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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
Figs. 2 & 4: It appears there is a duplicate of element 38 (Figs. 2 & 4), one of the “38” should be labeled “36” as a reference to a “first socket” as is supported in the applicant’s specification (page 4, line 30) .
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 5 and 10 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim(s) 5 & 10, line 3 & line 17, respectively, should read “to [a] the rod”;
Claim(s) 5 & 10, line 4 & line 18, respectively, should read “opening of a second socket”;
Claim(s) 10, line 28, should read “attached [so] to the panel”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/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.
Regarding Claim(s) 1, 5 and 10-11: The term “ substantially”, in independent Claim 1 (line 9), Claim 5 (line 3 and line 5, respectively), independent Claim 10 (line 17, line 19 and line 23, respectively), independent Claim 11 (line 9), is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. An element is either vertically or horizontally oriented or not, since there is only one vertical orientation and one horizontal orientation, so adding the term “substantially” renders the claim indefinite.
Claim(s) 2-9 is/are rejected due to their dependency on independent Claim 1.
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, 5, 8-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 11430355 B2; see reference in its entirety) in view of Iversen et al. (US 6584927 B1; see reference in its entirety).
With respect to independent Claim 1, Evans disclose(s): A mountable flag assembly (Fig. 6) comprising:
a clamp (Fig. 6: 52) comprising a pair of jaws (see annotated Fig. 6 below), the clamp being configured for opening to receive a rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below) and for closing such that the jaws secure the clamp to the rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below);
a socket (Fig. 6: 54) having an opening (see annotated Fig. 6 below) and being attached to the clamp such that the opening faces upwardly upon securing of the clamp to the rod (Fig. 5);
a staff (Fig. 6: 52) having an upper end (Fig. 6: 51) and a lower end (see annotated Fig. 6 below), the lower end being complimentary to and selectively insertable into the socket (see annotated Fig. 6 below) such that the staff is removably attached to the socket and extends substantially vertically relative to a ground surface (Fig. 5); and
a flag (see annotated Fig. 5 below) comprising: a panel having a vertical edge (see annotated Fig. 5 below); and a sleeve (see annotated Fig. 5 below) being attached to the panel and extending along the vertical edge (Fig. 5), the staff being insertable into the sleeve (Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
817
551
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
830
815
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Evans does not specifically disclose: a golf cart mountable flag assembly and a canopy of a golf cart.
However, Iversen teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) comprising: a golf cart mountable flag assembly (Fig. 1) and a canopy of a golf cart (Fig. 1: 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans, with the teachings of Iversen, for the purpose of increasing visibility of the assembly (col. 1, lines 25-30).
With respect to Claim 2, Evans and Iversen teach(es) the assembly of Claim 1.
Evans further disclose(s): wherein the clamp comprises: a torsion spring (see annotated Fig. 6 above) being operationally engaged to the pair of jaws (Fig. 6); a pair of handles (see annotated Fig. 6 above) being attached to the pair of jaws and operationally engaged to the torsion spring (Fig. 6), wherein the handles of the pair of handles being configured for squeezing together for opening the pair of jaws and for being released for closing the pair of jaws (Fig. 4-5 and Abstract).
With respect to Claim 5, Evans and Iversen teach(es) the assembly of Claim 1.
Evans further disclose(s): wherein the socket is one of a pair of sockets (Fig. 6: 54), the opening of a first socket of the pair of sockets facing upwardly upon attachment of the clamp to a rod of the canopy substantially vertically oriented (Fig. 5 and Abstract), the opening a second socket of the pair of sockets facing upwardly upon attachment of the clamp to a rod of the canopy substantially horizontally oriented (Fig. 4 and Abstract).
With respect to Claim 8, Evans and Iversen teach(es) the assembly of Claim 1..
Evans further disclose(s): further including a cap (Fig. 6: 60) being removably attachable to the upper end of the staff for securing the flag to the staff (Fig. 6).
With respect to Claim 9, Evans and Iversen teach(es) the assembly of Claim 8..
Evans further disclose(s): wherein: the staff is externally threaded (Fig. 6: 51) adjacent to the upper end (Fig. 6) and the lower end (see annotated Fig. 6 above); the opening is internally threaded such that the lower end of the staff is threadedly insertable into the socket (Fig. 6); and the cap is internally threaded such that the cap is selectively attachable to the upper end of the staff (Fig. 6).
With respect to independent Claim 11, Evans disclose(s): A mounted flag system (Fig. 6) comprising:
at least one rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below),
a clamp (Fig. 6: 52) comprising a pair of jaws (see annotated Fig. 6 below), the jaws being closed upon the rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below) such that the clamp is secured to the rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below);
a socket (Fig. 6: 54) having an opening (see annotated Fig. 6 below) and being attached to the clamp such that the opening faces upwardly (Fig. 5);
a staff (Fig. 6: 52) having an upper end (Fig. 6: 51) and a lower end (see annotated Fig. 6 below), the lower end being complimentary to and inserted into the socket (see annotated Fig. 6 below) such that the staff is removably attached to the socket and extends substantially vertically relative to a ground surface (Fig. 5); and
a flag (see annotated Fig. 5 below) comprising: a panel having a vertical edge (see annotated Fig. 5 below); and a sleeve (see annotated Fig. 5 below) being attached to the panel and extending along the vertical edge (Fig. 5), the staff being insertable into the sleeve (Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
817
551
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
899
840
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Evans does not specifically disclose: a golf cart mounted flag system and a golf cart comprising a canopy.
However, Iversen teach(es) a system (Fig. 1) comprising: a golf cart mounted flag system (Fig. 1) and a golf cart comprising a canopy (Fig. 1: 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans, with the teachings of Iversen, for the purpose of increasing visibility of the system (col. 1, lines 25-30).
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans and Iversen further in view of Priebe (US 10232692 B1; see reference in its entirety).
Regarding Claim(s) 3, Evans and Iversen disclose(s) the assembly of Claim 1.
The combination does not specifically disclose: a pair of grips are attached singly to the pair of jaws, wherein the grips are configured for frictionally engaging the rod upon closing of the jaws.
However, Priebe teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) including: a pair of grips (Fig. 1: 28) are attached singly to the pair of jaws (Fig. 1), wherein the grips are configured for frictionally engaging the rod upon closing of the jaws (Figs. 5-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans and Iversen, with the further teachings of Priebe, for the purpose of improving the grip by preventing movement (col. 5, lines 5-7).
Regarding Claim(s) 4, Evans, Iversen and Priebe disclose(s) the assembly of Claim 3.
The combination does not specifically disclose: wherein the grips comprise rubber, silicone, or elastomer.
However, Priebe further teach(es): wherein the grips comprise rubber, silicone, or elastomer (col. 5, lines 5-7).
Motivation to combine is the same as Claim 3.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans and Iversen further in view of Romesburg (US 5735230; see reference in its entirety).
Regarding Claim(s) 6, Evans and Iversen disclose(s) the assembly of Claim 1.
The combination does not specifically disclose: wherein the panel is flexible.
However, Romesburg teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) including: wherein the panel is flexible (column 4, lines 44-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans and Iversen, with the further teachings of Romesburg, for the purpose of improving durability of the panel (col. 2, lines 64-67).
Regarding Claim(s) 7, Evans and Iversen disclose(s) the assembly of Claim 1.
The combination does not specifically disclose: including indicia being attached to the panel.
However, Romesburg teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) including: including indicia being attached to the panel (column 4, lines 44-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans and Iversen, with the further teachings of Romesburg, for the purpose of improving visibility of the panel (col. 1, lines 52-56).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans in view of Iversen, Priebe and Romesburg.
With respect to independent Claim 10, Evans disclose(s): A mountable flag assembly (Fig. 6) comprising:
a clamp (Fig. 6: 52) comprising a pair of jaws (see annotated Fig. 6 below), the clamp being configured for opening to receive a rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below) and for closing such that the jaws secure the clamp to the rod (see annotated Figs. 4-5 below);
the clamp comprising: a torsion spring (see annotated Fig. 6 below) being operationally engaged to the pair of jaws (Fig. 6);
a pair of handles (see annotated Fig. 6 below) being attached to the pair of jaws and operationally engaged to the torsion spring (Fig. 6), wherein the handles of the pair of handles being configured for squeezing together for opening the pair of jaws and for being released for closing the pair of jaws (Fig. 4-5 and Abstract);
a socket (Fig. 6: 54) having an opening (see annotated Fig. 6 below) and being attached to the clamp such that the opening faces upwardly upon securing of the clamp to the rod (Fig. 5), the opening being internally threaded (Fig. 6), the socket being one of a pair of sockets (Fig. 6: 54), the opening of a first socket of the pair of sockets facing upwardly upon attachment of the clamp to a rod substantially vertically oriented (Fig. 5 and Abstract), the opening a second socket of the pair of sockets facing upwardly upon attachment of the clamp to a rod substantially horizontally oriented (Fig. 4 and Abstract);
a staff (Fig. 6: 52) having an upper end (Fig. 6: 51) and a lower end (see annotated Fig. 6 below), the lower end being complimentary to and selectively insertable into the socket (see annotated Fig. 6 below) such that the staff is removably attached to the socket and extends substantially vertically relative to a ground surface (Fig. 5); the staff being externally threaded (Fig. 6: 51) adjacent to the upper end (Fig. 6) and the lower end (see annotated Fig. 6 below);
a flag (see annotated Fig. 5 below) comprising: a panel having a vertical edge (see annotated Fig. 5 below); a sleeve (see annotated Fig. 5 below) being attached so the panel and extending along the vertical edge (Fig. 5), the staff being insertable into the sleeve (Fig. 5).
a cap (Fig. 6: 60) being removably attachable to the upper end of the staff for securing the flag to the staff (Fig. 6), the cap being internally threaded such that the cap is selectively attachable to the upper end of the staff (Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
817
551
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
830
815
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Evans does not specifically disclose: a golf cart mountable flag assembly and a canopy of a golf cart.
However, Iversen teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) comprising: a golf cart mountable flag assembly (Fig. 1) and a canopy of a golf cart (Fig. 1: 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans, with the teachings of Iversen, for the purpose of increasing visibility of the assembly (col. 1, lines 25-30).
The combination does not specifically disclose: a pair of grips are attached singly to the pair of jaws, wherein the grips are configured for frictionally engaging the rod upon closing of the jaws, the grips comprising rubber, silicone, or elastomer.
However, Priebe teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) including: a pair of grips (Fig. 1: 28) are attached singly to the pair of jaws (Fig. 1), wherein the grips are configured for frictionally engaging the rod upon closing of the jaws (Figs. 5-6), the grips comprising rubber, silicone, or elastomer (col. 5, lines 5-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans and Iversen, with the further teachings of Priebe, for the purpose of improving the grip by preventing movement (col. 5, lines 5-7).
The combination does not specifically disclose: the panel being flexible and indicia being attached to the panel.
However, Romesburg teach(es) an assembly (Fig. 1) including: the panel being flexible and indicia being attached to the panel (column 4, lines 44-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Evans, Iversen and Priebe, with the further teachings of Romesburg, for the purpose of improving durability and visibility of the panel (col. 2, lines 64-67 and col. 1, lines 52-56).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The following reference(s) relate to mountable flag assemblies: Shimer (US 1015717); Leoni et al. (US 2010/0192837 A1); Wicken et al. (US 10679529 B1).
The following reference(s) relate to golf cart assemblies: Ellenberg (US 5983518); Waldrop (US 12397213 B1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANIA COURSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (7am-3:30pm).
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, Kristina Deherrera, can be reached on (303) 297-4237. 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.
/TC/
08 January 2026
/KRISTINA M DEHERRERA/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855