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 § 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 2,5,10-13 and all claims depending therefrom 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.
The term “close” in claims 2,5,10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close” 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.
Further claims 2,5 recites “close contact”, it is unclear what is encompassed by the term “close” therefore it is unclear what is meant by the phrase “close contact”, it is unclear if the beams are close but not in contact or if they are in contact, and if they are in contact it is unclear what is meant or encompassed by “close” causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 10 recites “close engagement”, it is unclear what is encompassed by the term “close” therefore it is unclear what is meant by the phrase “close engagement”, it is unclear if the beams are close but not engaged or if they are engaged, and if they are engaged it is unclear what is meant or encompassed by “close” causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
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) 1-16,19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wyse (11454042) in view of Francis (10508467).
Claim 1. Wyse discloses an elevated flooring system comprising:
at least two support beams (104,106) configured to support a portion of at least one flooring panel, each of the at least two support beams having a first end; and
a saddle (130) configured to support respective first ends of each of the at least two support beams, the saddle comprising a base plate (137) and an alignment post (138) extending upwardly from the base plate;
wherein each one of the at least two support beams includes a respective first alignment passage (140) extending through a portion of the bottom of the first end.
Wyse does not expressly disclose wherein the alignment post is configured to be partially received by the first alignment passage of each one of the at least two support beams such that a portion of each support beam rests on a portion of the base plate. Instead Wyse discloses two alignment posts, each one received by the first alignment passage of each one of the at least two support beams such that a portion of each support beam rests on a portion of the base plate. Wyse further teaches that the alignment posts and alignment passages may have a different profile shape such as rectangular and an elongated slot (col. 8, lines 18-62).
Francis discloses an elevated flooring system having two beams (12) and a saddle (16) having an alignment post (one of 75, figure 5) wherein a single alignment post is configured to be partially connected to each one of the at least two support beams such that a portion of each support beam rests on a portion of the base plate and the alignment post attaches to the at least two support beams.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the profile and shape of the alignment posts and alignment passage of Wyse to be a singular alignment post that is partially received by a correspondingly shaped alignment passage of each of the at least two support beams (where Francis discloses a singular alignment post 75 that attaches to the at least two support beams) such that a portion of each support beam rests on a portion of the base plate, to achieve the predictable result of system that easily aligns the beams to be in contact while maintaining a hidden connection to promote a seamless appearance.
Claim 2. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein the alignment post is configured to guide the at least two support beams into close contact with each other when the alignment post is received by respective first alignment passages of each of the at least two support beams (where both Wyse and Francis disclose alignment posts configured to guide the at least two support beams into close contact with each other when connected to the at least two support beams). Thus the combination as above would result in the alignment post configured to be received by respective first alignment passages of each of the at least two support beams to guide them into close contact with each other.
Claim 3. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, each one of the at least two support beams further comprising a first beam aperture (141 of Wyse, similarly Francis discloses beam apertures) and the saddle further comprising a respective first saddle aperture (139 of Wyse, similarly Francis discloses respective first saddle aperture) for each one of the at least two support beams;
wherein each first beam aperture and each first saddle aperture is respectively positioned such that, when the alignment post is received within a respective alignment passage, the first beam aperture and the first saddle aperture are generally coaxially aligned (as noted in the figures of Wyse and Francis).
Claim 4. The elevated flooring system of claim 3, wherein each first beam aperture and each first saddle aperture are configured to receive a fastener (122 of Wyse) when coaxially aligned.
Claim 5. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein the at least two support beams comprise a first support beam and a second support beam (where 104 and 106 are a first and second support beam), the respective first alignment passages of the first support beam and the second support beam being configured to receive respective first and second sides of the saddle post such that the first and second support beams are substantially aligned with respective first ends and positioned in close contact relative to each other (as noted in the figures of Wyse as modified in the claims above).
Claims 6,7. Wyse in view of Francis disclose the elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein the first alignment passage extends upward from the bottom of its respective support beam (as seen in the figures of Wyse), but do not disclose that the first alignment passage extends upward to between approximately one-quarter and approximately three-quarters, which includes approximately half of the height of the beam.
Wyse does disclose that alternative configurations may have the aperture located in a wall structure spaced between the uppermost and lowermost margins of the beam (col. 8, line 63-col. 9, line 3). Applicant has not disclose that having the alignment passage extend upward from the bottom of the support beam to between approximately one quarter and approximately three quarters, or approximately half of the height of the beam solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose. Moreover, it appears that the alignment passage of Wyse in view of Francis, as modified above, or applicants invention, would perform equally well with the alignment passage extending upward from the bottom to between any height of the beam.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the first alignment passage to extend upward from the bottom of the support beam to between approximately one quarter and approximately three quarters, and/or half of the height of the beam, as taught by Wyse, and because such a modification would have been considered a mere deign consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over Wyse.
Claim 8. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein each of the at least two support beams includes a first end wall (113, where all or the extreme end of 113 extends downward from the top 116 along at least an upper portion of the first end) extending downward from the top of the beam along at least an upper portion of the first end.
Claim 9. The elevated flooring system of claim 8, wherein a lower portion of the first end wall partially defines the first alignment passage (where 113 partially defines the interior which is the alignment passage).
Claims 10-13. Wyse in view of Francis disclose the elevated flooring system of claim 9, but do not expressly disclose wherein an upper portion of the alignment post comprises a guide portion with a retaining recess, and wherein the lower portion of the first end wall is configured to be received in the retaining recess in close engagement when the beam engages the alignment post;
wherein the upper portion of the alignment post further comprises a guide section configured to direct respective first ends of each of the at least two support beams into the retaining recess when the alignment post is received by respective first alignment passages of each of the at least two support beams;
wherein the retaining recess comprises substantially vertical side walls and the guide section comprises opposing sloped side walls
wherein the retaining recess is generally configured to restrict horizontal travel of each one of the at least two support beams when the respective beam engages the alignment post, and wherein the retaining recess is generally configured to allow upward travel of each one of the at least two support beams when the respective beam engages the alignment post.
Wyse does disclose in the embodiment depicted in figures13-15 a guide portion with a retaining recess between a dual alignment post (138) where the lower portion of the first end wall (113) is configured to be received in the retaining recess in close engagement when the beams engage the alignment post (see figures 4-5,13-15);
wherein the upper portion of the dual alignment post further comprise a guide section (the bevel/chamfer at the top of 138 as seen in figures 13-15) configured to direct respective first ends of each of the at least two support beams into the retaining recess when the alignment post is received by respective first alignment passages of each of the at least two support beams;
wherein the retaining recess comprises substantially vertical side walls (the vertical walls of 138) and the guide section comprises opposing sloped side walls (the bevel/chamfer is sloped);
wherein the retaining recess is generally configured to restrict horizontal travel of each one of the at east two support beams (by the dual post and recess design) when the respective beam engages the alignment post, and wherein the retaining recess is generally configured to allow upward travel of each one of the at least two support beams when the respective beam engages the alignment post (as seen in figures 13-15.
Further Wyse teaches that the alignment posts and alignment passages may have a different profile shape such as rectangular and an elongated slot (col. 8, lines 18-62), as noted above.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options, such as those taught by Wyse as noted, and modify the alignment posts of Wyse in view of Francis to have an upper portion of the alignment post comprises a guide portion with a retaining recess, and wherein the lower portion of the first end wall is configured to be received in the retaining recess in close engagement when the beam engages the alignment post;
wherein the upper portion of the alignment post further comprises a guide section configured to direct respective first ends of each of the at least two support beams into the retaining recess when the alignment post is received by respective first alignment passages of each of the at least two support beams;
wherein the retaining recess comprises substantially vertical side walls and the guide section comprises opposing sloped side walls
wherein the retaining recess is generally configured to restrict horizontal travel of each one of the at least two support beams when the respective beam engages the alignment post, and wherein the retaining recess is generally configured to allow upward travel of each one of the at least two support beams when the respective beam engages the alignment post, as in claims 10-13, to achieve the predictable result of a system that allows for easy assembly and disassembly, and reduces undesired separation of the beams.
Claim 14. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein the base plate is generally in a horizontal orientation (as seen the figures of Wyse).
Claim 15. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein the alignment post is generally in a vertical orientation (as seen in Wyse and Francis).
Claim 16. The elevated flooring system of claim 1, wherein the alignment post is generally oriented perpendicular to the base plate (as seen in Wyse and Francis).
Claims 19-20. Wyse discloses the method of claim 17, further comprising installing a second support beam on the first saddle by lowering the first end of the second support beam onto the first saddle and a portion of the second support beam rests on a portion of the base plate of the first saddle but does not expressly disclose that the alignment post of the first saddle is partially received by the first alignment passage of the second support beam and a portion of the second support beam rests on a portion of the base plate of the first saddle; and
wherein substantially a first half of the alignment post of the first saddle is received by the first alignment passage of the first support beam and substantially the second half of the alignment post of the first saddle is received by the first alignment passage of the second support beam when the first and second support beams are installed.
Instead Wyse discloses dual alignment post assembly, where a second alignment post of the first saddle is partially received by the first alignment passage of the second support beam; and the first alignment post is received by the first alignment passage of the first support beam and the second alignment post is received by the first alignment passage of the second support beam when the first and second support beams are installed.
Wyse further teaches that the alignment posts and alignment passages may have a different profile shape such as rectangular and an elongated slot (col. 8, lines 18-62).
Francis discloses an elevated flooring system having two beams (12) and a saddle (16) having an alignment post (one of 75, figure 5) wherein a single alignment post is configured to be partially connected to each one of the at least two support beams such that a portion of each support beam rests on a portion of the base plate and the alignment post attaches to the at least two support beams.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the profile and shape of the alignment posts and alignment passage of Wyse to be a singular alignment post that is partially received by a correspondingly shaped alignment passage of each of the at least two support beams (where Francis discloses a singular alignment post 75 that attaches to the at least two support beams) substantially a first half of the alignment post of the first saddle is received by the first alignment passage of the first support beam and substantially the second half of the alignment post of the first saddle is received by the first alignment passage of the second support beam when the first and second support beams are installed, to achieve the predictable result of system that easily aligns the beams to be in contact while maintaining a hidden connection to promote a seamless appearance.
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) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Wyse (11454042).
Claim 17. Wyse discloses a method of assembling an elevated flooring system comprising:
providing a plurality of saddles (130), each saddle comprising a base plate (137) and an alignment post (138) extending upwardly from the base plate;
providing a plurality of support beams (104,106), each support beam comprising a first end and a respective first alignment passage (140) extending through a portion of the bottom of the first end;
installing the plurality of saddles in a substantially horizontal plane above a support surface (as seen in the figures and noted in the disclosure); and
installing a first one of the plurality of support beams (one of 104 or 106) on a first one of the plurality of saddles by lowering the first end of the first support beam onto the first saddle such that the alignment post of the first saddle is partially received (where during installation it is partially received) by the first alignment passage of the first support beam and a portion of the first support beam rests on a portion of the base plate of the first saddle (as seen in the figures, at least 4-5,13-15 and noted in the disclosure).
Claim 18. The method of claim 17, wherein the first support beam further comprises a second end (opposite the first, where each beam as opposing ends) and a respective second alignment passage (140 at the opposing end) extending through a portion of the bottom of the second end, the method further comprising:
installing the first support beam on a second saddle (an adjacent 130 as seen in at least figures 1A,B) by lowering the second end of the first support beam onto the second saddle such that the alignment post of the second saddle is partially received by the second alignment passage of the first support beam and a portion of the first support beam rests on a portion of the base plate of the second saddle (as noted in the figures and disclosure).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-8228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30.
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 Mattei can be reached at 571.270.3238. 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.
JESSICA L. LAUX
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/JESSICA L LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights