DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 21A appears to show two separate elements labeled 117. Which is correct? Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 70 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, the term “Threadably” immediately following the phrase “second secondary post” appears to be extraneous and is likely a typo that should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
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 62 and 63 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. The claim states that the channel is formed on the primary anchor baseplate. However, Figure 21A show the channels to be on the secondary anchor baseplate which is described in claim 70 as having opposing first (618) and secondary posts(619). Since this secondary base plate is described in claim 70 and not Claim 66, the examiner will assume Claims 62 and 63 depend from Claim 70 as well. An appropriate correction is required.
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) 66-69 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steffen, (U.S. 20130000243).
In re Claims 66 and claim 67, Figure 7 of Stephen teaches an assembly comprising a primary anchor, the primary anchor comprising: a primary anchor baseplate (354) defining a top surface; a primary post/centering element (355) extending from the primary anchor baseplate; and a primary blind bore (355a) extending into the primary post, the primary blind bore defining an open end. Fastener (360 is screwed into the blind bore (355a) then the blind bore is at least partially internally threaded. (Paragraph 0053); wherein the open end is flush with the top surface.
However, Figure 7 of does not teach that the primary post/centering element (355) defines a screw. However, Figure 9 shows an embodiment where a centering element (453) does define a screw on its exterior. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the primary post/centering element (355) taught by Figure 7 with the screw surface taught by Figure 9. This would allow the primary post to anchor more securely in the surrounding insulation (24). The insulation could be considered part of the roof structure, therefore the modified primary post engages the structure
In re Claim 68 and 69 Roofing material (17,24) are located between the baseplate (354) and the rest of the structure attached to the roof. While shingles are not specifically disclosed, the examiner takes official notice that shingles on a roof are well known and conventionally used to protect the structure form the elements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 49, 50 57-58, 60, 65, and 70-73 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 prior art of record fails to teach or adequately suggest a primary anchor assembly with the combination of characteristics specified in the claims. Of particular note are the requirements for a secondary anchor with a secondary anchor baseplate; a first secondary post extending from the secondary anchor baseplate; and a second secondary post extending from the secondary anchor baseplate opposite the first secondary post. The second secondary post threadably is at least partially externally threaded and threadably engages the primary blind bore to attach the secondary anchor to the primary anchor. There is no cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prior art to obtain the applicant's invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM G BARLOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1158. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am-4:00 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Glessner can be reached at (571) 272-6754. 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.
/ADAM G BARLOW/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633