This is a Final office action for serial number 18/229432.
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 Interpretation
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: one hydraulic connector in claim 1; and one electrical connector in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 6 states “wherein the at least one first fixing means comprises at two fixing screws, and wherein the two fixing screws are parallel to each other”. Claim 1 recites “said bracket comprising: at least one first fixing means comprising at least one fixing screw, at least one lock wing connected to the at least one fixing screw, wherein the at least one fixing screw is configured to be rotated by the at least one lock wing” and “and at least one second fixing means configured to fix the device to the bracket, wherein the bracket is configured to be located in a hole of the structure” however the specification only discloses of a total of two fixing screws therefore claim 6 including that the comprising two fixing screws fails and claim 1 including at least one second fixing means would suggest a total of three fixing screws/means therefore failing to comply with the written description requirement since the specification only discloses a total of three fixing screws/means only a total of two fixing screws/means.
Claim 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 7 states “wherein the at least one first fixing means comprises at two fixing screws, and wherein the two fixing screws are parallel to each other”. Claim 1 recites “said bracket comprising: at least one first fixing means comprising at least one fixing screw, at least one lock wing connected to the at least one fixing screw, wherein the at least one fixing screw is configured to be rotated by the at least one lock wing” and “and at least one second fixing means configured to fix the device to the bracket, wherein the bracket is configured to be located in a hole of the structure” however the specification only discloses of a total of two fixing screws therefore claim 7 including that the comprising two fixing screws fails and claim 1 including at least one second fixing means would suggest a total of three fixing screws/means therefore failing to comply with the written description requirement since the specification only discloses a total of three fixing screws/means only a total of two fixing screws/means.
Claim 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 8 states “wherein the at least one first fixing means comprises at two fixing screws, and wherein the two fixing screws are parallel to each other”. Claim 1 recites “said bracket comprising: at least one first fixing means comprising at least one fixing screw, at least one lock wing connected to the at least one fixing screw, wherein the at least one fixing screw is configured to be rotated by the at least one lock wing” and “and at least one second fixing means configured to fix the device to the bracket, wherein the bracket is configured to be located in a hole of the structure” however the specification only discloses of a total of two fixing screws therefore claim 8 including that the comprising two fixing screws fails and claim 1 including at least one second fixing means would suggest a total of three fixing screws/means therefore failing to comply with the written description requirement since the specification only discloses a total of three fixing screws/means only a total of two fixing screws/means.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(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, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10 and 11 is/are rejected, as best understood, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Tamarit ES 1277629U. The applicant is reminded that (regards to claim 1, 3-7) external supply, a cutout of the hole, or the structure are not positively claimed therefore the prior art only need to be capable of performing the functions related to the external supply, a cutout of the hole, or the structure.
Tamarit discloses claims:
1. A bracket for connecting a device to a structure, said bracket comprising: at least one first fixing means comprising at least one fixing screw (left 4), at least one lock wing (5) connected to the at least one fixing screw, wherein the at least one fixing screw is configured to be rotated by the at least one lock wing (5), and at least one stop rib (8) configured to limit the movement of the at least one lock wing at a predetermined position, and at least one second fixing means (right 4) configured to fix the device to the bracket, wherein the bracket is configured to be located in a hole of the structure, wherein said bracket comprises at least one hydraulic connector and/or electrical connector (3), wherein the at least one hydraulic connector and/or electrical connector (3) is configured to connect at least one external supply to the bracket.
3. The bracket according to claim 1, wherein the bracket has a protrusion (2a) in a radial direction configured to fit into a cutout of the hole of the structure.
5. The bracket according to any claim 1, wherein the at least one fixing screw (left and right 4) is parallel to a direction perpendicular to an outline of the bracket.
6. The bracket according to claim 1, wherein the at least one first fixing means comprises two fixing screws, and wherein the two fixing screws are parallel to each other.
9. The bracket according to claim 1, wherein the bracket is configured to enclose an outside wall of the device.
Inherently discloses 10. A method for connecting the bracket of claim 1 to a structure and to a device, the method comprising the steps of:- positioning the bracket in a hole of the structure, - rotating at least one fixing screw connected to at least one lock wing and rotating the at least one lock wing until the rotation of the at least one lock wing is stopped by at least one stop rib, whereby the rotation of the at least one fixing screw moves the at least one lock wing towards the structure from the back side of the structure until the bracket is fixed to the structure.
11. Method according to claim 10, further comprising the step of connecting at least one supply (12 or water hose) to a connector of the bracket before the step of positioning the bracket in the hole of the structure.
[AltContent: textbox (Protrusion (2a))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (BRACKET (1)
2ND Fixing means (4)
Stop rib (8)
1ST FIXING MEANS (4))]
PNG
media_image1.png
330
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Hydraulic connector (3))]
PNG
media_image2.png
224
244
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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) 4, 7 and 8 is/are rejected, as best understood, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Tamarit ES 1277629U in view of Harris et al. (Harris) 2014/0259383.
Tamarit discloses all of the limitations of the claimed invention except for wherein at least one of the at least one fixing screws is inclined and/or turned outwards to a direction perpendicular to the outline of the bracket; wherein at least two of the fixing screws are inclined to each other; wherein at least two fixing screws are inclined to each other and turned outwards. Harris teaches that it is known to have (Claim 4) wherein at least one of the at least one fixing screws (72) is inclined and/or turned outwards to a direction perpendicular to the outline of the bracket; (Claim 7) The bracket according to claim 1, wherein at least one fixing screw comprises at least two fixing screws (72), and wherein the at least two fixing screws are inclined to each other; (Claim 8) The bracket according to claim 1, wherein the at least one fixing screw comprises at least two fixing screws (72), and wherein the at least two fixing screws are inclined to each other and turned outwards (see figure 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success to have modified Tamarit to have included wherein at least one fixing screw comprises at least two fixing screws, and wherein the at least two fixing screws are inclined to each other; wherein the at least one fixing screw comprises at least two fixing screws, and wherein the at least two fixing screws are inclined to each other and turned outwards as taught by Harris for the purpose of providing an angle that allows for easier access to the fixing screws for a tool or the user.
Claim(s) 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Tamarit ES 1277629U in view of DeVries et al. (DeVries) 2014/0261767. The applicant is reminded that the outside wall of device and device are not positively claimed therefore the prior art only need to be capable of performing the functions related to the outside wall of device and device.
Tamarit discloses all of the limitations of the claimed invention except for the bracket is configured to enclose an outside wall of the device and connecting at least one supply to a connector of the bracket. DeVries discloses (Claim 9) The bracket according to claim 1, wherein the bracket (20) is configured to enclose an outside wall (outside wall of 14) of the device (Figure 1); inherently teaches (Claim 11) Method according to claim 10, further comprising the step of connecting at least one supply (94) to a connector (96) of the bracket before the step of positioning the bracket in the hole of the structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success to have modified Tamarit to have the bracket is configured to enclose an outside wall of the device and connecting at least one supply to a connector of the bracket as taught by DeVries for the purpose of providing a means for connecting a light means to the faucet and providing more stability to the faucet.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY T WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6826. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 9:00am-5:30pm flexible schedule.
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 (571) 272-8227. 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.
/KIMBERLY T WOOD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights