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 Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1:
Line 13, “an elongated-shaft blade end” should be –the elongated-shaft blade end--;
Line 16, “an elongated-shaft user” should be –the elongated-shaft user--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-11, 17, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brazeau, US 2006/0249964 A1, in view of Brenton, U.S. Patent No. 2919153.
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Brazeau ‘964 shows a method of pushing a shovel to clear material from a surface as shown in drawings 1-23. Brazeau ‘964 discloses a manually operated shovel 10 designed to be pushed by a user to clear material forma a surface (see figure 1) comprising: a blade 12 comprising a length (no reference number, left to right length) and a width (no reference number, up to down length) wherein the length is greater than the width (see figure 2), a bottom edge 12a to engage the surface and a top edge 12b spaced from the bottom edge, a front face (i.e., a surface of the blade which is a concave shape, claim 2, see figure 2) defined between the top edge and the bottom edge, and a back face (i.e., a back surface of the blade, a convex shape, claim 3, see figure 2) defined between the top edge and the bottom edge wherein the back face is opposed to and separated from the front face, an elongated-shaft 14 (i.e., that is parallel with at least a portion of the blade in the width direction, claim 11) having an elongated blade end (near 13) and an elongated-shaft user end (near 16), wherein the elongated-shaft user end is spaced apart from the elongated-shaft blade end, a selectively-pivotable joint (22, 128, 322, using a spring 326 with a button 324 to lock and selectively positionable to a length in the range near zero to 180 degrees located in within the bottom half 36, claim 4, 6-10, and 21-22 see figures 16-20) connected with the elongated shaft blade end (near 13) and the back face of the blade, wherein the selectively-pivotable joint is fixed in place relative to a length direction of the blade 12 and pivots around a joint center point (an axis of B) to move the elongated-shaft user end in an arc relative to spaced apart side edges of the blade (i.e., edges of 12, left and right, no reference number), and a T-shaped handle 16 connected with the elongated-shaft user (near 16), wherein the T-shaped handle is fastened to the elongated shaft rather than selectively adjustable.
Brenton ‘153 discloses a selectively-pivotable joint (near 15, which is above the half point, near a middle one-third, see figure 1-2, claim 5), and a T-shaped handle 18 connected with the elongated-shaft user of the shaft 17 (i.e., an end of the shaft), wherein the T-shaped handle 18 is selectively-adjustable by moving the shaft 17 by using the locking collar 23, see figures 1-5.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Brazeau ‘964 to include an adjustable shaft as suggested by Brenton ‘153, in order to accommodate a different length of usage of the shovel. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-16, 18-20, and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The claims 12-16, 18-20, and 23 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claims 12-16, 18-20, and 23, including every structural element recited in the claim, especially the combination of all the limitation of previous claims with the T shaped handle is adjustable angularly with an elongated axis of the elongated-shaft rather than just adjustable along the same axis. The prior of record, as stated above, Brazeau ‘964 in view of Brenton ‘153 shows an adjustable shaft feature but fails to show another adjustable feature on the T shaped handle.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the device as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the device in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
SK
6/29/26
/SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights