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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1-2, 4, 7-13, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 9,375,797) in view of Rollin et al. (US 5,685,662).
Regarding claims 1 and 18, Yang (hereafter “D1”) discloses a modular framing system (figures 1-2 show various frame structures, the embodiment of figure 8 will be focused on) comprising: a plurality of spanning members (810, 820, 830), at least some of which are hollow and have a predetermined nominal wall thickness (as shown in figure 8); fasteners (bolts – title; [0008]); and a plurality of joiners (plates 801/802) that are each securable to two or more of the hollow spanning members (810, 820, 830), each joiner having: two or more connection portions (801/802 can be considered to have three or four connection portion that extend from a central node point), each connection portion having two or more through holes (each having a plurality of bolt holes – figure 8B) through which to pass one of the fasteners when securing the joiner to one of the spanning members, at least one web portion (at central intersection portion of 801/802) that interconnects an adjacent pair of the connection portions, the web portion being configured to space the respective adjacent pair of connection portions ([0053]), and such that spanning members (810, 820, 830) secured to the adjacent pair of connection portions are non-parallel and lie in a common plane (all lie in a common plane, vertical plane in figure 8A), each interconnection of two or more spanning members to the respective joiner defines a notional node point (defined by center of 801/802), and the joiner is shaped to accommodate one of the spanning members (in figure 8A horizontal spanner 810 extends through node point) extending through the notional node point in any of the three non-parallel directions in assembled frame structures, wherein frame structures are assemblable from the modular framing system (as in figures 1-2), each frame structure being formed of spanning members that are interconnected by securing the joiners to the spanning members, with each fastener (bolts, not indexed) passing through a respective one of the through holes in the connection portions of one of the joiners and engaging the respective spanning member to thereby form the interconnection, and with the joiners interconnected with connection portions against a lateral external surfaces of the spanning members in an assembled frame structure (figures 1-2, 8). D1 does not state the thicknesses of the joiners or spanning members.
Rollin et al. teaches a frame formed by elongate spanning members (10, 22) connected by connecting members (angle piece 40) with fasteners, the connecting members being of a much larger thickness than the spanning members (col. 7, lines 44-55; figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to utilize joiners of D1 having a thickness of at least 1.5x the wall thickness of the spanning members, as taught by Rollin et al., for the purpose of sufficient strength under heavy loads.
Regarding claim 2, D1 as modified discloses wherein each joiner (801/802) has a first major edge (V-shaped edge) and a second major edge (top edge), the first major edge being a shape complement of at least part of the external periphery of the cross-sectional profile of one of the spanning members (figure 8).
Regarding claim 4, D1 as modified discloses wherein the first major edge (v-shaped edge) includes a locating portion that defines a non-planar surface (v-shape being non-planar) that has two or more sections (two orthogonal members forming the v-shape) in which normals to the surface are convergent (normals to the v-shape would intersect at ninety degrees), to thereby form the shape complement (complement to angled beams 820, 830 – figure 8).
Regarding claim 7, D1 as modified discloses wherein each of the joiners (801/802) is formed such that each web portion (central portion of 801/802) interposes an adjacent pair of the connection portions (between angle connection portions and horizontal extending connection portions of 801/802), and wherein each connection portion in that pair is contiguous with the respective web portion (figure 8).
Regarding claim 8, D1 as modified discloses wherein each of connection portions (extending portions of 801/802) that is part of a pair of connection portions that are contiguous with an interposing web portion defines a planar mounting face (the flat main plane portions of 801/802), and the planar mounting faces in that pair of connection portions are co-planar (in a vertical plane).
Regarding claim 9, D1 as modified discloses wherein the interposing web portion (central portion of 801/802) has a substantially planar surface (in the main plane surface), and the joiner (801/802) is formed such that, for each pair of connection portions and the corresponding interposing web portion, the planar mounting faces and the substantially planar surface all lie in a common plane.
Regarding claim 10, D1 as modified discloses wherein the plurality of joiners (801/802) includes a set of first joiners (801 and 802 being a set), that each have two connection portions and one web portion, and whereby, in assembled frame structures that incorporate a respective one of the first joiners, spanning members (810, 820, 830) secured to the respective first joiner project outwardly away from the respective first joiner in up to two directions (figure 8).
Regarding claim 11, D1 as modified discloses wherein the plurality of joiners (801/802) includes a set of second joiners (801 and 802 being a set), that each have three connection portions (as stated 801 and 802 have up to four connection portions) and two web portions (at least in the embodiment of figure 13 if that of figure 8 is not considered to have two web portions), and whereby, in assembled frame structures that incorporate a respective one of the second joiners, spanning members secured to the respective second joiner project outwardly away from the respective second joiner in up to three directions (figure 8/13).
Regarding claim 12, D1 discloses wherein the plurality of joiners include a second set of joiners each having three connection portions and two web portions (see as in frame of figure 13), and a first major edge (one of v-shaped edges) and a second major edge (another of v-shaped edges), the first major edge includes a locating portion that includes a concave recess (formed in the v-shape) within which to receive at least a segment of the external periphery of the cross-sectional profile of the spanning members (capable of receiving a beam/spanning member), whereby, in assembled frame structures that incorporate a respective one of the second joiners, spanning members secured to the respective second joiner project outwardly away from the respective second joiner in up to three directions.
Regarding claim 13, D1 as modified discloses wherein the second joiners (as at 1320, 1330, 1310, 1340, 1350 of figure 13) are configured such that, in assembled frame structures a respective one of the second joiners, two spanning members secured to two of the three connection portions project outwardly away from the respective second joiner in substantially parallel and co-axial directions (opposite spanners as at 1320, 1340).
Regarding claim 17, D1 as modified discloses wherein at least some of the joiners (801, 802) are each formed of material having a constant thickness (figure 8).
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 9,375,797) in view of Rollin et al. (US 5,685,662) and Reynolds et al. (US 7,530, 201).
Regarding claim 14, D1 as modified does not disclose the use of cross-braces connected to web portions.
Reynolds et al. discloses cross-braces (strut 15) connected to a bracket (node connector 12) web of a node connection for a framework of beams (13, 14). The braces (15) are connected at a diagonal by pins (37) (figure 15; col. 5, lines 20-35)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify D1 to add cross braces mounted to mounting holes at web portions of joiners as taught by Reynolds et al. for additional framework bracing when desired in a three dimensional support structure.
Regarding claim 16, D1 as modified discloses wherein the mounting of an end region of a respective one of the cross-braces (as at pin 37) to a respective joiner facilitates adjustment of the position of the respective end of the cross-brace relative to the mounting hole (pin connection would allow adjustability – figure 15 – Reynolds).
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 9,375,797) in view of Rollin et al. (US 5,685,662) and Hendry (US 10,738,457).
Regarding claims 19-21, D1 as modified does not disclose feet for supporting vertical beams / spanning members.
Hendry teaches use of foot structures (support boot 70) at the base of vertical framework beams (30), the feet (70) comprising a base plate (base 78) and mating portion (upright portion 76) connected with through holes and fasteners (figure 2A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to utilize support feet with the device of modified D1 for providing a supporting base to the framework when not utilizing a bottom horizontal beam/spanning member.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 9,375,797) in view of Rollin et al. (US 5,685,662) and Hendry (US 10,738,457) and Oetlinger (US 9,702,389).
Regarding claim 22, D1 as modified does not disclose the gusset attached to foot sleeve members. Oetlinger teaches use of gussets (126/128) for supporting brackets (26) that supporting structural framework members (col. 8, lines 29-35). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to add gussets to the feet of modified D1 as suggest in Oetlinger for use with frameworks requiring heavy load support.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 9,375,797) in view of Rollin et al. (US 5,685,662) and Hensen et al. (US 10,273,678).
Regarding claim 23, D1 as modified does not disclose use of self-drilling fasteners. Hensen et al. discloses a joiner (connector 2) for framework beams (100, 200) wherein apertures in the joiner are connected through with self-drilling fasteners (37) (col. 5, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to utilize self-drilling fasteners in D1 as taught by Hensen et al. to eliminate the need for pre-drilling.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 37 is 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record does not disclose or suggest any combination meeting the limitations of the independent claim(s). Specifically, D1 does not teach at least the claimed chamfers in the spanning members and joiners being a shape complement of one another and the prior art documents of record do not suggest a modification to meet these limitations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PATRICK D HAWN whose telephone number is (571)270-5320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-6.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728227. 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.
/PATRICK D HAWN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights