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 Amendment
This office action is in response to the reply filed on 11/21/2025, wherein claims 1-2, 4, 12, 14, 16-17, 20 were amended, claims 11, 13, 15 are cancelled, claims 21-22 are new. Claims 1-10, 12, 14, 16-22 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 21 is 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.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the most proximal points of the respective support structures" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-5, 7-10, 12, 14, and 16-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Van Dykes Restorers Blog (see webpage attached).
With respect to claim 1, Van Dyke discloses an inlay system configured for storage of a plurality of containers at different vertical levels within a processing device, the inlay system comprising: a plurality of support structures (figure 1), each of which is arranged at a different vertical level and configured to respectively support at least a portion of at least one of a plurality of containers (figure 1), wherein the support structures are arranged with a horizontal offset between adjacent levels .
PNG
media_image1.png
652
934
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein a vertical spacing between a lower support structure and a higher support structure being adjacent to the lower support structure is configured so that a vertical distance between a vertically protruding portion of at least one of the plurality of containers located on the lower support structure and the higher support structure is at most 5 cm. From the figure, it would appear that the frame of the lower support structure in figure 1 is less than 5cm. The measurement can be taken from the top surface of the middle support structure to the top of the photo frame. From the figure, those items appear to be similar in height. Also, refer to 112b, the reference points are unclear.
With respect to claim 3, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein a vertical spacing between a lower support structure and a higher support structure being adjacent to the lower support structure (lowest shelf of figure 1) is configured so that a vertically protruding portion (figure 1) of at least one of the plurality of containers located on the lower support structure vertically overlaps and/or extends beyond the higher support structure (second shelf of figure 1).
With respect to claim 4, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein the horizontal offset is such that neither the support structure (second shelf) adjacent in the direction of a vertically protruding portion (figure 1) of at least one of the plurality of containers nor a container (figure 1) stored upon said adjacent support structure horizontally overlaps with said protruding portion.
With respect to claim 5, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the support structures comprises at least one stiffening element, wherein the at least one stiffening element comprises at least one of a bend, an offset, a hem, a hole, a slot, a seam, a tab, a notch, a flange, an emboss, a dimple and/or a rib. (inherent slot for installation of floating shelves. Alternatively it can be viewed as an inherent tab. Also dimple can be considered an inherent finish on wooden products)
With respect to claim 7, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of containers comprises a main portion (transparent/glass/plastic portion of frame) and at least one of the plurality of containers comprises at least one protruding portion (darker frame portion that extends above glass) that extends vertically beyond the main portion of the respective container.
With respect to claim 8, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 7, wherein the main portion comprises main portion height H1 (transparent portion height) and the at least one protruding portion of the at least one container comprises a protruding portion height H2 (protruding portion height), wherein for at least one container comprising a protruding portion and being stored on a lower support structure a vertical distance H3 between the lower support structure (lowest shelf) and a higher support structure (2nd shelf) being adjacent to the lower support structure is chosen such that H1< H3 <(H1+H2).
Examiner Note: See 112b above. This is met by the top most surface of the lower support structure and the bottom most surface of the higher support structure.
With respect to claim 9, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein the processing device is one of a heated and/or refrigerated incubator, an environmental chamber, a heating cabinet or a cooling cabinet. (The shelves of Van Dyke are incorporated on houses. Houses can be considered a controlled environment, in which the temperature and sometimes humidity is controlled. The term “environmental chamber” can be broadly read and a house can meet this definition.)
With respect to claim 10, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein a higher support structure being adjacent to a lower support structure is configured such that a vertically protruding portion of at least one of the plurality of containers (figure 1, the frame) located on the lower support structure (lowest shelf) does not horizontally overlap with the respective higher support structure.
With respect to claim 12, Van Dyke discloses a device for processing samples, the device comprising an inlay system for storage of a plurality of containers at different vertical levels within a processing device, the inlay system comprising: a plurality of support structures (figure 1), each of which is arranged at a different vertical level and configured to respectively support at least a portion of at least one of a plurality of containers (figure 1), wherein the support structures are arranged with a horizontal offset between adjacent levels, wherein the device is configured to control at least one or a plurality of, temperature (if placed on a household wall, a house commonly has a thermostat), humidity, C02-level, and/or 02-level within the device and/or containers stored therein.
Examiner Note: It is noted that the claims as presented are directed to a product and apparatus. As currently presented, the apparatus is the mere assembly of the product and its examination in conjunction with the product does not represent a serious burden at this time; therefore, no restriction is required. However, if subsequent amendments to the claims result in diverging subject matter and searches between the claimed inventions, the examiner reserves the right to restrict at that time.
With respect to claim 14, Van Dyke discloses a method for storing a plurality of containers at different vertical levels within a processing device, the method comprising: causing storage of a plurality of container in an inlay system configured for storage of a plurality of containers at different vertical levels within a processing device, the inlay system comprising: a plurality of support structures (figure 1), each of which is arranged at a different vertical level and configured to respectively support at least a portion of at least one of a plurality of containers (figure 1), wherein the support structures are arranged with a horizontal offset between adjacent levels
Examiner Note: It is noted that the claims as presented are directed to a product and method of using the product. As currently presented, the method is the mere assembly of the product and its examination in conjunction with the product does not represent a serious burden at this time; therefore, no restriction is required. However, if subsequent amendments to the claims result in diverging subject matter and searches between the claimed inventions, the examiner reserves the right to restrict at that time.
With respect to claim 16, Van Dyke discloses the method according to claim 14,wherein the method comprises storing the plurality of containers such that a vertical distance V between a vertically protruding portion of at least one of the plurality of containers and the support structure of an adjacent vertical level being higher than the vertical level supporting the at least one of the plurality of containers is at most 5 cm. From the figure, it would appear that the frame of the lower support structure in figure 1 is less than 5cm. The measurement can be taken from the top surface of the middle support structure to the top of the photo frame. From the figure, those items appear to be similar in height.
With respect to claim 17, Van Dyke discloses the method according to claim 14,wherein the method comprises storing the plurality of containers such that a vertically protruding portion (figure 1) of at least one of the plurality of containers vertically overlaps and/or extends beyond the support structure of an adjacent level (2nd shelf) being higher than a level supporting (lowest shelf) the at least one of the plurality of containers.
With respect to claim 18, Van Dyke discloses the method according to claim 14,wherein the method comprises installing the inlay system in a processing device (a buildings wall) such that there is a horizontal offset between support structures of adjacent levels.
With respect to claim 19, Van Dyke discloses the method according to claim 14,wherein the method comprises storing each of the plurality of containers (figure 1) on a support structure of the inlay system.
With respect to claim 20, Van Dyke discloses the method according to claim 14, wherein the method comprises removing a container from one level without removing any container of a level directly above. (Inherent structure of Van Dykes, for example changing the photo in the photo frame would result in said performance. The prior art is configured to enable the removal of an item on one level without the removal of an item from another level.)
With respect to claim 21, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system of claim 1, wherein the horizontal offset is the distance between the most proximal points of the respective support structures of adjacent levels. (Overlapping features can have an “offset”)
With respect to claim 22, Van Dyke discloses the inlay system according to claim 2, wherein the vertical offset is the distance between a top of the vertically protruding portion and a bottom of the higher support structure. (Overlapping features can have an “offset”)
Examiner Note: It is believed that Van Dyke achieves the claimed subject matter. Any arguments can also be obviated by a change of shape rationale (height of the protrusion), it would be considered as a simple change of shape of Van Dykes design and not novel in view of the guidelines established In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim(s) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Home Depot Sunset (see webpage attached).
With respect to claim 1, Home Depot discloses an inlay system for storage of a plurality of containers at different vertical levels within a processing device, the inlay system comprising: a plurality of support structures (figure 1), each of which is arranged at a different vertical level and configured to respectively support at least a portion of at least one of the plurality of containers (figure 1), wherein the support structures are arranged with a horizontal offset between adjacent levels.
PNG
media_image2.png
673
744
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
656
788
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 6, Home Depot discloses the inlay system according to claim 1, wherein the horizontal offset O is in the range of 2 to 10 cm . (Inherent property of Home Depots stacked configuration. Refer to figure 2 to see horizontal direction. Home Depot’s front surface is wavy and inconsistent. Therefore at a certain point the offset between the front face of the two levels can easily be a number from the range between 2 to 10 cm. )
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-20150176410-A1 OR US-20190270956-A1 OR US-20160137961-A2 OR US-20140120608-A1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art does not disclose an inlay system "configured for storage of a plurality of containers at different vertical levels within a processing device". However, this does not positively claim the presence of a processing device or describe the processing device as an additional feature. This only states intended function relative to a processing device. In fact, the independent claim only positively recites "a plurality of support structures". Further the term processing device can apply to a variety of devices and have a broad meaning. For example, a room can be monitored and temperature controlled. For large scale testing, larger rooms can be used for sample testing.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to previous 112b rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 8/21/2025 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 SYMREN K SANGHERA whose telephone number is (571)272-5305. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached on (571)272-4561. 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.
/S.K.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/ERNESTO A GRANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735