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 .
The amendment filed 11/17/2025 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a tensioning means” in claim 6.
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 only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 8-13, 16, 17, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US PG Pub No. 2008/0073301 (Van Conkelberge, hereinafter).
In re claim 1, with reference to Figs. 1-7, Van Conkelberge discloses: Transport system comprising a transport container or frame (10) and a subdivision element (1), the subdivision element (1) comprising upright (5, 6, 6’) and lying (2, 2’, 2”) strips of flexible material (see Fig. 3), a first group of uprights (4, 4’) and beams (see fig. 3 below) and a second group of uprights and beams (see Fig. 3 above) and a group of cross-beams (see Fig. 1 below), the upright and lying strips extending into the interior of the transport container or transport frame (See Fig. 7), the upright and lying strips dividing the transport container or transport frame into separate compartments, wherein the upright and lying strips form a subdivision grid, the upright strips being attached to the group of cross-beams (See Fig. 1), wherein the cross-beams are detachably connected to a top side of the transport container or the transport frame (at 12/13, via attachments 7 and/or 14, see Figs. 3, 4, and 5), wherein the lying strips (2, 2’, 2”) are arranged between the first and the second group of uprights and beams (see Fig. 3 below), wherein a lying strip at a first end is attached to a beam of the first group and at an opposite second end is attached to a beam of the second group (see Fig. 3 below) and wherein the uprights of the first and the second group are detachably connected to the transport container or the transport frame (see Figs. 1, 3, and 7 below), wherein at least some of the beams of the first group are fastened to at least some of the uprights of the first group and at least some of the beams of the second group are fastened to at least some of the uprights of the second group by clamps (Paragraph 0028: “it is also possible for the web to be screwed fast to the strut or nailed fast thereto or for the web to be clamped into slots provided on the struts”, thereby the struts/beams 3”/3’’’ are prevented from translating longitudinally through the uprights 4/4’/4”/4’’’ by way of the web being clamped at the beams adjacent the uprights).
[AltContent: textbox (Bottom Side)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Top Side)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Subdivision Grid)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
556
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Cross Beams)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
368
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Plane)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (2nd Group of Beams)][AltContent: textbox (1st Group of Beams)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
393
472
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In re claim 3 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein the subdivision grid comprises at least one side wall (6’, see Fig. 4).
In re claim 8 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein an upright comprises at a first end a hook (7) element configured for hooking into a recess (paragraphs 0031 and 0049) in the transport container or transport frame (at 12) and at a second opposite end a connecting element (15/16) configured for detachably connecting the upright to the transport container or transport frame (see Fig. 5).
In re claim 9 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein the connecting element comprises an eye or slot (occupied by 14/16) and the transport container or the transport frame comprises holes (15), wherein an upright can be detachably connected to the transport container or the transport frame by means of a bolt (14) through the eye or the slot of the connecting element in a hole of the transport container or the transport frame (see paragraphs 0032, 0041, and reference claim 35).
In re claim 10 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein the transport container or the transport frame comprises a L-shaped profile at the top on at least two opposite sides (at 13, see Figs. 3 and 4), wherein the L-shaped profile is fixedly attached to the transport container or the transport frame, and wherein the cross-beams close to their ends include a notch, recess or hook configured for hooking into the U-shaped or L-shaped profile (reference claim 34: “preferably provided for that purpose on the frame elements and/or struts are hooks, eyes and/or bores).
In re claim 11 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein the uprights of one or more of the groups of uprights and beams form a plane, wherein the strips of flexible material are located substantially on a first side of the plane and the beams of said one or more groups are located on an opposite second side of the plane and wherein lying strips extend through said plane to the beams (see Fig. 3 above).
In re claim 12 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein a strip is attached to a beam or cross-beam by means of a loop formed by said strip (see Fig. 3, paragraph 0047).
In re claim 13 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses: Method for dividing a transport container or frame, comprising: providing a subdivision element, comprising upright and lying strips of flexible material, a first group of uprights and beams and a second group of uprights and beams and a group of cross-beams; placing the subdivision element in the interior of the transport container or transport frame, wherein the upright and lying strips extend into the interior of the transport container or transport frame, wherein the upright and lying strips divide the transport container or transport frame into separate compartments, wherein the upright and lying strips form a subdivision grid, wherein the upright strips are attached to the cross-beams, and wherein the lying strips are arranged between the first and the second group of uprights and beams, wherein a lying strip at a first end is attached to a beam of the first group and at an opposite second end is attached to a beam of the second group; detachably connecting the uprights of the first and the second group to the transport container or the transport frame; connecting the cross-beams to the transport container or the transport frame; wherein the cross-beams are detachably connected to a top side of the transport container or the transport frame; wherein at least some of the beams of the first group are fastened to at least some of the uprights of the first group and at least some of the beams of the second group are fastened to at least some of the uprights of the second group by means of clamps (as in re claim 1 above).
In re claim 16 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including wherein the method comprises the additional step of rearranging the transport container or the transport frame, wherein another subdivision element is provided, placed and releasably connected to the transport container or the transport frame (reference claim 36, multiple elements 1/1’ can be attached).
In re claim 17 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses The use of a transport system according to claim 1 (paragraph 0057: “Goods to be transported can be easily introduced into the pockets formed in that way and pushed rearwardly until meeting the rear wall 20 and can be transported”).
In re claim 19 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including Use of a method according to claim 13 for transporting goods using a transport container or frame and a subdivision element (paragraph 0057 discloses using the device for transport of goods).
In re claim 20 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including at least some of the cross-beams are provided on the top side of the transport container or the transport frame (see Fig. 7 above).
In re claim 21 with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention including at least some of the cross- beams are provided on the top side of the transport container or the transport frame (see Fig. 7 above).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Conkelberge as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of US Patent No. 9,255,396 (Eberhart hereinafter).
In re claims 6 and 7, with reference to the Figs. noted above, Van Conkelberge discloses the claimed invention except wherein a clamp comprises a U-shape comprising a base and two legs, and a tensioning means, the tensioning means being configured for clamping the legs about an upright and the two legs each comprising an opening, which are positioned opposite each other and which are configured to receive a beam, and wherein the tensioning means comprises a bolt and a cage nut, wherein a first leg of the U-shape comprises a hole configured to receive the bolt and wherein a second leg comprises a recess configured for fastening the cage nut, wherein the bolt can be screwed through the hole in the first leg and the recess in the second leg into the cage nut.
However, with reference to Fig. 2b below, Eberhart discloses a connector for attaching perpendicular structural elements in a rack assembly including a clamp that comprises a U-shape comprising a base (see Fig. 2B below) and two legs, and a tensioning means (20, see Fig. 5A), the tensioning means being configured for clamping the legs about an upright (i.e. axis “z” can be upright) and the two legs each comprising an opening, which are positioned opposite each other and which are configured to receive a beam (i.e. along axis y), and wherein the tensioning means comprises a bolt and a nut (20, see Fig. 5A), wherein a first leg of the U-shape comprises a hole configured to receive the bolt and wherein a second leg comprises a recess configured for fastening the nut, wherein the bolt can be screwed through the hole in the first leg and the recess in the second leg into the nut (see Fig. 5A).
[AltContent: textbox (Base)]
[AltContent: textbox (Leg)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Leg)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Openings)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image4.png
361
391
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have modified the carriage bolt and nut to have been a bolt and cage nut accomplishing substantially the same function via retaining a portion of the fastener to aid fastening, and to have utilized such a clamp in order to further stabilize and strengthen the transport assembly of Van Conkelberge by providing attachment between the vertical uprights to the beams supporting the subdivision element and thereby preventing relative movement during transport which may otherwise jostle or disturb the transported goods.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states that claims 21 and 22 have been added, however, claim 22 is not present in the current claims.
Applicant argues on page 6 of the Remarks that Van Conkelberge does not disclose the cross-beams detachably connected to a top side of the transport container. However, as the “top side of the transport container” has not been designated as a particular element or structure, Examiner interprets as in Fig. 7 above, denoting areas considered to be a top side (and as a reference, a bottom side), and as before describes that the cross-beams (upper struts 3) are connected to the top side of the transport frame at least via uprights 4/4’. Applicant designates “the top side of the transport frame 16” at pages 22-23 of the original Specification, referencing Figs. 2A and 3, wherein the “top side” does not have its own reference numeral, and one cannot assume a top-most portion of 16 as the top side, since the corner elements extend significantly above the cross-beams 24. Therefore, Examiner’s interpretation is both broad and reasonably in light of Applicant’s original disclosure.
Applicant argues on pages 6-8 of the Remarks that Van Conkelberge does not teach at least some of the beams of the second group are fastened to at least some of the uprights of the second group by clamps. However, in re claim 1 above, Van Conkelberge does disclose clamping as a fastening mechanism by which beams are fastened to the uprights, as the web material is clamped to the beams, which prevents longitudinal translation of the beams through the uprights while allowing rotation through the uprights (Paragraph 0028: “it is also possible for the web to be screwed fast to the strut or nailed fast thereto or for the web to be clamped into slots provided on the struts”, thereby the struts/beams 3”/3’’’ are prevented from translating longitudinally through the uprights 4/4’/4”/4’’’ by way of the web being clamped at the beams adjacent the uprights).
No further arguments are presented.
Conclusion
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 ANDREW T KIRSCH whose telephone number is (571)270-5723. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9a-5p EST.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/ANDREW T KIRSCH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733