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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 7, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 7, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument that Luff fails to disclose a support foot extending laterally from the outlet end and an edge tab positioned on the support foot as recited in the amended claims is noted but is not considered persuasive because the inclined surface of Luff is considered to have a support foot at the distal end. See below for a detailed explanation. Examiner recommends clarifying that the outlet end is a distal end, the support foot extends laterally from the outlet end relative to a longitudinal axis between the inlet end and the outlet end, and the support foot extends beyond a width of the inclined surface. The combination of these limitations would overcome Luff and Bell.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “and” should be deleted from the end of line 9. 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.
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.
Claims 12 and 20 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 12, the wording of “the second angle is approximately 0 degrees” in lines 1-2 is confusing. The second angle is related to an angle between the second sloped portion and the ground. If the second sloped portion is at 0 degrees to the ground then it is parallel to the ground. This contradicts the description “sloped”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “second sloped portion” in claims 9-12 to mean “second portion”. Examiner notes that this limitation was previously presented in the original claim 12 and was rejected for being indefinite.
Regarding claim 20, the wording of “the second angle is approximately 0 degrees” in lines 2-3 is confusing. The second angle is related to an angle between the second sloped portion and the ground. If the second sloped portion is at 0 degrees to the ground then it is parallel to the ground. This contradicts the description “sloped”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “second sloped portion” in claims 18-20 to mean “second portion”. Examiner notes that this limitation was previously presented in the original claim 20 and was rejected for being indefinite.
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.
Claims 1-3, 9-13 and 17-20 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bell (US 2013/0118625).
Regarding claim 1, Bell discloses a flared end ramp (e.g. 50, Fig. 12) comprising: an inlet end configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 51, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058); a plurality of protrusions on an upper side of the inlet end (e.g. two protrusions shown but not labeled at 51, Fig.’s 10 and 12); an outlet end (e.g. end of 56 near 59 which includes ribs 58); an inclined surface extending between the inlet end and the outlet end of the flared end ramp (e.g. 53 and 56, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 12, paragraph 0057); a plurality of drainage ribs extending laterally on the inclined surface from the inlet end to the outlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the inclined surface (e.g. 58, Fig. 12, paragraph 0057); a support foot extending laterally from the outlet end (e.g. portion of 56 adjacent 59 that does not include ribs 58, Fig. 12); and an edge tab positioned on the support foot, the edge tab located outside of the width of the inlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. portion of 57 positioned on the support foot, Fig. 12). See sketch below.
Regarding claim 2, Bell further discloses an inner tab positioned on the support foot of the outlet end, the inner tab extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. portion of opposite 57 positioned on the support foot, Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 3, Bell further discloses that at least a portion of the flared end ramp is configured to be placed inside a stormwater chamber such that the inner tab is positioned inside the stormwater chamber and the edge tab is positioned outside of the stormwater chamber (e.g. Fig. 12 wherein the stormwater chamber is not positively recited, and an arch-shaped stormwater chamber placed with one leg on the inclined surface and one leg on the ground will result in the edge tab positioned outside of the stormwater chamber and the inner tab positioned inside the stormwater chamber).
PNG
media_image1.png
495
988
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Bell discloses a flared end ramp (e.g. 50, Fig. 12) comprising: an inlet end configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 51, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058); an outlet end (e.g. end of 56 near 59 which includes ribs 58); an inclined surface comprising a first sloped portion extending from the inlet end to a second sloped portion and the second sloped portion extending from the first sloped portion to the outlet end (e.g. first sloped portion 53 and second sloped portion 56, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 12, paragraph 0057); a plurality of drainage ribs extending laterally on the inclined surface from the inlet end to the outlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the inclined surface (e.g. 58, Fig. 12, paragraph 0057); a support foot extending laterally from the outlet end (e.g. portion of 56 adjacent 59 that does not include ribs 58, Fig. 12); and an edge tab positioned on the support foot, the edge tab located outside of the width of the inlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. portion of 57 positioned on the support foot, Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 10, Bell further discloses that a first angle between an axis parallel to the ground and the first sloped portion is greater than a second angle between the second sloped portion and the axis parallel to the ground (e.g. Fig.’s 10 and 12).
Regarding claim 11, Bell further discloses that the first angle is approximately 5 degrees (e.g. Fig.’s 10 and 12).
Regarding claim 12, Bell further discloses that the second angle is approximately 0 degrees (e.g. Fig.’s 10 and 12).
Regarding claim 13, Bell discloses a flared end ramp (e.g. 50, Fig. 12), comprising: an inlet end configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 51, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058); an outlet end (e.g. end of 56 near 59 which includes ribs 58); an inclined surface extending from the inlet end to the outlet end (e.g. 53 and 56, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 12, paragraph 0057); a plurality of drainage ribs extending laterally on the inclined surface from the inlet end to the outlet end (e.g. 58, Fig. 12, paragraph 0057); and a support foot extending laterally from the outlet end (e.g. portion of 56 adjacent 59 that does not include ribs 58, Fig. 12); and an edge tab positioned on the support foot, the edge tab located outside of the width of the inlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. portion of 57 positioned on the support foot, Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 17, Bell further discloses that the plurality of drainage ribs extend completely from the inlet end to the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 12 wherein the inlet end is considered 51/53 and the inclined surface is considered 56).
Regarding claim 18, Bell further discloses that the inclined surface comprises a first sloped portion extending from the inlet end to a second sloped portion and the second sloped portion extending from the first sloped portion to the outlet end (e.g. first sloped portion 53 and second sloped portion 56, Fig. 12, paragraph 0058).
Regarding claim 19, Bell further discloses that a first angle between an axis parallel to the ground and the first sloped portion is greater than a second angle between the second sloped portion and the axis parallel to the ground (e.g. Fig.’s 10 and 12).
Regarding claim 20, Bell further discloses that the first angle is approximately 5 degrees and the second angle is approximately 0 degrees (e.g. Fig.’s 10 and 12).
Claims 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luff (US 2,334,779).
Regarding claim 13, Luff discloses a flared end ramp (e.g. 40, Fig. 3) comprising: an inlet end configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 48, Fig. 3); an outlet end (e.g. near 42, Fig. 3); an inclined surface extending from the inlet end to the outlet end (e.g. 41, Fig. 3, page 2, col. 1, lines 56-60), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 3); a plurality of drainage ribs extending laterally on the inclined surface from the inlet end to the outlet end (e.g. 55, Fig. 3, page 2, col. 1, lines 64-66); a support foot extending laterally from the outlet end (e.g. portion of 41 near 42 and including 60, Fig. 3); and an edge tab positioned on the support foot (e.g. rightmost 60, Fig. 3), the edge tab located outside of the width of the inlet end (e.g. Fig. 3 wherein the edge tab is not located at the inlet end and therefore is outside the width of the inlet end, and/or wherein the edge tab is located at the side of the outlet end which is wider than the narrowest part of the inlet end and is therefore outside the width of the inlet end) and extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. similar to 55, col. 1, lines 64-73, shown extending vertically upward in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 17, Luff further discloses that the plurality of drainage ribs extend completely from the inlet end to the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 3).
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 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bell (US 2013/0118625) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tollefsen et al (US 2,800,925).
Regarding claim 4, Bell discloses the invention substantially as applied above but does not disclose a fastener configured to connect at least two of the plurality of protrusions directly to each other, thereby securing the flared end ramp to the pipe. Tollefsen teaches a flared end ramp comprising: an inlet end (e.g. 22) configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 16, Fig. 2); a plurality of protrusions on an upper side of the inlet end (e.g. 24, Fig. 3); an outlet end (e.g. distal end of 18, Fig. 2); an inclined surface extending between the inlet end and the outlet end of the flared end ramp (e.g. 18, Fig. 2, col. 2, lines 9-11), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 4); and a fastener configured to connect at least two of the plurality of protrusions directly to each other, thereby securing the flared end ramp to the pipe (e.g. 28, Fig. 2, col. 1, lines 65-68). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a plurality of protrusions and a fastener as taught by Tollefsen to the inlet end of Bell for the expected benefit of convenient and adjustable fitting of the flared end ramp inlet end to a pipe (e.g. Tollefsen, col. 1, line 69 – col. 2, line 3).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Bell and Tollefsen further discloses that the fastener is a threaded rod or one or more zip ties (e.g. Tollefsen, 28, Fig. 2, col. 1, lines 65-68 wherein a bolt is a threaded rod).
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bell (US 2013/0118625) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Janesky (US 2008/0138156).
Regarding claim 7, Bell discloses the invention substantially as applied above but does not disclose an indent on the inlet end configured to prevent the pipe from sliding towards the outlet end. Janesky teaches a flared end ramp (e.g. 40, Fig. 2) comprising: an inlet end configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 46 connects to 28, Fig. 2); a plurality of protrusions on an upper side of the inlet end (e.g. 110 and 112, Fig.’s 3A and 3B); an outlet end (e.g. 42, Fig. 2); an inclined surface extending between the inlet end and the outlet end of the flared end ramp (e.g. 98, Fig. 3A, wherein 98 is considered inclined relative to any element that extends along a different plane), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 3C); a plurality of drainage ribs extending laterally on the inclined surface from the inlet end to the outlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the inclined surface (e.g. 118 and 120, Fig. 3A); and an indent on the inlet end configured to prevent the pipe from sliding towards the outlet end (e.g. 106 and 108, Fig.’s 3A and 3B, paragraph 0027). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add an indent as taught by Janesky to the inlet end of Bell for the expected benefit of seating the pipe (e.g. Janesky, paragraph 0027).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Bell and Janesky further discloses that the indent is rounded with a curvature corresponding to a radius of the pipe and wherein the indent protrudes upward from the upper side of the inlet end to a distance that is level with an inside diameter of the pipe (e.g. Janesky, Fig.’s 3A and 3B wherein the inlet pipe is not positively recited and therefore the indent of Janesky has a curvature radius corresponding to an inlet pipe with the same radius).
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luff (US 2,334,779) in view of Tollefsen et al (US 2,800,925).
Regarding claim 1, Luff discloses a flared end ramp (e.g. 40, Fig. 3) comprising: an inlet end configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 48, Fig. 3); an outlet end (e.g. near 42, Fig. 3); an inclined surface extending between the inlet end and the outlet end of the flared end ramp (e.g. 41, Fig. 3, page 2, col. 1, lines 56-60), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 3); a plurality of drainage ribs extending laterally on the inclined surface from the inlet end to the outlet end and extending vertically upward relative to the inclined surface (e.g. 55, Fig. 3, page 2, col. 1, lines 64-66, shown extending vertically upward in Fig. 4); a support foot extending laterally from the outlet end (e.g. portion of 41 near 42 and including 60, Fig. 3); and an edge tab positioned on the support foot (e.g. rightmost 60, Fig. 3), the edge tab located outside of the width of the inlet end (e.g. Fig. 3 wherein the edge tab is not located at the inlet end and therefore is outside the width of the inlet end, and/or wherein the edge tab is located at the side of the outlet end which is wider than the narrowest part of the inlet end and is therefore outside the width of the inlet end) and extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. similar to 55, col. 1, lines 64-73, shown extending vertically upward in Fig. 4). Luff does not disclose a plurality of protrusions on an upper side of the inlet end. Tollefsen teaches a flared end ramp comprising: an inlet end (e.g. 22) configured to connect to a pipe (e.g. 16, Fig. 2); a plurality of protrusions on an upper side of the inlet end (e.g. 24, Fig. 3); an outlet end (e.g. distal end of 18, Fig. 2); an inclined surface extending between the inlet end and the outlet end of the flared end ramp (e.g. 18, Fig. 2, col. 2, lines 9-11), wherein the outlet end of the flared end ramp has a width that is larger than a width of the inlet end of the flared end ramp such that the inclined surface is angled laterally outward from the inlet end toward the outlet end (e.g. Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a plurality of protrusions (as well as a rear portion, e.g. 22) as taught by Tollefsen to the upper side of the inlet end of Luff for the expected benefit of convenient and adjustable fitting of the flared end ramp inlet end to a pipe (e.g. Tollefsen, col. 1, line 69 – col. 2, line 3).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Luff and Tollefsen further discloses an inner tab positioned on the support foot of the outlet end (e.g. Luff, middle 60 is an inner tab, Fig. 3), the inner tab extending vertically upward relative to the support foot (e.g. Luff, similar to 55, col. 1, lines 64-73, shown extending vertically upward in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Luff and Tollefsen further discloses that at least a portion of the flared end ramp is configured to be placed inside a stormwater chamber such that the inner tab is positioned inside the stormwater chamber and the edge tab is positioned outside of the stormwater chamber (e.g. Luff, Fig. 3, wherein the stormwater chamber is not positively recited, and an arched stormwater chamber placed with a leg between the edge tab and the inner tab will result in a portion of the flared end ramp being positioned inside the stormwater chamber with the inner tab positioned inside the stormwater chamber and the edge tab positioned outside of the stormwater chamber).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Luff and Tollefsen further discloses a fastener configured to connect at least two of the plurality of protrusions directly to each other, thereby securing the flared end ramp to the pipe (e.g. Tollefsen, 28, Fig. 2, col. 1, lines 65-68).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Luff and Tollefsen further discloses that the fastener is a threaded rod or one or more zip ties (e.g. Tollefsen, 28, Fig. 2, col. 1, lines 65-68 wherein a bolt is a threaded rod).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Luff and Tollefsen further discloses that a second edge tab (e.g. Luff, leftmost 60, Fig. 3) positioned on a second support foot (e.g. Luff, left side portion of 41 near 42 and including 60, Fig. 3, wherein the first support foot is considered the right side portion of 41 near 42) and a second inner tab positioned on the second support foot (e.g. Luff, the other middle 60, Fig. 3), the second edge tab and the second inner tab extending vertically upward relative to the second support foot (e.g. Luff, similar to 55, col. 1, lines 64-73, shown extending vertically upward in Fig. 4).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luff (US 2,334,779) alone.
Regarding claim 15, Luff discloses the invention substantially as applied above but does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of drainage ribs comprise a length of 43 inches to 56 inches. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the length limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Finally, Applicant has not disclosed that this length provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem.
Regarding claim 16, Luff discloses the invention substantially as applied above but does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of drainage ribs comprise a length is 43 inches. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the length limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Further, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Finally, Applicant has not disclosed that this length provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACY N LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7515. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-3pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678