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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/9/25 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 10 are amended. Claims 11-14 are new.
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(s) 1-14 is/are rejected, as best understood, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,765,847 to Benkert in view of US 2017/0219154 to Achunche.
Regarding claim 1, Benkert '847 discloses an off-set shock mount comprising: an unsprung bottom portion 350; a sprung top portion 330 residing above the bottom portion; a support plate 301 attached to the top portion and configured to attach to a protected structure 18 (col.11, lines 10-20 - " the exemplary top member 330 would comprise an exemplary top plate 301 that would be welded to, or otherwise attached to, top ends of exemplary opposing shear wall members 302-1 and 302-2"); a spring 2 in compression between the bottom portion and the top portion and supporting the top portion 330; and two guide assemblies 310/401 guiding vertical motion of the sprung portion (figs 11-15). Noting that Benkert '847 teaches that the support plate is " otherwise attached to " (col. 11, lines 10-20 - fig. 14).
Achunche ‘154 teaches supporting a protected structure (tube 20 carrying pipe 14) from a side location relative to a support structure 12 using a resilient arrangement 22/24. Thus, Achunche ‘154 demonstrates that a protected structure may be attached to a supporting arrangement at a position laterally offset from a primary vertical support axis, rather than directly above the support structure.
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 support plate of Benkert ‘847 to attach to the protected structure at a laterally offset position, as taught by Achunche ‘154 in order to accommodate installation constraints.
Regarding claim 2, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses further including at least two guide bolts 9 limiting vertical motion of the top portion 330 (fig. 15).
Regarding claim 3, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses wherein at least two guide bolts
comprise four guide bolts 9 (fig. 15).
Regarding claim 4, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses wherein pairs of nuts 11 are tightened
together on a top portion of each of the guide bolts 9 to limit the vertical motion of the top portion (fig.14).
Regarding claim 5, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses wherein the two guide assemblies comprise: vertically upward reaching bracing plates 401 attached to the bottom portion 350; vertically downward reaching guide plates 310 attached to the top portion; and the bracing plates 401 and guide plates 310 overlapping to limit horizontal movement of the top plate 301 (fig. 11).
Regarding claim 6, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses wherein the two guide assemblies include sleeves 404 between the bracing plates 401 and guide plates 310.
Regarding claim 7, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses wherein the sleeves 404 are rubber sleeves.
Regarding claim 8, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses wherein the guide plates 310 comprise a
pair of parallel guide plates 310 and the bracing plate 401 comprise a single bracing plate residing between the pair of parallel guide plates (fig. 11).
Regarding claim 9, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses further including a pre-load bolt 4 threadedly engaging the top portion 330 and bearing against the spring 2 to pre-load the spring.
Regarding claim 10, Benkert '847 discloses an off-set shock mount comprising: an unsprung bottom portion 350; a sprung top portion 330 residing above the bottom portion; a support plate 301 attached to the top portion and configured to attach to a protected structure 18 (col.11, lines 10-20 - " the exemplary top member 330 would comprise an exemplary top plate 301 that would be welded to, or otherwise attached to, top ends of exemplary opposing shear wall members 302-1 and 302-2"); a spring 2 in compression between the bottom portion 350 and the top portion 330 and supporting the top portion; two guide assemblies 310/401 guiding vertical motion of the sprung portion; four guide bolts 9 limiting vertical motion of the top portion 330; two guide assemblies comprising a pair of parallel guide plates 310 and a single bracing plate 401 residing between the pair of parallel guide plates (fig. 11); and a pre-load bolt 4 (figs 2 and 14) threadedly engaging the top portion and bearing against the spring to pre-load the spring 2. Noting that Benkert '847 teaches that the support plate is " ...otherwise attached to (col. 11, lines 10-20 - fig. 14).
Achunche ‘154 teaches supporting a protected structure (tube 20 carrying pipe 14) from a side location relative to a support structure 12 using a resilient arrangement 22/24. Thus, Achunche ‘154 demonstrates that a protected structure may be attached to a supporting arrangement at a position laterally offset from a primary vertical support axis, rather than directly above the support structure.
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 support plate of Benkert ‘847 to attach to the protected structure at a laterally offset position, as taught by Achunche ‘154 in order to accommodate installation constraints.
Regarding claim 11, Benkert ‘847 discloses an off-set shock mount comprising: an unsprung bottom portion 35; a sprung top portion 330 residing above the bottom portion; a support plate 301 attached to the sprung top portion; a spring 2 in compression between the bottom portion and the top portion and supporting the top portion; a rigid frame 302-1/302-2 (these are rigid structural members attached to the top plate 301 forming a frame) attached to the support plate, the rigid frame 302-1/302-2 comprising at least two L-shaped side walls 302-1/302-2 (note that each side wall includes a vertical wall portion and a orthogonal horizontal flange portion – figs. 12-14 – thereby comprising L-shaped walls.
Further, Achunche ‘154 teaches supporting a protected structure (tube 20 carrying pipe 14) from a side location relative to a support structure 12 using a resilient arrangement 22/24. Thus, Achunche ‘154 teaches that a protected structure may be attached to a supporting arrangement at a position laterally offset from a primary vertical support axis, rather than directly above the support structure.
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 support plate of Benkert ‘847 to attach to the protected structure at a laterally offset position, as taught by Achunche ‘154 in order to accommodate installation constraints.
Further, when the support plate 301 is configured to attach to a protected structure at a laterally offset position, the rigid frame formed by the L-shaped side walls 302-1/302-2 is subjected to increased bending forces. Adding reinforcement means is a known solution for rigid framed structures subjected to eccentric loading.
Therefore, providing a stiffener plate connecting the L-shaped walls is a known structural technique for increasing rigidity and resisting bending in a framed structure. Accordingly, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide at least one stiffener plate connecting the L-shaped side walls in order to reinforce the rigid frame and improve transmission of the eccentric load from the support plate to the spring as a compressive force.
Regarding claim 12, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses, further including a guide assembly 401-1/401-2 guiding vertical motion of the sprung top portion.
Regarding claim 13, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses, further including at least two guide bolts 9 limiting vertical motion of the sprung top portion.
Regarding claim 14, Benkert '847, as modified, discloses, further including a pre-load bolt 4 threadedly engaging the sprung top portion and bearing against the spring to pre-load the spring.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and the inventor’s declaration with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not solely rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the previous office action should not have been made final, but then files an RCE. The examiner submits that the claims were amended, which indeed changes the claim scope, and thus the final is proper and maintained.
Applicant simultaneously argues the finality and files and RCE which is unusual. However, the RCE is examined above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA E MILLNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7507. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:00pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/MONICA E MILLNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632