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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the connection fastener and the positioning cover sheet are threaded connected, but it should be written as threadingly connected. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-10 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 1 states two upright stands in the preamble, but follows with the upright stand. As such, it is unclear whether the further composition structure of a cylindrical wall applies to both the stands or just one. For examination purposes, as best understood by the examiner in view of the specification, “the upright stand” is interpreted as “each upright stand”. Examiner suggests amending the claim as such, to overcome the antecedent basis and indefiniteness issues.
Claim 1 recites the phrase two ends of the connection fastener are respectively connected to the positioning cover sheet in two ball net assemblies to splice the two ball net assemblies. The phrase renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the two ball net assemblies are positively recited and part of the claimed invention as the claim is directed to “a ball net assembly”. Examiner suggests amending the claim to clearly define what structural limitations are being claimed.
Claims 2-10 are dependent on claim 1, therefore inheriting the deficiencies of claim 1 and being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as well.
Claim 4 recites a storage space and then one storage space, so it is unclear whether there are multiple storage spaces or just one. It is suggested to be changed to the storage space.
Claim 4, line 2, the ball net wires also lacks antecedent basis and renders the claim indefinite, previously introduced as multiple ball net wires, so it is unclear to which of the multiple ball net wires the phrase is referring to. For example, it could be only some or all. Examiner suggests amending the claim to clearly define what structural limitations are being claimed.
Claim 5 is dependent on claim 4, therefore inheriting the deficiencies of claim 4 and being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as well.
Claim 5 recites the phrase the other end of the double headed connector is connected to the rotating shaft in another ball net assembly to synchronize a rotation of rotating shafts in two spliced ball net assemblies. The phrase renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the “another ball net assembly” and the limitations following the phrase are positively recited and part of the claimed invention as the claim is directed to a ball net assembly. Examiner suggests amending the claim to clearly define what structural limitations are being claimed.
Claim 9 recites the ball net assembly in line 3, but lacks antecedent basis because multiple ball net assemblies are stated in line 2. It is unclear which of the multiple ball net assemblies the ball net assembly is in reference to. Examiner suggests amending the claim to clearly identify the structural limitations being claimed.
Claim 10 recites the positioning hole, but lacks antecedent basis because it was never introduced in claim 1. As such, it is suggested that the positioning hole in the rotating shaft should be added to the body of independent claim 1.
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.
Claim 8 is 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. The claim recites a portable ball net, comprising the ball net assembly according to claim 1, however it is unclear what is additionally attempted to be claimed. There are no further limitations set forth in the dependent claim that, rendering in failure to limit the subject matter of claim 1.
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
1. Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez (US 4993719 A) in view of Gu (US 20230310958 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Hernandez teaches a ball net assembly (see abstract), comprising two upright stands (10) and multiple ball net wires connected between the two upright stands (11), the upright stand comprises a cylindrical shell (see abstract) and a positioning cover sheet fixed at two ends of the cylindrical shell (end caps 26,13), a side wall of the cylindrical shell is provided with an extension-and-contraction groove (28); the upright stand comprises a rotating shaft (21) located inside the cylindrical shell, two ends of multiple ball net wires respectively pass through the extension-and-contraction groove and are connected to a side wall of the rotating shaft (Each end of the net 11 extends through the slot 28 in one of the housings 10: col 4, lines 58-60), when the rotating shaft rotates, the multiple ball net wires are driven to retract or extend to adjust a width of the ball net assembly; ([abstract] The net is attached to a rotatable tube within the housing from which it may be extended through a longitudinal housing slot and around which it may be rerolled by manually turning an end cap attached to the tube on the outside of the housing). However, Hernandez fails to teach the upright stand comprises a connection fastener, two ends of the connection fastener are respectively connected to the positioning cover sheet in two ball net assemblies to splice the two ball net assemblies. Gu teaches this as follows: t-shaped sleeve 5, as seen below in Fig 3, is analogous to the connection fastener, as it joins together multiple nets.
PNG
media_image1.png
399
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the net assembly of Hernandez with the connection fastener of Gu in order to create a net assembly comprised of multiple net assemblies to improve its applicability in various net-using sports/activities (Gu, [0014]).
In regards to claim 2, the modified Hernandez teaches wherein the cylindrical shell comprises a front shell and a rear shell, wherein the front shell and the rear shell are buckled together to form the cylindrical shell; an end of the front shell; (Each of the two housings 10 comprises a pair of semicylindrical members 15 which are joined to define the cylindrical housing 10 having a generally open interior 16 between upper and lower end flanges 18 and 20, respectively. The semicylindrical members 15 are suitably joined with pin connections 17 in the end flanges 18 and 20 (Hernandez, col 4, lines 19-25). An end of the rear shell are respectively extended into the positioning cover sheet, and the positioning cover sheet fixes the front shell and the rear shell is seen below in Fig 2 of Hernandez.
PNG
media_image2.png
435
167
media_image2.png
Greyscale
End caps 26, 13 analogous to the positioning cover sheet
Semi-cylindrical members 15 analogous to the front and rear shell
Regarding claim 8, the modified Hernandez teaches a portable ball net (see abstract of Hernandez).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Hernandez teaches a portable ball net (see abstract of Hernandez), comprising a support seat (item 52, Hernandez), and multiple ball net assemblies (Fig 3 of Gu), wherein the multiple ball net assemblies are connected through the connection fastener (item 5, Gu) in the ball net assembly, and the support seat is connected to one ball net assembly through the connection fastener (in combination, the support seat is connected to at least one ball net assembly through the connection faster).
2. Claim 3 is rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez in view of Gu, further in view of Saeed (US 11953043 B2).
Regarding claim 3, while the modified net assembly of Hernandez teaches a side wall of the positioning cover sheet, it fails to teach that it is provided with an external thread, two ends of the connection fastener are respectively provided with an internal thread, and the connection fastener and the positioning cover sheet are threaded connected. Saeed teaches this as follows: A breakaway threaded fastener is provided. The fastener has a stud, a pin, and a cap. The stud has a hollow cavity with a closed end, an open end, a wall, and an outer surface. The outer surface has an external thread. The pin is in the hollow cavity. The pin has a first end at the closed end of the stud and a second end extending above the open end of the stud. The cap has another hollow cavity with a closed end, an open end, and an internal thread. The cap is threadably engaged to the open end of the stud via the internal and external threads so that the second end of the pin abuts the closed end of the cap (see abstract).
It is obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results. See MPEP 2143(B). The MPEP states the prior art must: (1) teach a device (method) which differs from the claimed device (method) by the substitution of some component or step with another component (step), (2) teach that the substituted components and their functions were known, and (3) show that one of ordinary skill could have substituted one known element for another to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(B).
In this case, Hernandez in view of Gu teaches a base connector for stacking
multiple ball net assemblies via a connector utilizing a pressing buckle and corresponding positioning aperture. Saeed teaches a connector for coupling components using internal and external threads. Both connectors perform the function of coupling/securing two components together. One of ordinary skill could have replaced the pressing buckle/aperture of Hernandez in view of Gu with the internal/external threaded coupling of Saeed to achieve predictable results because both references deal with coupling/securing two components together that function in the same manner in the environment of a ball sport nets.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the connector of Hernandez in view of Gu by replacing the connector with an internal and external threaded connector because the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
3. Claim 4 is rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez in view of Gu, further in view of Wettern (US 9714491 B2).
Regarding Claim 4, the modified Hernandez teaches a ball net assembly; however it fails to teach wherein a surface of the rotating shaft is convex with multiple convex partition plates, and each of the ball net wires is connected to one convex partition plate, a storage space is formed between two adjacent convex partition plates, and one storage space is used to store a collected ball net wire. Wettern teaches this as follows: The central region 31 of the bobbin has a plurality of longitudinal bars 38 extending between the side cheeks 32 and at spaced intervals along the length of those bars there are circular ribs 39 which together with the bars define the cylindrical surface around which the band is wound. Slots 40 are formed in two diametrically opposed bars, between alternate pairs of ribs 39 and projecting from the bar within each slot 40, there is a catch 41 (col 6, lines 58-67). The circular ribs 39 read on the convex partition plates and the slots 40 read on the storage space.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the shaft of Hernandez with the shaft (13) of Wettern to ensure a secure connection of the ball net wires to the shaft in a storage space (Wettern, (col 6, lines 58-68).
4. Claims 5-7 are rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez in view of Gu, further in view of Wettern and Bruck et al. (US 20100288450 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Hernandez with Wettern teaches the upright stand, however it fails to teach wherein the upright stand comprises a double headed connector, one end of double headed connector passes through the positioning cover sheet and is connected to one end of the rotating shaft; the other end of the double headed connector is connected to the rotating shaft in another ball net assembly to synchronize a rotation of rotating shafts in two spliced ball net assemblies. Bruck et al. teaches this as follows: [0056] Reference numeral 64 denotes the end of hinge 62 of cylinder 50. End 64 has a square profile, and is used as a male connector. The square profile of end 64 corresponds to that of driveshaft 72 of motor 60, i.e., end 74 is used as a female connector corresponding to male connector 64. Thus, by connecting end 74 of driveshaft 72 to end 64 of the hinge of cylinder 50, the curtain of cylinder 50 is rotated. End 64 is analogous to the double headed connector, as it serves as a coupling mechanism that connects two rotating pieces (the positioning cover sheet and rotating shaft) in the same axis of rotation; the drive shaft 72 and cylinder 50. This is analogous to the connection of one end of the rotating shaft and the rotating shaft in another ball net assembly in the claim. In combination, one end of the double headed connector passes through the positioning cover sheet connected to one rotating shaft, and the other end passes through the rotating shaft of another ball net assembly.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the modified net assembly of Hernandez with Wettern, with the end 64 of Bruck et al. to ensure a simultaneous rotating of the rotating shafts in the multiple ball net assemblies.
Regarding claim 6, the further modified Hernandez with Bruck et al. teaches wherein a cross-sectional area of an end of the double headed connector is non-circular (Thus, each end of a hinge has a square profile, but while one end is used as a male connector, the other serves as a corresponding female connector: Bruck et al. [0054]), and an end of the rotating shaft is provided with a positioning hole that matches an end of the double headed connector, and the end of the double headed connector is inserted into the positioning hole on the rotating shaft (The post assembly 12 includes a hollow tubular outer member which comprises the upper end of the post assembly and remains stored within the housing 10. The tubular outer member 21 has a pair of integral annular flanges 22 and 23 on its upper and lower ends which are adapted to be received, respectively, in upper and lower annular slots 24 and 25 formed in the upper and lower end flanges 18 and 20 in the housing 10: Hernandez, col 4, lines 26-36). The upper and lower slots of the hollow tubular member are analogous to an end of the rotating shaft is provided with a positioning hole.
Regarding claim 7, the modified Hernandez with Bruck et al. teaches wherein a cross-sectional area of an end of the double headed connector is rectangular (Numeral 62 denotes a hinge around which curtain 52 is rolled. One end of hinge 62, which is marked by reference numeral 64, has a square contour, Bruck et al., [0054]).
5. Claim 10 is rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hernandez in view of Gu, further in view of Weix et al. (US 10808454 B1).
Regarding Claim 10, while the modified Hernandez teaches a portable ball net, it fails to teach comprising an adjustment member, one end of the adjustment member is inserted into the positioning hole in the rotating shaft in a top of the ball net assembly, and the rotating shaft in the portable ball net is driven to rotate synchronously to adjust a width of the portable ball net by the adjusting member. Weix et al. teaches this as follows: The barrier assembly 102 may further include another end cap 146 removably attached to the first end 108 of the housing 104. The end cap 146 may comprise a roller pin or a roller receiver 148 configured to support and removably attach to the roller 124 at the first end 108 of the housing 104, allowing the roller 124 to rotate freely (col 9, lines 58-63). The cap 146 is analogous to the adjustment member of the claim.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the modified net assembly of Hernandez with the cap 146 of Weix et al. to efficiently adjust the width of the portable ball net (Weix et al., col 6, lines 48-53).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RIA SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-0286. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am- 5pm.
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, Nicholas Weiss, can be reached at (571)-270-1775 . 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.
/R.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/BRIAN P WOLCOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711