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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 8, “support object” should be “supported object”. 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 3,4,7-10,13-20 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.
In claims 3,9,13 and 17 it is unclear what part of the surface of the bridge part is being referenced as “the part of the surface of the bridge part”. It appears the claims may be meant to read “a part of the surface of the bridge part”.
In claims 4,10,14 and 18 it is unclear what part of the surface of one shaft part is being referenced as “the part of the surface of one shaft part”. It appears the claims may be meant to read “a part of the surface of one shaft part”.
In claim 7 lines 13-14, the portion of the claim reading “and a part of a surface of the body part being formed by a support surface that supports a supported object” is unclear. It is unclear if the support surface in the above cited passage is the same support surface of line 7 of the claim. Likewise it is unclear if the supported object is the same supported object from line 8 of the claim. For the purposes of examination it was assumed that the claim was meant to reference the same support surface and supported object, as this is what was meant to be claimed per the examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention.
Further in claim 7, line 15 it is unclear which of the screw parts is being referenced as “the screw part”.
In claim 8 lines 7-8, there is no antecedent basis for the term “the support surface”. It appears this should read “a support surface”.
In claim 8 lines 13-14, the portion of the claim reading “and a part of a surface of the body part being formed by a support surface that supports a supported object” is unclear. It is unclear if the support surface in the above cited passage is the same support surface of line 7 of the claim. Likewise it is unclear if the supported object is the same supported object(support object, see above claim objection) from line 8 of the claim. For the purposes of examination it was assumed that the claim was meant to reference the same support surface and supported object, as this is what was meant to be claimed per the examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention.
Further in claim 8, line 16 it is unclear which of the screw parts is being referenced as “the screw part”.
The scope of claim 16 is unclear. Claims 16 depends from claim 7 which includes the step of “disposing a level gauge on a support surface, wherein the level gauge is a supported object”. Claim 16 recites “wherein the supported object is a level gauge or a first gyro sensor”. It is unclear if in the case where the supported object is a first gyro sensor, if the step of “disposing a level gauge on a support surface, wherein the level gauge is a supported object” is still meant to be a part of the claimed method. In the event that the step would not be a part of the claimed method, then claim 16 would no longer require all the limitations of parent claim 7 and would be in improper dependent form (see 35 USC 112(d)). For the purposes of examination it was assumed that the claim was meant to recite that the method included the step of disposing a level gauge, or a first gyro sensor, on a support surface, as this what was meant to be claimed per the examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention.
Likewise the scope of claim 20 is unclear. Claims 20 depends from claim 8 which includes the step of “disposing a first gyro sensor on the support surface, wherein the first gyro sensor represents a support object”. Claim 20 recites “wherein the supported object is a level gauge or a first gyro sensor”. It is unclear if in the case where the supported object is a level gauge, if the step of “disposing a first gyro sensor on the support surface, wherein the first gyro sensor is a support object” is still meant to be a part of the claimed method. In the event that the step would not be a part of the claimed method, then claim 20 would no longer require all the limitations of parent claim 8 and would be in improper dependent form (see 35 USC 112(d)). For the purposes of examination it was assumed that the claim was meant to recite that the method included the step of disposing a level gauge, or a first gyro sensor, on a support surface, as this what was meant to be claimed per the examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention.
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) 1,2,4,10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Johnson III et al.(US5804737).
[claim 1] Johnson teaches a U-bolt(34) fastened to a fastened object(76), comprising: a body part, wherein the body part includes a pair of shaft parts(60) and a bridge part(64), both shaft parts of the pair of shaft parts are aligned in a first direction(horizontal direction in fig 6) and extending in a second direction(vertical direction in fig 6) orthogonal to the first direction, and the bridge part connects one set of ends of each of the pair of shaft parts(fig 6); and a pair of screw parts(62) provided at the other set of ends of each of the pair of shaft parts, wherein a part of a surface of the body part constitutes a support surface(supporting gauges 92) that supports a supported object(92).
[claim 2] wherein the support surface supports the supported object in a substantially vertical direction in a state where the U-bolt is fastened to the fastened object(fig 1).
[claim 4,10] wherein the part of the surface of one shaft part of the pair of shaft parts constitutes the support surface that supports the supported object in a direction orthogonal to the second direction(fig 1).
Claim(s) 1-4,6,7,9,10,12-14,16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nansei(JP3088650).
[claim 1] Nansei teaches a U-bolt(42f1) fastened to a fastened object(42b), comprising: a body part, wherein the body part includes a pair of shaft parts(vertical legs seen in fig 7) and a bridge part(horizontal portion seen in fig 7), both shaft parts of the pair of shaft parts are aligned in a first direction(horizontal direction in fig 7) and extending in a second direction(vertical direction in fig 7) orthogonal to the first direction, and the bridge part connects one set of ends of each of the pair of shaft parts(fig 7); and a pair of screw parts(threaded ends seen in fig 7) provided at the other set of ends of each of the pair of shaft parts, wherein a part of a surface of the body part constitutes a support surface(inner surface contacting 42f) that supports a supported object(42f).
[claim 2] wherein the support surface supports the supported object in a substantially vertical direction in a state where the U-bolt is fastened to the fastened object(fig 7).
[claim 3,9,13] wherein the part of the surface of the bridge part(inner surface) constitutes the support surface that supports the supported object in the second direction.
[claim 4,10,14] wherein the part of the surface of one shaft part(inner surface) of the pair of shaft parts constitutes the support surface that supports the supported object in a direction orthogonal to the second direction(fig 7).
[claim 6,12,16] wherein the supported object is a level gauge (42f) or a first gyro sensor, and when the supported object is the first gyro sensor, a second gyro sensor is disposed on the fastened object.
[claim 7] Nansei teaches an installing method of fastening a U-bolt(42f1) to a fastened object(42b), the installing method comprising; disposing a level gauge(42f) on a support surface(inner surface of 42f1), wherein the level gauge is a supported object, the U-bolt includes a body part and a pair of screw parts(threaded ends seen in fig 7), the body part further includes a pair of shaft parts(vertically extending portions seen in fig 7) and a bridge part(horizontal portion in fig 7), both shaft parts of the pair of shaft parts are aligned in a first direction(horizontal direction in fig 7) and placed in a second direction(vertical direction in fig 7) orthogonal to the first direction, the bridge part connects one set of ends of each of the pair of shaft parts(fig 7), the pair of screw parts is provided at the other set of ends of each of the pair of shaft parts(fig 7), and a part of a surface of the body part being formed by a support surface(inner surface) that supports a supported object(42f); and a step of fastening the screw part with a nut(seen in fig 7), on the basis of levelness indicated by the level gauge.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 11 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.
Claims 8,15 and 17-20 would be allowable if amended to overcome the above claim objection and 112 rejections.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with regards to claims 5,11 and 15, the prior art teaches the U-bolt of claims 1 and 2 and the method of claim 7, however the prior art does not teach wherein the body part includes a recess, and the support surface is constituted by a bottom surface of the recess as recited in claims 5,11 and 15.
With regards to claims 8 the prior art(Nansei JP3088650) teaches a method of fastening a U-bolt to a fastened object with a level sensor, as detailed with respect to claim 7 above. However the prior art does not teach a method of fastening a U-bolt where the supported object is a first gyro sensor, as recited in claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20250027768, US20240093807, US20240093714, US11802578, US20230114691, US20180067003, US6305424, US5215281, US5205022, US5014940.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H DUCKWORTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2304. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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 5712724979. 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.
/BRADLEY DUCKWORTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632