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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 122 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/18/2026.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
“same extension,” as recited in claim 107;
“bottom payload-receiving surface,” as recited in claims 112 and 121; and
“opposed lengths,” as recited in claims 112 and 121.
Claim Objections
Claims 112-113 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 112, lines 6-7, “the area defined by the support frame” has no antecedent basis.
Claim 121 has a similar problem.
In claim 113, lines 14-15, “the second payload-receiving recess” has no antecedent basis in the claims.
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 107 and 112-121 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.
In claim 107, it is not clear what structure “same extension” is referring to. For purposes of expediting examination, “same extension” will be interpreted as one of the elements shown below in the image taken from Fig. 9A of Applicant’s drawings:
[AltContent: textbox (same extension)][AltContent: textbox (same extension)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval]
PNG
media_image1.png
438
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 112, is generally vague and indefinite. The combination of the specification not including the terminology used in the claim, the lack of reference numerals matching the structure recited in the claim, and the confusing language of the claim render claim 112 unclear.
It appears that Applicant is referring to the structure indicated below in the image taken from Fig. 9A of Applicant’s drawings:
[AltContent: textbox (opposing lengths)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (bottom payload-receiving surface)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
541
534
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, the phrase “with more of each of the lengths extending on opposite sides of the first payload-receiving recess than portions of the lengths that are disposed within the area defined by the support frame” doesn’t appear to make any sense. There are only two lengths (opposite sides of the bottom payload-receiving surface) and they are each in the area defined by the support frame.
Claim 121 has a similar problem.
In claim 113, line 4, Applicant recites that “each of the first and second payload-receiving fixtures includes: a support frame.” Thus, there are a total of two support frames. However, later in the claim, Applicant refers to “the support frame” which has no proper antecedent basis in the claims. For purposes of expediting examination, “the support frame” will be interpreted as --each of said support fames.--
Many of the dependent claims of 113 also only recited “the support frame.”
Due to the 112(b) problems with claims 112 and 121, prior art could not be applied to claims 112 and 121 at this time. Once the 112(b) problems have been overcome, any relevant prior art will then be applied.
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.
Claims 103-104 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Springett et al. (US 2011/0056168).
With respect to claim 103, Springett et al. disclose a payload-receiving fixture for securing a payload for transport, comprising:
a support frame 61;
a first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame 11 as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 7 of Springett et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (second payload-receiving recess)][AltContent: ]
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first payload receiving recess)]
PNG
media_image3.png
180
204
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame and spaced apart from the first payload-receiving recess (as indicated above);
a plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 46/46 coupled to the support frame 61 (as shown in Fig. 8B of Springett et al.), the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 46/46 each extending into the first payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a first payload 32 disposed in the first payload-receiving recess (as shown in Fig. 7 of Springett et al.); and
a plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 63/63 coupled to the support frame 61 (as shown in Fig. 8B of Springett et al.), the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 63/63 each extending into the second payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a second payload 30 disposed in the second payload-receiving recess (as indicated above).
With respect to claim 104, Springett et al. disclose that the support frame 61 comprises:
a lower component as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 8A of Springett et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (mid-component)][AltContent: textbox (lower component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image4.png
169
266
media_image4.png
Greyscale
; and
a mid-component coupled to the lower component (as indicated above), the mid-component including a portion thereof arranged above the lower component (as shown above), the lower component and the mid-component at least partially defining the first payload-receiving recess (as can be seen above),
wherein at least one payload-receiving surface 46 of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 46/46 is coupled to the lower component as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 7 of Springett et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces is coupled to the mid-component.)][AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces coupled to mid-component )]
[AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
[AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces coupled to lower component)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image3.png
180
204
media_image3.png
Greyscale
and at least one payload-receiving surface 46 of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 46/46 is coupled to the mid-component (as indicated above), and
wherein at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces is coupled to the mid-component.
Claims 103 and 111 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kootstra et al. (US 2007/0177954).
With respect to claim 103, Kootstra et al. disclose a payload-receiving fixture for securing a payload for transport, comprising:
a support frame 30;
a first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame 30 as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 3 of Kootstra et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (second payload-receiving recess)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first payload receiving recess)]
PNG
media_image5.png
467
397
media_image5.png
Greyscale
a second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame and spaced apart from the first payload-receiving recess (as indicated above);
a plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52/70 coupled to the support frame 30 (as shown above), the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52/40 each extending into the first payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a first payload 24 disposed in the first payload-receiving recess (as shown in Figs. 7-8 of Kootstra et al.); and
a plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52/70 coupled to the support frame 30 (as shown above), the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52/70 each extending into the second payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a second payload 240 disposed in the second payload-receiving recess (as shown in Figs. 7-8 of Kootstra et al.).
With respect to claim 111, Kootstra et al. disclose that the first payload 24 comprises a first wind turbine blade (Kootstra et al., paragraph [0018]) and the second payload 24 comprises a second wind turbine blade (Kootstra et al., paragraph [0018]), the first and second wind turbine blades 24/24 being substantially identical in size and shape (as shown in Fig. 6 of Kootstra et al.),
wherein areas of the first and second payload-receiving recesses defined by the support frame are configured to receive different portions along a length of the first and second wind turbine blades 24/24 when the first and second wind turbine blades are positioned in opposite direction of each other (as shown in Figs. 7-8 of Kootstra et al.),
wherein an area of the first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame 30 is larger than an area of the second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame 30 such that the area of the first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame is configured to receive a wider portion of the first wind turbine blade 24 as compared to the area of the second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame 30 (as shown in Figs. 3 and 7-8 of Kootstra et al.), which is configured to receive a less wide portion of the second wind turbine blade 24 (as shown in Figs. 3 and 7-8 of Kootstra et al.).
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 103-106 and 113-115 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poulsen et al. (US 2014/0305743) in view of Kastrup et al. (US 2021/062792).
With respect to claim 103, Poulsen et al. disclose the claimed payload-receiving fixture except that they are silent on the inclusion of a plurality of first and second payload-receiving surfaces. Poulsen et al. disclose a payload-receiving fixture for securing a payload for transport, comprising:
a support frame 100;
a first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame 11 as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 5 of Poulsen et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (first payload receiving recess)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (second payload-receiving recess)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image6.png
277
238
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and;
a second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame and spaced apart from the first payload-receiving recess (as indicated above).
Kastrup et al. teach a similar payload-receiving fixture including a support frame 144 plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 coupled to the support frame 44 (shown on one side of the blade 22 in Fig. 5 of Kastrup et al.), the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 46/46 each extending into the first payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a first payload 22 disposed in the first payload-receiving recess (as shown in Fig. 5 of Kastrup et al.); and
In the combination, Poulsen et al. in view of Kastrup et al. would teach a stack of frames 144 as shown below in the image based on Fig. 5 of Kastrup et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces coupled to the mid-component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (lower component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces coupled to the mid-component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (upper component)][AltContent: textbox (mid-component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (a plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (a plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image7.png
362
334
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces coupled to the lower component)]
In the combination Kastrup et al. teach a plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 coupled to the support frame 144, the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 each extending into the second payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a second payload 22 disposed in the second payload-receiving recess (as indicated above).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Kastrup et al. with the payload receiving fixture disclosed by Poulson et al. for the advantage of the support pads which can be adjusted to different configurations for supporting blades of different shapes (Kastrup et al., paragraph [0035]).
With respect to claim 104, in the combination, Kastrup et al. teach that the support frame 144 comprises:
a lower component (indicated above); and
a mid-component coupled to the lower component (via sides, as indicated above), the mid-component including a portion thereof arranged above the lower component (as shown above), the lower component and the mid-component at least partially defining the first payload-receiving recess (as can be seen above),
wherein at least one payload-receiving surface 52 of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 is coupled to the lower component (as shown above); and at least one payload-receiving surface 52 of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 is coupled to the mid-component (as indicated above), and
wherein at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces is coupled to the mid-component (as indicated above).
With respect to claim 105, the combination of Poulsen et al. and Kastrup et al. teach that the support frame further comprises an upper component coupled to at least one of the mid-component (via side walls, as shown above) and the lower component, the upper component including a portion thereof arranged above the mid-component and the lower component, and
wherein the mid-component and the upper component at least partially define the second payload-receiving recess (as can be seen above).
With respect to claim 106, the combination of Poulsen et al. and Kastrup et al. teach that the at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces is coupled to the upper component as indicated in the below image based on Fig. 5 of Kastrup et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces coupled to the upper component)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image7.png
362
334
media_image7.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 113, Poulsen et al. disclose the claimed payload-receiving fixture except that they are silent on the inclusion of a plurality of first and second payload-receiving surfaces. Poulsen et al. disclose a payload-receiving fixture for securing a payload for transport, comprising:
a first pay load receiving fixture; and
a second payload receiving fixture as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 5 of Poulsen et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (second payload-receiving recess)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first payload receiving recess)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first payload-receiving fixture)][AltContent: textbox (second payload-receiving fixture)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image8.png
231
231
media_image8.png
Greyscale
wherein each of the first and second payload-receiving fixtures includes
a support frame (a portion of frame 100).
In the combination of Poulsen et al. and Kastrup et al. stacking of the fixtures disclosed by Kastrop et al. to achieve the vertically aligned fixtures of Poulsen et al. would result in the below which is modified image based on Fig. 5 of Kastrup et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (second payload-receiving recess)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox ( upper component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (mid-component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (lower component)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image7.png
362
334
media_image7.png
Greyscale
the mid-component including a portion thereof arranged above the lower component, the lower component and the mid-component at least partially defining a first payload-receiving recess of the support frame 50.
Kastrup et al. further teach a plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 coupled to the support frame 50, the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 each extending into the first payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a first payload 26 disposed in the first payload-receiving recess (as shown above); and
a plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 (in the upper recess) coupled to the support frame 50, the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 each extending into the second payload-receiving recess and each being configured to receive a portion of a second payload 26 disposed in the second payload-receiving recess (as shown above).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Kastrup et al. with the payload receiving fixture disclosed by Poulson et al. for the advantage of the support pads which can be adjusted to different configurations for supporting blades of different shapes (Kastrup et al., paragraph [0035]).
With respect to claim 114, the combination of Poulsen et al. and Kastrup et al. further teach the support frame 50 further comprises an upper component coupled to at least one of the mid-component and the lower component (as indicated above), the upper component including a portion thereof arranged above the mid-component and the lower component, and wherein the mid-component and the upper component at least partially define the second payload-receiving recess (as indicated above).
With respect to claim 115, the combination of Poulsen et al. and Kastrup et al. teach that at least one payload-receiving surface 52 of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces 52/52 is coupled to the upper component (as shown above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 107-110 and 116-120 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Claim 107 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for at least one payload- receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces that is coupled to the mid- component and the at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload- receiving surfaces that is coupled to the mid-component are disposed on a same extension coupled to the mid-component such that the extension extends both into the first payload-receiving recess and the second payload-receiving recess.
Claims 108-110 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for extension coupled to the support frame, the extension comprising a payload-receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces and a payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces such that the extension extends both into the first payload-receiving recess and the second payload-receiving recess.
Claim 116 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the at least one payload- receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces that is coupled to the mid- component and the at least one payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload- receiving surfaces that is coupled to the mid-component are disposed on a same extension coupled to the mid-component such that the extension extends both into the first payload-receiving recess and the second payload-receiving recess.
Claims 117-119 have been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the extension coupled to the support frame, the extension comprising a payload-receiving surface of the plurality of first payload-receiving surfaces and a payload-receiving surface of the plurality of second payload-receiving surfaces such that the extension extends both into the first payload-receiving recess and the second payload-receiving recess.
Claim 120 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the mid-component including a portion thereof arranged above the lower component, the lower component and the mid-component at least partially defining a first payload- receiving recess of the support frame and wherein an area of the first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame is larger than an area of the second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame such that the area of the first payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame is configured to receive a wider portion of the first wind turbine blade as compared to the area of the second payload-receiving recess defined by the support frame.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Llorente Gonzalez et al. is cited to show another example of a payload-receiving fixture including a lower, component, a mid-component, and an upper component wherein the first and second payloads include wind turbine blades.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J COLILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-2157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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.
/Daniel J Colilla/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights