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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on January 21, 2026. These drawings are not accepted by the examiner as they contain New Matter not present in the originally filed application (see new matter rejection below). Additionally, it is unclear what the unlabeled arrow in figure 5 depicts.
The amendment filed January 21, 2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the angle of 86.250 shown in figures 5 and 6.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
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 1 and, 3-9 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 claims are considered vague and indefinite for the following reasons:
Claim 1 recites that “said side walls at an angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to each of said side flanges”. This limitation is confusing because it appears from the drawings that the angle between the flange (lower surface of flange) to the side wall (outer surface of side wall) is greater than 90 degrees. The angle of less than 90 degrees is between the inner surface of the sidewall and the plane in which the flange extends but not the flange itself.
Claim 1 recites that “said end walls at an angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to each of said end walls”. This limitation is confusing because it is unclear how the end walls can extend at an angle from itself.
Claims 3-9 depend directly or indirectly from canceled claim 2. Since the metes and bounds of the claims cannot be ascertained, the claims cannot be further treated on the merits at this time.
The dependent claims not specifically mentioned are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim since they inherently contain the same deficiencies therein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Laughlin (U.S. 8,598,454).
To the degree claim 1 is understood in view of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 above, Laughlin teaches an electrical box extender 10, comprising a frame 12, 14, 16, 18 with a front opening (at lead line 20 in figure 1) including an inner periphery (at lead lines 14, 18; figure 1), and side walls 12, 14 and end walls 16, 18 extending from the inner periphery of the frame (figure 1), two side flanges at 32, 34 extending from each side wall 12, 14, said side walls at an angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to each of said side flanges (as shown in figure 1, the angled portion that extends directly from the side walls extends in a plane which is less than 90 degrees from the inside surface of the side wall), and an end flange 36, 38 extending from each end wall 16, 18, said end walls at an angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to each of said end walls (as shown in figure 1, the angled portion that extends directly from the end wall extends in a plane with an angle of less than 90 degrees from the inside surface of the end wall).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 21, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Laughlin and Gretz do not teach side and end walls that extends at an angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to the flanges. First as noted in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 above, the present invention does not appear to teach that the side and end walls extend at angle of less than 90 degrees with respect to the flanges. It appears from the drawings that the angle between the flange (lower surface of flange) to the side or end wall (outer surface of side or end wall) is greater than 90 degrees. The angle of less than 90 degrees is between the inner surface of the side or end wall and the plane in which the flange extends but not the flange itself. The Laughlin device teaches a portion of the flange which is directly connected to the top edge of the side or end wall extends in a plane that is at an angle of less than 90 degrees with the inner surface of the side or end wall. It is the examiner’s position that the invention of Laughlin meets this limitation of claim 1 to the degree the present invention meets this limitation.
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 NIKI MARINA ELOSHWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4538. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7: 00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached on 571-270-5531. 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.
/NIKI M ELOSHWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
/ORLANDO E AVILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights