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 § 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.
Claim(s) 19, 21, 28, 30, 37, 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu, U.S. Patent 7,604,444.
Regarding claim 19, Wu discloses a framing system comprising: a frame member (5) defining a channel (interior of 5), the frame member including a flange (13) at least partially defining an opening of the channel (S; see Fig. 2), the flange having a flange thickness (see Fig. 2); and a clip (1) for attaching an object to the frame member, the clip including: a head (21) sized to be received in the channel via the opening and frictionally engaged with the channel upon rotation of the head when the head is received in the channel (via 65; as shown in Fig. 1); and a body (25) attached to the head and configured to engage with the object (3), the head and the body defining a gap (at D7) therebetween for receiving the flange when the head is frictionally engaged with the channel, the gap having a gap thickness that is smaller than the flange thickness (D8) to define an interference fit between the flange and the clip (col. 5, lines 6-14). The phrases “for attaching an object to the frame member,” “sized to be received in the channel via the opening and frictionally engaged with the channel upon rotation of the head when the head is received in the channel,” “configured to engage with the object,” “for receiving the flange when the head is frictionally engaged with the channel,” and “to define an interference fit between the flange and the clip” 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 21, Wu discloses a framing system wherein: the flange is a first flange (13a); the frame member includes a second flange (13b), the opening of the channel being defined between the first flange and the second flange (see Fig. 2); and the gap is configured to: receive the second flange therein when the head is frictionally engaged with the channel; and define an interference fit between the second flange and the clip (as shown in Fig. 1, generally). The phrase “configured to: receive the second flange therein when the head is frictionally engaged with the channel; and define an interference fit between the second flange and the clip” 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 28, Wu discloses a clip comprising: a head (21) sized to be received in the channel via the opening and frictionally engaged with the channel upon rotation of the head when the head is received in the channel; and a body (25) attached to the head and configured to engage with the object, the head and the body defining a gap (at D7) therebetween for receiving the flanges when the head is engaged with the channel (see Fig. 1, generally), the gap having a gap thickness that is smaller than the flange thickness to define an interference fit between the flanges and the clip (col. 5, lines 6-14). The phrases “sized to be received in the channel via the opening and frictionally engaged with the channel upon rotation of the head when the head is received in the channel,” “configured to engage with the object,” “configured to engage with the object,” “for receiving the flanges when the head is engaged with the channel,” and “to define an interference fit between the flanges and the clip” 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 30, Wu discloses a clip wherein the head is rotatable relative to the body (via 71, 155).
Regarding claim 37, Wu discloses a framing system comprising: when a head (21) of a clip is inserted into the channel (5) of the frame member and the head of the clip is rotated relative to the channel (into the position shown in Fig. 1): causing frictional engagement between the head and one or more surfaces (surfaces of 13) defining the channel (via teeth 65 upon rotation); receiving the two flanges into a gap defined between the head and a body of the clip (between 81 and 43); and press-fitting the two flanges between the head and the body of the clip (via spring 31) to define an interference fit between the clip and the two flanges (col. 3, lines 31-37); and attaching the object (3) to the clip.
Regarding claim 40, Wu discloses a framing system comprising cammingly engaging the head with the one or more surfaces defining the channel (as shown in Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 31-37).
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) 1-4, 8-9, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selzer, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0046879 in view of Wu, U.S. Patent 7,604,444.
Regarding claim 1, Selzer discloses a framing structure comprising: a post (104) extending substantially vertically and having a channel (180) extending along the post; a beam (106) supported by the post and extending transversally to the post; and a clip (182) for attaching an object to the post, but does not disclose the clip including: a head received in the channel of the post and frictionally engaged with one or more surfaces defining the channel; and a body attached to the head and configured to engage with the object. Wu teaches a clip (1) for attaching an object to a post, the clip including: a head (21) received in the channel of a structural framing member (5) and frictionally engaged with one or more surfaces defining the channel (S); and a body (25) attached to the head and configured to engage with an object (3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such a clip for ease of assembly in attaching objects to the structural members. The phrases “for attaching an object to the post” and “configured to engage with the object” 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, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein: the post includes a flange (Selzer 181) partially defining an opening of the channel; the head and the body (as modified) of the clip define a gap therebetween (see Wu at D7); and the flange is received in the gap and press-fitted between the head and the body (in the manner shown in Zhang Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein: the flange is a first flange; the post includes a second flange (Selzer 183), the opening of the channel being defined between the first flange and the second flange (at 180); and the second flange is received in the gap and press-fitted between the head and the body (in the manner shown in Wu Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein: the head is attached to the body via a neck extending between the first flange and the second flange (Wu 31); and the neck is spaced apart from both the first flange and the second flange (in the manner shown in Wu Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, the prior art discloses a framing structure wherein the head is rotatably attached to the body (via 71, Wu).
Regarding claim 9, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure having a rotatable head (via 71 Wu), but does not disclose wherein the clip includes two independently rotatable heads frictionally engaged with the one or more surfaces defining the channel. Selzer teaches a clip attached via two heads (175). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize an elongate clip with two independently rotatable heads for a more stable and secure connection.
Regarding claim 18, Selzer discloses a framing structure wherein the outdoor structure is a pergola (see Fig. 1A).
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selzer, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0046879 in view of Wu, U.S. Patent 7,604,444 and Blum, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2010/0102011.
Regarding claim 5, the prior art discloses a framing structure wherein: the channel has a longitudinal channel axis and a cross-sectional profile in a plane normal to the longitudinal channel axis (see Figures); but does not disclose the head of the clip is tapered away from the body nor the cross-sectional profile of the channel tapers away from the opening of the channel. Blum teaches a channel cross-sectional profile having a taper (see Figures) corresponding to a tapered fastener head (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 a tapered head and a post having a similar cross section depending on material availability and as the same results would be produced, since there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent. Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art discloses a framing structure wherein: the head of the clip has a top surface (Wu 41) at a distal extremity of the head opposite the body; the channel has a back surface (Wu inner lower surface of 5) opposite the opening of the channel; but does not disclose the top surface of the head of the clip is in contact with the back surface of the channel. Blum teaches a partial channel (46) similar in shape to a clip head. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a post having such channels depending on material availability. It would also have been obvious to utilize a post having a channel shaped to match the clip head, the clip head contacting the inner surface, when such posts are readily available, since there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent. Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein: the head has an elongated shape having a longitudinal head axis (see Wu Fig. 6); but does not disclose opposite axial ends of the head along the longitudinal head axis are in contact with opposite side surfaces of the channel. Blum teaches a partial channel (46) similar in shape to a clip head. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a post having a channel shaped to match the clip head, opposing axial ends of the clip head contacting opposing surfaces of the channel, depending on material availability and as the same results will be produced, since there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent. Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23.
Claim(s) 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selzer, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0046879 in view of Wu, U.S. Patent 7,604,444 and Neil et al., U.S. Patent 4,840,345.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art discloses a framing structure having a body, but does not disclose wherein the body includes a hook. Neil teaches a clip for mounting an object, the clip body (10) including a hook (14). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such a head including a hook depending on the desired object to be mounted.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein the hook includes a ledge (Neil 16) to hinder the object from becoming disengaged from the hook.
Regarding claim 12, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein the hook includes a tab (Neil 30) to facilitate opening or closing of the hook. The phrase “to facilitate opening or closing of the hook” 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 13, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure wherein the hook includes a brace (Neil 20) in a corner region of a throat of the hook to reinforce the hook. The phrase “to reinforce the hook” 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 14, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure but does not disclose wherein the body includes a toggle ball holder. Neil teaches a receptacle capable of holding a toggle ball (10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such a head including a holder depending on the desired object to be mounted.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure but does not disclose wherein the body includes an electric receptacle holder. Neil teaches a receptacle capable of holding an electric receptacle (10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such a head including a receptacle depending on the desired object to be mounted.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure but does not disclose wherein the body includes an electronic display device holder. Neil teaches a receptacle capable of holding a device (10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such a head including a device holder depending on the desired object to be mounted.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art as modified discloses a framing structure but does not disclose wherein the body includes a lamp holder. Neil teaches a receptacle capable of holding a device (10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such a head including a device holder depending on the desired object to be mounted.
Claim(s) 31, 38-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu, U.S. Patent 7,604,444 in view of Selzer, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0046879.
Regarding claim 31, Wu discloses a clip having a rotatable head (via 71) but does not disclose wherein the clip includes two independently rotatable heads to be received in the channel via the opening and frictionally engaged with the channel upon rotation of the heads when the heads are received in the channel. Selzer teaches a clip attached via two heads (175; see Fig. 1B). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize an elongate clip with two independently rotatable heads for a more stable and secure connection.
Regarding claim 38, Wu discloses a framing system including a frame member (5), but does not disclose wherein the frame member is oriented substantially vertically. Selzer teaches a vertically oriented frame member (104). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the clip with a vertically oriented post when it is desired for an object to be attached to the vertical member of a structure.
Regarding claim 39, Wu discloses a framing system including a frame member (5), but does not disclose wherein the frame member is oriented substantially horizontally. Selzer teaches a horizontally oriented frame member (106). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the clip with a horizontally oriented beam when it is desired for an object to be attached to the horizontal member of a structure.
Conclusion
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