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 § 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 1-9 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jejina (8,196,705).
Claim 1. Jejina teaches an article capable of use as a deck extension (the scaffold deck planks can extend the deck by attaching the scaffold to the deck just as it is attached to the wall) comprising:
an adjustable height mounting frame, 14, col. 6, lines 25-27; and
an angle bracket mounting support (the embodiment of 20 shown in fig. 3a) comprising a vertical portion 26 and a horizontal portion 24,
wherein the horizontal portion of the mounting support is configured to attach to a deck via a vertical fastener extending substantially vertically into a rim joist of the deck (the horizontal portion of the mounting support is configured to attach to a deck via a vertical fastener extending substantially vertically into a rim joist of the deck in the same way it attaches to the wall top surface),
wherein the adjustable height mounting frame is configured to attach directly to the vertical portion of the angle bracket (vertical member 42 of the adjustable height mounting frame is capable of being attached “directly”, as broadly recited, to vertical portion 26 of angle bracket mounting support 20 (the bracket is unitary so the bracket as a whole is directly capable of being attached) by bolt 34 just as Applicant’s bolt 138 attaches frame vertical member 120 directly to the angle bracket (directly to both unitary bracket portions).
wherein the vertical portion of the mounting support is configured to contact a vertical surface of the deck (the vertical portion of the mounting support is capable of contacting a deck vertical surface just as it contacts wall vertical surface 4b, fig. 3A), wherein the adjustable height mounting frame is capable of extending from the vertical surface of the deck that the vertical portion is capable of contacting, fig. 3A.
Claim 2. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 1, Jejina further teaching the adjustable height mounting frame is capable of having an adjustable height relative to a surface of the deck, col. 6, lines 25-27.
Claim 3. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 1, Jejina further teaching the adjustable height mounting frame comprises a leveling bolt 44 configured to change a level of a horizonal surface of the adjustable height mounting frame.
Claim 4. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 1, Jejina further teaching the mounting support comprises a 90-degree angle bracket at least because the vertical and horizontal portions comprise together a generally 90-degree angle bracket, fig. 3A.
Claim 5. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 4, Jejina further teaching the 90-degree angle bracket is capable of contacting at least one of a horizontal surface of the deck board via element 24, a vertical surface of a deck board via element 26, and a vertical surface of the rim joist via element 26.
Claim 6. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 1, Jejina further teaching the vertical fastener capable of extending through the deck board capable of extending through a deck board into the rim joist by using a sufficient length fastener.
Claim 7. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 6, Jejina further teaching the vertical fastener capable of extending extends through a 90-degree angle bracket of the mounting support (the vertical and horizontal portions comprise together a generally 90-degree angle bracket).
Claim 8. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 1, Jejina further teaching the mounting support is configured to attach to the deck via a horizontal fastener extending substantially horizontally into a deck board of the deck at least because a fastener positioned at the edge of portion 26 could be driven into the deck horizontally, the fastener head clamping portion 26 to the deck.
Claim 9. Jejina teaches the deck extension of claim 1, Jejina further teaching the deck extension is capable of extending outside of an area of the deck just as the scaffold deck extends from the wall.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J KENNY whose telephone number is (571)272-9951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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.
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 Glessner can be reached at (571)272-6754. 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 KENNY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633