DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 15, 17-19, 21-28 and 31 are pending.
Claims 1-14, 16, 20, 29-30 are cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
Per the 1/15/26 Interview, as outlined in Applicant’s page 6 Remarks, Figures 33 and 33A are hereby rejoined to the elected Species and/or Subspecies.
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.
Claim(s) 17, 19, 21-28 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.
Re claim 17, claim 17 depends on claim 16, a cancelled claim, thus making the claim indefinite. It appears claim 17 is intended to depend from claim 15 and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 21, claim 21 recites, “said at least one socket” in line 2 There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “at least one socket” and will be interpreted as such.
Claims 19 and 22-28 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
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) 15, 18 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 9,303,444) in view of McSpadden, IV (“McSpadden”) (US 2023/0279720).
Re claim 15, Choi discloses a support system (10) for securing structural element (90) within wall apertures (10 is capable of use within wall apertures, as this is a statement of intended use); comprising at least one structural frame element (20); said at least one structural frame element (20) having a top wall (see examiner comments), a bottom wall (see examiner comments), a side wall (80), a front wall (see examiner comments) and (a back wall see examiner comments);
wherein said bottom wall (see examiner comments) is configured to be mounted onto an existing wall (the bottom wall of examiner comments is capable of mounting to an existing wall, as this is a statement of intended use);
wherein said at least one structural frame element (20) is configured to secure a structural component within an existing aperture of an existing wall (20 is capable of secure a structural component (90) within an existing aperture of an existing wall, as this is a statement of intended use); at least one projecting member (40) configured to extend at an angle (Fig. 4) from said top wall (see examiner comments) and at least one holding projection (30; 52) is configured to extend at an angle from (Fig. 4) said top wall (see examiner comments); and wherein said at least one projecting member (40) and said at least one holding projection (30; 52) are configured to secure (Fig. 4) said structural component (90),
but fails to disclose another side wall (as Fig. 5 only shows a single end cap 80, disposed on one end of 20).
However, McSpadden discloses another side wall (Fig. 6-7 642).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support system of Choi with another side wall as disclosed by McSpadden in order to provide aesthetic appeal to both ends of the at least one structural frame element ([0056]) instead of just one end.
Re claim 18, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 15; wherein said back wall (see examiner comments) further comprises at least one mounting barb (25).
Re claim 31, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 15, but fails to disclose wherein said at least one projecting member or said at least one holding projection further comprising a cushioning member, said cushioning member extending towards said structural member.
However, McSpadden discloses wherein said at least one projecting member (620) or said at least one holding projection further comprising a cushioning member (634), said cushioning member (634) extending towards (Fig. 9) said structural member (102).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support system of Choi wherein said at least one projecting member or said at least one holding projection further comprising a cushioning member, said cushioning member extending towards said structural member as disclosed by McSpadden in order to protect the strucual member from damage resulting in contact from the at least one projecting member or the at least one holding projection.
Claim(s) 17, 19, 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 9,303,444) in view of McSpadden, IV (“McSpadden”) (US 2023/0279720) and Davies (US 4,984,402).
Re claim 17, Choi as modified discloses as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 16, but fails to disclose further comprising at least one opening in said top wall and wherein said at least one opening configured to direct moisture away toward a second opening within said at least one structural frame element.
However, Davies discloses further comprising at least one opening (28) in said top wall (22) and wherein said at least one opening (28) configured to direct moisture away toward (Col 3 lines 28-36) a second opening (28a) within said at least one structural frame element (20).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support system of Choi with further comprising at least one opening in said top wall and wherein said at least one opening configured to direct moisture away toward a second opening within said at least one structural frame element as disclosed by Davies in order to allow for escape of moisture passing between the features of the frame element (Abstract).
Re claim 18, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 17; wherein said back wall (see examiner comments) further comprises at least one mounting barb (25).
Re claim 21, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 17, wherein said at least one socket (32) is angled (Fig. 4).
Re claim 22, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 17, wherein said at least one holding projection (30; 52) is further comprising a holding portion (5), said holding portion (5) configured to be inserted into one of at least one retaining slot (which receives 5) along said top wall (see examiner comments); and a securing portion (30) said securing portion (30) adjacently securing (Fig. 4) structural component (90).
Re claim 23, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 22, wherein said holding portion (5) of said at least one holding projection (30; 52) is configured to accommodate said securing portion (30) of variable lengths (5 is capable of use with a securing portion of variable lengths, as this is a statement of intended use).
Re claim 24, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 23, wherein said at least one holding projection (30; 52) is configured to be utilized as said at least one holding projection (30, 52, Fig. 4) or as said removable securing member (as this is an “or” clause).
Re claim 25, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 21 wherein said bottom wall (see examiner comments) or said top wall (see examiner comments) is angled towards or away from (at 90 degrees) said existing wall (76, 78).
Re claim 26, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 24 wherein said bottom wall (see examiner comments) or said top wall (see examiner comments) is angled towards or away from (at 90 degrees) said existing wall (76, 78).
Claim(s) 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 9,303,444) in view of McSpadden, IV (“McSpadden”) (US 2023/0279720), Davies (US 4,984,402) and Murray et al (“Murray”) (US 2020/0318421).
Re claim 27, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 17, wherein said at least one mounting barb (25) is configured to secure an additional structural element (30; 25 is also capable of securing an additional structed element, as this is a statement of intended use), and wherein said at least one mounting barb (25) configured as a recessed (at 26 and at 27) fastener point (Fig. 4),
but fails to disclose wherein said at least one mounting barb is made of thermally insulating material.
However, Murray discloses wherein said at least one mounting barb (108; Choi: 25) is made of thermally insulating material (Abstract; disclosing plastic, a known thermally insulating material).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support system of Choi wherein said at least one mounting barb is made of thermally insulating material as disclosed by Murray in order to utilize an inexpensive, easy to manufacture, formable and durable material.
Re claim 28, Choi as modified discloses the support system for securing structural element within wall apertures of claim 24, but fails to disclose wherein said one of at least one structural frame element and another of said at least one structural frame element are in a parallel and spaced apart configuration from each other.
However, Murray discloses wherein said one of at least one structural frame element (Fig. 1 100) and another of said at least one structural frame element (100) are in a parallel and spaced apart configuration from each other (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support system of Choi wherein said one of at least one structural frame element and another of said at least one structural frame element are in a parallel and spaced apart configuration from each other as disclosed by Murray in order to secure the panel element on multiple edges instead of a single edge, providing additional support and rigidity thereto.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections 35 USC 112: Applicant’s argument with respect to the claims rejected under 35 USC 112 is persuasive and rejection of the claims pursuant to 35 USC 112 (for the reasons stated in the previous rejection) is hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections 35 USC 102 and/or 103: Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are moot as they do not apply to any of the combination of references relied upon in the above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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.
KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635