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 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) 1-6, 8-11, 13, 15-16, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fagan, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0157685.
Regarding claim 1, Fagan discloses a portable building structure comprising: a fixed portion comprising: a central floor panel (122); a central roof panel (120) above the central floor panel; a pair of central sidewalls (components 126), each one of the pair of central sidewalls being disposed at opposite ends of the central floor panel (paragraph 17), the pair of central sidewalls interposing the central floor panel and the central roof panel (Fig. 1A); the central floor panel, the central roof panel, and the pair of central sidewalls together providing the fixed portion of the foldable modular building; at least one foldable portion comprising: a lateral floor panel (132/114) hingedly connected to an outside lateral edge of the central floor panel (see Fig. 1C); a lateral roof panel (130) hingedly connected to an outside lateral edge of the central roof panel (see Fig. 1B); a pair of outside wall panels (136), each one of the pair of outside wall panels being hingedly connected to an outside lateral edge of a corresponding one of the pair of central sidewalls (paragraph 34); and an outer lateral sidewall (134), the outer lateral sidewall being hingedly connected to an outside lateral edge of the lateral floor panel (paragraph 34); and a lateral support beam (lower horizontal 112; Fig. 3), the lateral support beam being dimensioned to contact an outside lateral edge of the lateral floor panel and a bottom edge of the outer lateral sidewall (see Fig. 3), but does not specifically disclose the lateral beam is positioned to interpose the outer lateral sidewall and a foundation. Fagan teaches the deployable panels are affixed to deployable side frame members at various locations (paragraph 23). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to affix the panels within an inside edge of the lateral beam depending on the method a user chooses to affix the panel to construct the wall. The lateral beam would then interpose the lateral panel and a foundation, should the structure be placed on a foundation. The phrases “dimensioned to contact an outside lateral edge of the lateral floor panel and a bottom edge of the outer lateral sidewall” and “positioned to interpose the outer lateral sidewall and a foundation” are statements of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 2, Fagan discloses a portable building structure wherein the at least one foldable portion comprises two foldable portions, each one of the two foldable portions being provided on opposite lateral edges of the fixed portion (see Fig. 1E).
Regarding claim 3, Fagan discloses a portable building structure wherein the lateral floor panel is hingedly connected to the central floor panel so that the lateral floor panel is rotatable upwardly and inwardly between a deployed position in which the lateral floor panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central floor panel and a folded position in which the lateral floor panel extends perpendicular to the central floor panel (see Fig. 1C, generally). The phrase “rotatable upwardly and inwardly between a deployed position in which the lateral floor panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central floor panel and a folded position in which the lateral floor panel extends perpendicular to the central floor panel” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 4, Fagan discloses a portable building wherein the outer lateral sidewall is hingedly connected at a base of the outer lateral sidewall to an outside lateral edge of the lateral floor panel (as established in Claim 1) so that the outer lateral sidewall is rotatable inwardly and downwardly between a deployed position in which the outer lateral sidewall extends vertically perpendicular to the lateral floor panel, and a folded position in which the outer lateral sidewall extends parallel to and sits above the lateral floor panel (paragraph 34). The phrase “rotatable inwardly and downwardly between a deployed position in which the outer lateral sidewall extends vertically perpendicular to the lateral floor panel, and a folded position in which the outer lateral sidewall extends parallel to and sits above the lateral floor panel” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 5, Fagan discloses a portable building structure wherein each one of the outside wall panels is hingedly connected to the central sidewall so that each one of the outside wall panels is rotatable horizontally inwardly between a deployed position in which the outside wall panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central sidewall and a folded position in which the outside wall panel is extends perpendicular to the central sidewall (paragraph 34). The phrase “rotatable horizontally inwardly between a deployed position in which the outside wall panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central sidewall and a folded position in which the outside wall panel is extends perpendicular to the central sidewall” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 6, Fagan discloses a portable building structure having a folded configuration in which the outer lateral sidewall extends parallel to and sits adjacent to the lateral floor panel, with the outer lateral sidewall interposing the fixed portion and the lateral floor panel (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Fagan discloses a portable building structure wherein the outer lateral sidewall sits above and is supported by the central floor panel when the foldable modular building is in a folded configuration (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 9, Fagan discloses a portable building structure having a folded configuration in which the outside wall panels extend parallel to the outer lateral sidewall, and in which the outside wall panels interpose the fixed portion and the outer lateral sidewall (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Fagan discloses a portable building structure having a deployed configuration in which the lateral floor panel extends parallel to and in the same plane as the central floor panel, the lateral roof panel extends parallel to and in the same plane as the central roof panel, the outer lateral sidewall extends perpendicularly between the lateral floor panel and the lateral roof panel, each one of the pair of outside wall panels extends parallel to and in the same plane as a corresponding one of the central sidewalls (see Fig. 2, generally), and the lateral support beam is positioned beneath and vertically supports the outer lateral sidewall (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Fagan discloses a portable building structure wherein the central roof panel is wider than the central floor panel (see Fig. 4), but does not specifically disclose wherein the central roof panel is wider than the central floor panel by an amount corresponding to a thickness of the lateral floor panel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the widths differ by an amount to fit within the fixed portion in a folded position, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 13, Fagan discloses a portable building structure but does not disclose wherein a length, width, and height of the lateral floor panel is the same as the length, width, and height of the outer lateral sidewall. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the two adjacent floor panels assembled together would have approximately the same dimensions as the outer lateral sidewall (see Fig. 4), and depending on method of production and choice of materials.
Regarding claim 15, Fagan discloses a portable building structure wherein the lateral roof panel is hingedly connected to the central roof panel so that the lateral roof panel is rotatable downwardly and inwardly between a deployed position in which the lateral roof panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central roof panel and a folded position in which the lateral roof panel extends perpendicular to the central roof panel (as shown in Fig. 1B). The phrase “rotatable downwardly and inwardly between a deployed position in which the lateral roof panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central roof panel and a folded position in which the lateral roof panel extends perpendicular to the central roof panel” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 16, Fagan discloses a portable building structure but does not specifically disclose wherein the lateral roof panel is hingedly connected to the central roof panel so as to be upwardly rotatable relative to the central roof panel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that, as the particulars of the hinge are not disclosed by Fagan, a hinge may be used which allows for an upward turning movement of the lateral roof panel depending on the type of hinge utilized in the structure. The phrase “so as to be upwardly rotatable relative to the central roof panel” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 20, Fagan discloses a portable building structure having a central roof panel (120) and at least one lateral roof panel (130), wherein the lateral roof panel is hingedly connected to the central roof panel so that the lateral roof panel is rotatable downwardly and inwardly between a deployed position in which the lateral roof panel is disposed parallel to and in the same plane as the central roof panel and a folded position in which the lateral roof panel extends perpendicular to the central roof panel (see Figs. 1A-1C).
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fagan, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0157685 in view of Hosterman et al., U.S. Patent 6,434,895.
Regarding claim 17, Fagan discloses a portable building structure, but does not disclose wherein the lateral roof panel comprises at least an inner and an outer lateral roof panel, the inner and the outer lateral roof panels being hingedly connected. Hosterman teaches a portable structure having two separate hinged roof panels which fold out into one plane (110, 120; see Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize two hingedly connected panels rather than one for ease of assembly and because the same results will be produced, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art as modified discloses a portable building structure having inner and outer lateral roof panels, but does not specifically disclose wherein, in a folded configuration, the outer lateral roof panel, the inner lateral roof panel and the central roof panel extend parallel to one another, with the inner lateral roof panel interposing the central roof panel and the outer lateral roof panel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the panels in such a manner to accommodate the multiple panels when it will simplify the assembly process for a user.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art as modified discloses a portable building structure wherein, in a deployed configuration, the outer lateral roof panel, the inner lateral roof panel, and the central roof panel extend parallel to and in the same plane as one another (see for example Fagan Fig. 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 45 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 closest prior art of record fails to disclose or make obvious a foldable modular building comprising the support beam in the position as claimed in the folded configuration, nor including the recessed window components positioned as claimed.
Claim 22 is allowed. The closest prior art of record fails to disclose or make obvious a method of deploying a foldable modular building comprising the specific method steps as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/16/2026 regarding claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the applicant’s argument that the lateral support beam does not interpose a sidewall and foundation, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The specific lower outer horizontal component 112 as shown in the figures, does indeed deploy from the fixed members as shown in Figure 3. The frame members (112) and the panels (134) of Fagan are disclosed as separate elements. As Fagen does not disclose the particulars of the manner in which 134 is mounted to 112, it is obvious that 112 may be at a position vertically between the wall panel 134 and a ground or foundation beneath. The examiner agrees with the applicant’s assertion that the sidewall (134) is supported by the bottom frame (112), however, this alone does not infer that the frame member cannot be positioned beneath the wall panel. See rejection as set forth above.
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 GISELE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)270-7326. The examiner can normally be reached M-T,Th-F 7:30am-4:30pm.
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, 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.
GISELE D. FORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/GISELE D FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3633