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
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention II in the reply filed on 5/29/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all non-elected claims have been amended to depend from Claim 13 (independent claim of Invention II), therefore, all pending claims 1-20 should be examined. This is found persuasive because amended Invention I and Invention III cannot be restricted from Invention II. Therefore, claims 1-20 are being examined.
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 2-6, 8-12, and 19 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.
Claim 2: Claim 2 recites “wherein each of the receptacles is defined by a base, one of a pair of C-shaped walls and one of a pair of the top ledges of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of the top ledges being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls”. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Claim 2 depends on claim 1 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites the claimed limitations of claim 2. It is not clear whether what is recited in claim 2 refers to ones in claim 13 or if they are separate and distinct from each other. For examination purposes, “wherein each of the receptacles is defined by a base, one of a pair of C-shaped walls and one of a pair of the top ledges of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of the top ledges being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls” is interpreted as ------wherein each of the receptacles is defined by [[a]]the base, the one of [[a]]the pair of C-shaped walls and the one of [[a]]the pair of the top ledges of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of the top ledges being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls--.
Claim 5: Claim 5 recites “a base” in line 2. However, the scope of the claim 5 is indefinite. Claim 5 depends on claim 1 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites “a base” in line 7. It is not clear whether “a base” of claim 5 refers to “a base” of claim 13 or if they are distinct and separate from each other. For examination purposes, “a base” is interpreted as --[[a]]the base--.
Claim 6: Claim 6 recites “a base” in line 2. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Claim 6 depends on claim 1 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites “a base” in line 7. It is not clear whether “a base” of claim 6 refers to “a base” of claim 13 or if they are distinct and separate from each other. For examination purposes, “a base” is interpreted as --[[a]]the base--.
Claim 8: Claim 8 recites “wherein each of the receptacles is defined by a base, one of a pair of C-shaped walls and one of a pair of the top ledges of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of the top ledges being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls”. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Claim 8 depends on claim 7 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites the claimed limitations of claim 8. It is not clear whether what is recited in claim 8 refers to ones in claim 13 or if they are separate and distinct from each other. For examination purposes, “wherein each of the receptacles is defined by a base, one of a pair of C-shaped walls and one of a pair of the top ledges of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of the top ledges being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls” is interpreted as ------wherein each of the receptacles is defined by [[a]]the base, the one of [[a]]the pair of C-shaped walls and the one of [[a]]the pair of the top ledges of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of the top ledges being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls--.
Claim 11: Claim 11 recites “a base” in line 2. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Claim 11 depends on claim 7 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites “a base” in line 7. It is not clear whether “a base” of claim 11 refers to “a base” of claim 13 or if they are distinct and separate from each other. For examination purposes, “a base” is interpreted as --[[a]]the base--.
Claim 12: Claim 12 recites “a base” in line 2. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Claim 12 depends on claim 7 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites “a base” in line 7. It is not clear whether “a base” of claim 12 refers to “a base” of claim 13 or if they are distinct and separate from each other. For examination purposes, “a base” is interpreted as --[[a]]the base--.
Claim 19: Claim 19 recites “a base” in line 2. However, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Claim 19 depends on claim 18 which recites “the foot pad according to Claim 13”. Claim 13 recites “a base” in line 7. It is not clear whether “a base” of claim 19 refers to “a base” of claim 13 or if they are distinct and separate from each other. For examination purposes, “a base” is interpreted as --[[a]]the base--.
Claims 3-4, 9-10 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-4, 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. As aforementioned, claims 2 and 8 recite limitations that are already recited in claim 13. Claims 2 and 8 do not further limit any structural limitations. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claims 3-4 and 9-10 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 7, 13-18, 20 are allowed.
Claims 2, 5-6, 8, 11-12, 19 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.
Claims 3-4 and 9-10 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 subject matter of the claim(s) could either not be found or was not suggested in the prior art of record. The subject matter of the independent claim(s) could either not be found or was not suggested in the prior art of record. The subject matter of independent claim 13 not found was that the foot pad is configured to receive opposite ends of the jack foot including ends of the bottom plate and ends of the pair of vertically extending walls within each of the pair of opposite facing receptacles; in combination with the limitations set forth in claim 13 of the instant invention.
None of the prior arts of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, teaches or renders obvious the allowable subject matter of the instant invention.
The closest prior art, Wilson et al (US 2016/0325974 A1) teaches a similar foot pad (fig13) configured to be connected to a vertically adjustable jack (fig1, para[0017], abstract) configured to support the vertically adjustable jack on a surface, the vertically adjustable jack having a jack foot 5 (para[0043]) including a bottom plate (circular flat plate, fig1) and a pair of vertically extending walls 14 (para[0044]) extending upwardly from the bottom plate (fig1), the foot pad comprising: a base 28 (fig13); and receptacles 32 (para[0051],[0068]); each of the receptacles is defined by the base 28, one of a pair of C-shaped walls (curved side wall of the receptacles 32) and one of a pair of top ledges 22 (fig13) of the foot pad, with the one of the pair of top ledges 22 being connected to one of the pair of C-shaped walls; wherein the foot pad is configured to receive the jack foot 5 (para[0057],[0069]), resilient and flexible material (para[0069]) of the foot pad being configured to be deflected to allow the peripheral edge of the jack foot 5 to be positioned within the receptacles 32 and the receptacles 32 then resiliently returning to an original shape of the foot pad (para[0057],[0069]).
Although the prior art of record teaches a similar foot pad, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Wilson et al to use the foot pad to receive opposite ends of the jack foot including ends of the bottom plate and ends of the pair of vertically extending walls within each of the pair of opposite facing receptacles; in combination with the limitations set forth in claim 13 of the instant invention. As seen in figures, the receptacles taught by Wilson et al is to receive a circular peripheral edge of the circular bottom plate of the jack foot, not to receive any part of vertical walls of the jack foot. Thus, for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the independent claim 13.
None of the prior arts of record considered as a whole, alone or in combination, teaches or renders obvious the allowable subject matter of the instant invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Koberg (US 8,814,121 B2), Lambdin (US 7,958,967 B2), Bean (US 6,874,745 B1), Stonhaus (4,254,927), Selanders et al (US 2024/0208467 A1), Vargas (US 2015/0028177 A1), Lucas (US 2005/0017223 A1), and Ferris et al (US 12,162,733 B2) teach similar foot pads.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seahee Hong whose telephone number is (571)270-5778. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-4pm ET.
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 Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/SEAHEE HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights