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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 2/9/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the method of claim 15 cannot be practiced by a materially different apparatus than that of claim 1 because both the method and apparatus claims recite limitations directed to an obstacle which is biased, movable, and resettable in response to a pallet being inserted. The Applicant further argues that restrictions are based on differences between the independently claimed inventions and the absence of limitations found only in dependent apparatus claims does not establish that the method of claim 15 can be practiced by an apparatus materially different from that recited in independent in claim 1. This is not found persuasive because claim 1 is still only “configured to” be used with a pallet racking system while claim 15 positively requires the pallet racking system and pallet. Restrictions are based on the grouping of claims related to distinct inventions and includes both the independent and dependent claims. The method and apparatus claims are not commensurate in scope and thus, the search of one of either the method or apparatus is not required in the other of the method or apparatus. The method claims are not reciting the apparatus used in the method to the same exact level of detail as in the apparatus claims.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract exceeds 150 words (152 words). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 4-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 4 and 5 are exactly the same.
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.
Claims 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites “a free end of the obstacle abutting with the brace in the obstruction position and with the obstacle spaced from the free end abutting with the brace in the pass through position.”. It is unclear how the claim recites that the free end is a part of the obstacle but somehow it is then spaced from a component of itself when the obstacle changes position. The free end seems to be integral with the obstacle. Does it detach from itself when changing positions? Does it mean the free end of the brace such that it abuts the obstacle in the obstruction position but is spaced apart from the obstacle in the pass through position?
Dependent claims 9-13 fail to solve the deficiency.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson (US 6173846) in view of Mason (US 7419062).
Regarding claim 1, Anderson teaches of (fig. 2) a fall prevention apparatus configured to be mounted to a pallet racking system (abstract, safety bracket attached to the load beans of a pallet rack for preventing pallets from being pushed off the rear end of the rack), the fall prevention apparatus comprising:
a shelf (shelves formed by lateral load beams 7), with the shelf including decking upon which a pallet can be supported (pallets can be loaded on the beams of the shelves), with the decking defining a free edge past which the pallet can be introduced through a passage in the pallet racking and unto the decking (front side has a free edge in which the pallet can be introduced through a passage in the pallet racking and unto the decking),
an obstacle (safety bracket 6) wherein:
the obstacle includes means for abutting with (back member 62 for abutting with) and sliding on the pallet being introduced through the passage (base 61 allows the pallet to slide on it when being introduced through the passage).
Anderson does not appear to teach of an obstacle biased from a pass through position extending parallel to the passage to an obstruction position extending into the passage, wherein:
the obstacle is adapted to be pushed from the obstruction position to the pass through position while the pallet is being introduced into the passage, and
the obstacle is biased to the obstruction position from the pass through position after the pallet was introduced into the passage and the obstacle is prevented from moving beyond the obstruction position from the pass through position.
Mason teaches of (fig. 3) an obstacle (paddle 22) biased from a pass through position extending parallel to the passage (col. 5 lines 19-27, Paddles 22 are pivotally mounted to tray 2 and are adapted to pivot downwardly and extend parallel to the passage toward a rear of the shelf unit as products are loaded into the respective row) to an obstruction position extending into the passage (col. 5 lines 19-27, paddles 22 extend in a vertical position into the passage), wherein:
the obstacle is adapted to be pushed from the obstruction position to the pass through position while the object is being introduced into the passage (col. 5 lines 28-40, as products are placed into a particular row, the paddle 22 is pushed and pivot down toward a rear of the shelf unit), and
the obstacle is biased to the obstruction position from the pass through position after the object was introduced into the passage and the obstacle is prevented from moving beyond the obstruction position from the pass through position (col. 5 lines 28-40, Once the row of products is pushed past the paddle 22, the paddle 22 flips up into its vertical state and acts as a stop, preventing the biasing mechanism from pushing the row of products all the way to the front of the shelf unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Anderson to incorporate the teachings of Mason of an obstacle biased from a pass through position extending parallel to the passage to an obstruction position extending into the passage, wherein: the obstacle is adapted to be pushed from the obstruction position to the pass through position while the pallet is being introduced into the passage, and the obstacle is biased to the obstruction position from the pass through position after the pallet was introduced into the passage and the obstacle is prevented from moving beyond the obstruction position from the pass through position in order to facilitate the loading of the pallets into the shelves and allows for more efficient stocking of the shelves as motivated by Mason in col. 5 lines 37-40.
Regarding claim 2, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 1, and (fig. 1) wherein the abutting and sliding means (61, 62) comprises an abutment surface of a planer shape upon which the pallet is slideable (surfaces of 61, 62 are planer and allows abutment on the surface of back member 62 and sliding of the pallet on the surface of base member 61).
Regarding claim 3, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 2, and (fig. 2) wherein the obstacle (6) includes a limit plane (rear side of back member 62, facing away from the rack) opposite to the abutting and sliding means (on opposite rear side of back member 62), with the limit plane preventing access out of the passage when the obstacle is in the obstruction position (abstract, the limit plane prevents the pallet from being pushed out of the passage when the obstacle 6 is in the obstruction position).
Regarding claim 4, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 3, and (fig. 1) wherein the abutment surface (62) is parallel to, but spaced from, the limit plane (front surface of back member 62 is parallel to, but spaced from by the thickness of the back member 62, the back side of the back member 62).
Regarding claim 5, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 3, and (fig. 1) wherein the abutment surface (62) is parallel to, but spaced from, the limit plane (front surface of back member 62 is parallel to, but spaced from by the thickness of the back member 62, the back side of the back member 62).
Regarding claim 6, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 5, but does not appear to teach of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the pallet racking.
Mason teaches of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the racking (col. 5 lines 19-27, Paddles 22 are pivotally mounted to tray 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Anderson to incorporate the teachings of Mason of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the pallet racking in order to facilitate the loading of the pallets into the shelves and allows for more efficient stocking of the shelves as motivated by Mason in col. 5 lines 37-40.
Regarding claim 7, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 6, but does not appear to teach of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the shelf.
Mason teaches of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the shelf (col. 5 lines 19-27, Paddles 22 are pivotally mounted to tray 2, which is the shelf).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Anderson to incorporate the teachings of Mason of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the shelf in order to facilitate the loading of the pallets into the shelves and allows for more efficient stocking of the shelves as motivated by Mason in col. 5 lines 37-40.
Regarding claim 14, Anderson as modified teaches of claim 1, but does not teach of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the shelf.
Mason teaches of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the shelf (col. 5 lines 19-27, Paddles 22 are pivotally mounted to tray 2, which is the shelf).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Anderson to incorporate the teachings of Mason of wherein the obstacle is pivotally mounted to the shelf in order to facilitate the loading of the pallets into the shelves and allows for more efficient stocking of the shelves as motivated by Mason in col. 5 lines 37-40.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13 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 8-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The cited references made of record in the contemporaneously filed PTO-892 form and not relied upon in the instant office action are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and may have one or more of the elements in Applicant’s disclosure and at least claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOE TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8530. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-6pm 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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/ZOE TAM TRAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights