the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of the length aspect, if reducing the front left, right frame 221, a length of 222, the net 400 is folded, folding, if the front left and right length extension of the frame 221, 222, the net 400 is tensioned." Which the telescopic adjustment allows the different sizes to be adjusted as claimed.
Regarding claim 8, Cui teaches 8. A telescopic folding structural frame, comprising: a first structural member operable to telescopically insert into a second member via a connector and be held in place, See Fig. 2 which shows the telescopic members. Further, the connector 300 is also telescopic in nature. See "the connecting sleeve 300 generally connected such as a telescopic rod of the tent, has been widely generalized and used, so the detailed explanation is omitted of the structure.", the telescopic folding structural frame readily engageable to a screen to retain golf balls struck by a user therein; See Fig. 4; (400) which is a screen that is connected to the telescopic members for retaining golf balls., and a locking mechanism to lock the first structural member and a second member in an extended or retracted position. noting "At this time, the height adjusting member 250 by screw buckle of the screw form." This is the locking mechanism which retains the telescopic members after they are adjusted reading on the claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 9, Cui teaches 9. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 8, further comprising a top telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 10, Cui teaches 10. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 9, further comprising a bottom telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 11, Cui teaches 11. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 10, further comprising a left telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 12, Cui teaches 12. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 11, further comprising a right telescopic member. See Fig. 2 which shows the different top, bottom, left and right telescopic members.
Regarding claim 13, Cui teaches 13. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 12, wherein each of the top telescopic member, the bottom telescopic member, the left telescopic member, andthe right telescopic member are readily expandable to allow for the expansion of the telescopic folding structural frame to permit releasable engagement with the screen in an expanded configuration. noting "Moreover, the rear vertical frame 211 divided into a plurality of, using the height adjusting member 250 is connected so as to be capable of adjusting the height. At this time, the height adjusting member 250 by screw buckle of the screw form. The front frame 220 includes a front left side frame is installed behind the left side of the frame 210 from the front 221, mounted on the rear frames 210 from the front right side of the right front frame 222. In addition, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 can be respectively divided into multiple, which is capable of adjusting the front and back length. Moreover, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 of length adjustment, are respectively divided into a plurality of frames, and the frame with the frame of the pipe shape connected in inserting mode. That is, the front left and right side frames 221, 222 are separated, connected in an insertion manner, so as to respectively adjust the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of length. Therefore, it is possible to adjust the front left side frame 221 and right front frame length of 222, can be adjusted and convenient to use according to the swing direction. Moreover, the adjusting the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of the length aspect, if reducing the front left, right frame 221, a length of 222, the net 400 is folded, folding, if the front left and right length extension of the frame 221, 222, the net 400 is tensioned." Which the telescopic adjustment allows the different sizes to be adjusted as claimed.
Regarding claim 14, Cui teaches 14. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 13, wherein each of the top telescopic member, the bottom telescopic member, the left telescopic member, and the right telescopic member are readily retractable to allow for the expansion of the telescopic folding structural frame to permit removable engagement with the screen in a retracted configuration. noting "Moreover, the rear vertical frame 211 divided into a plurality of, using the height adjusting member 250 is connected so as to be capable of adjusting the height. At this time, the height adjusting member 250 by screw buckle of the screw form. The front frame 220 includes a front left side frame is installed behind the left side of the frame 210 from the front 221, mounted on the rear frames 210 from the front right side of the right front frame 222. In addition, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 can be respectively divided into multiple, which is capable of adjusting the front and back length. Moreover, the front left side frame 221 and right front frame 222 of length adjustment, are respectively divided into a plurality of frames, and the frame with the frame of the pipe shape connected in inserting mode. That is, the front left and right side frames 221, 222 are separated, connected in an insertion manner, so as to respectively adjust the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of length. Therefore, it is possible to adjust the front left side frame 221 and right front frame length of 222, can be adjusted and convenient to use according to the swing direction. Moreover, the adjusting the front left and right side frames 221, 222 of the length aspect, if reducing the front left, right frame 221, a length of 222, the net 400 is folded, folding, if the front left and right length extension of the frame 221, 222, the net 400 is tensioned." Which the telescopic adjustment allows the different sizes to be adjusted as claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way;
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
(E) “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;
(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
The notations noted below apply to all rejections: In as much structure set forth by the applicant in the claims, the device is capable of use in the intended manner if so desired (See MPEP 2112). It should be noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, it meets the claim limitations. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art. See In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 939, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). The intended use defined in the preamble and body of the claim breathes no life and meaning structurally different than that of the applied reference.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui (CN 111093780 A) in view of Liao (CN 2280539 Y).
Regarding claim 15, Liao teaches 15. The telescopic folding structural frame of Claim 14, further comprising at least one base member to support the telescopic folding structural frame during use and to minimize movement of the telescopic folding structural frame. See Fig. 1; (10) wherein item 10 is a base member which supports the frame as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the date of the effective filing, to modify Cui with Liao to provide a disc shaped ground contact for the structure to help the frame stay in place.
Response to Arguments
With regards to the applicant’s arguments filed 2/17/2026 see below. The applicant argues:
The claimed telescopic folding structural frame 100 (see applicant's FIG. on the right) is different from the structure of Cui, because the structure of Cui is not telescopic. The structure of Cui cannot be reasonably equated with the claimed telescopic folding structural frame using broadest possible interpretation. Furthermore, Cui does not teach or suggest the claimed locking mechanism to lock the first structural member and a second member in an extended or retracted position. Accordingly, Cui does not anticipate the independent claims 1 and 8 along with the dependent claims 2-7 and 9-14.
However, in review of the rejections cited above and the prior art of record one can reference the citations of Ciu used for claim 1 which clearly note the use of telescopic capabilities such as with tents. This (1) clearly defines the use of telescopic frame and (2) make known that the use of telescopic members such as those used in tents are well known in the art. Further one can reference Fig. 2 and the descriptions of 221 and 222 in which the disclosure discusses the ability to change lengths making the connections telescopic in nature. Furthermore, item 250 is a height adjusting member allowing the different connecting rods to telescopically adjust the overall height of the frame. A review of the applicant’s specification doesn’t give an explicit structural definition for what the term telescopic encompasses, claim 1 generally recites a telescopic folding structure. As such, the art teaches a telescopic frame and also corroborates the finding that the use of telescopic frames are well known in the art prior to the instant inventions effective filing date, the claims generally recite telescopic and the applicants invention provides no specific structural definition for the telescopic elements other than the ability to change the length. As such the examiner is not persuaded by the applicant’s arguments.
The applicant argues that Cui does not teach or suggest the locking mechanism as claimed. However, the examiner does not find specific structure to be claimed to clearly differentiate the locking mechanism other than a general recitation of “a locking mechanism to lock…”. One can reference the rejection on Claim 8 where the Cui reference clearly teaches a screw buckle used with a height adjustment member which would lock the telescopic members in place. The locking and unlocking of the screw buckle would allow the members to be held in an extended or retracted position. A screw buckle is a type of locking mechanism reading on the claimed limitations. As such, the examiner is not persuaded by the applicant’s arguments.
The applicant argues against the motivation to combine the references stating that no teaching, suggestion, motivation or reason with rational underpinning as to why helping the frame stay in place would be achieved via “dis shaped ground contact”. A review of the rejection on Claim 15 clearly that’s the use of the base of Liao the disc shaped ground contact to keep a structure in place. Liao such as show in Figure 1 clearly includes the disc shaped base member on the frame. These are additional elements to the Liao frame. A person of ordinary skill in the art would realize that the larger area of the disc shaped members would allow for more surface contact with the ground improving the stability of the frame on the ground and also increasing the weight of the device to help keep it on the ground. Such motivation can come explicitly from the reference or from common scientific principles. As such the examiner is not persuaded by the applicants’ arguments.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gao US 20230076144 A1 - which teaches a golf practice tent with frame members.
Zhang CN 203264209 U - which teaches a practice net with positioning nails (15) similar to the base of the instant invention to secure the net to the ground.
Huang CN 110090420 A - which teaches a golf practice device with a base and net.
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 JEFFREY S VANDERVEEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0503. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11am - 7pm CST.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/JEFFREY S VANDERVEEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3711