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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
Claim 4 (lines 1-2), “an additional guide insert”.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
Figs. 6-9: It appears that element 72 (Figs. 6-9) shows a “rack” in which a “rack” is defined as “a bar with teeth on one face for gearing with a pinion or worm gear to transform rotary motion to linear motion or vice versa” (Merriam-Webster Online 2025) and that element 71 (Fig. 7) shows a “pinion” in which a “pinion” is defined as “ a gear with a small number of teeth designed to mesh with a larger wheel or rack” (Merriam-Webster Online 2025). However, the specification states (¶ [008] & [029]) “rack (71) and pinion (72)”. It appears these designations are reversed.
For examination purposes the Figures will be treated as: pinion (71) and rack (72).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In the applicant's originally filed specification, it states in ¶ [008], "The rack is rotatably installed…..and the pinion is fixed to another tube….so that a rotation of the rack " and in ¶[029], "The rack (71) is rotatably installed…..and the pinion (72) is fixed to another tube….so that a rotation of the rack (71)". As mentioned above in the Drawing Objection, it appears these designations are reversed since it is a rack that is fixed and a gear that rotates.
For examination purposes the Specification will be treated as: pinion (71) and rack (72).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 2, 7 and 9 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 2: lines 2-7 should read “a rack (72) and pinion (71) mechanism, wherein the pinion (71) is rotatably installed in one tube (3: 4) of the telescopic bar (2) and the rack (72) is fixed to another tube (3; 4) of the telescoping bar (2) so that a rotation of the pinion (71) provides interrelated linear movement between the tube (3: 4) of the telescopic bar (2).”
As mentioned above in the Drawing Objection and Specification Objection, it appears these designations are reversed since it is a rack that is fixed and a gear that rotates.
For examination purposes the Claim will be treated as: pinion (71) and rack (72).
Claim(s) 7 and , line 1, respectively, should read “for levelling [a] the wall”;
There is insufficient antecedent basis for the following limitation(s) in Claim 9, so line 12 should read, “a levelling tool”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil (WO 2020/053888 A1 ; see reference in its entirety) in view of Screen (US 4747180; see reference in its entirety) and McCabe (US 2828578; see reference in its entirety).
With respect to independent Claim 1, Patil disclose(s): A device (Figs. 8(a) & 8(b)) for levelling a wall or similar vertical surface (Abstract) , wherein the device comprises:
a telescopic bar (see Annotated Fig. 8(b) below & page 9, lines 5-8) formed of at least two tubes (see Annotated Fig. 8(b), which can slide one inside another (see Annotated Fig. 8(b) below & page 9, lines 5-8), and wherein the telescopic bar comprises a first end portion and a second end portion (see Annotated Fig. 8(b) below), wherein the telescopic bar further comprises an adjusting and locking device (page 9, lines 2-3) configured to adjust and to lock the tubes of the telescopic bar in a necessary length (page 9, lines 2-8);
two feet (page 10, lines 10-18: it is understood that the tracks are considered feet ) wherein each foot comprises a connection and guide mechanism (see Annotated Fig. 8(b) below), slidably connecting each foot to respective the first end portion and the second end portion of the telescopic bar (Fig. 8(a) & (b) & page 10, lines 10-18) so that the telescopic bar is able to move in relation to the foot (Fig. 8(a) & (b) & page 10, lines 10-18); wherein the connection and guide mechanism comprises: a roller (see Annotated Fig. 8(b) below), rotatably connected to the end portion of the telescopic bar so that roller can roll along the foot (Fig. 8(b) & page 10, lines 10-18).
PNG
media_image1.png
824
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Patil does not specifically disclose: at least two rollers.
However, Screen teach(es) a device (Fig. 2) comprising: at least two rollers (Fig. 2: 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Patil, with the teachings of Screen, for the purpose of increasing engagement with a surface (col. 1, lines 15-17).
Patil in view of Screen do(es) not specifically disclose: a foot bar fixed to the foot and extending in a direction towards the telescopic bar and into it, wherein the foot bar comprises a threaded hole; a threaded shaft rotatably connected to the telescopic bar and engaged with the threaded hole of the foot bar so that rotational movement of the threaded shaft through the engagement of the threaded hole of the foot bar is transferred into linear motion of the telescopic bar along the foot.
However, McCabe teach(es): a device (Fig. 2) including: a foot bar (21) fixed to the foot (16) and extending in a direction towards the bar and into it (32), wherein the foot bar comprises a threaded hole (27); a threaded shaft (28) rotatably connected to the bar (Fig. 2) and engaged with the threaded hole of the foot bar (Fig. 2) so that rotational movement of the threaded shaft through the engagement of the threaded hole of the foot bar is transferred into linear motion of the bar along the foot (Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Patil and Screen, with the teachings of McCabe, for the purpose of allowing the user to grip the tool for ease of movement of the tool (col. 1, lines 15-18).
With respect to Claim 3, Patil, Screen and McCabe teach(es) the device of Claim 1.
Patil further disclose(s): wherein the tube is a square tube or rectangular tube (Figs. 8(a) & (b): the tubes in the framework are shown as rectangular tubes).
With respect to Claim 4, Patil, Screen and McCabe teach(es) the device of Claim 1.
Patil further disclose(s): wherein one side of the tube is a guide surface (see Annotated Fig. 8(b)) for guiding a wall levelling device (page 10, lines 5-8; it is understood the tool plate is the finishing plate 10 which acts as a wall leveling device).
With respect to Claim 5, Patil, Screen and McCabe teach(es) the device of Claim 4.
Patil further disclose(s): wherein an additional guide insert is attached to the guide surface further facilitating a guidance of the wall levelling device (see Annotated Fig. 8(b) above & page 10, lines 5-8).
With respect to Claim 7, Patil, Screen and McCabe teach(es) the device of Claim 1.
Patil further disclose(s): wherein a system comprises at least two devices (Fig. 8(a)), wherein the devices are arranged between the floor and the ceiling (Fig. 8(a)) and page 9, lines 1-3) and in a such a vertical position that both guide surfaces of both devices are levelled vertically forming one vertical virtual plane (Fig. 8(a)) & (b) and page 9, lines 1-3)
With respect to Claim 8, Patil, Screen and McCabe teach(es) the system of Claim 7.
Patil further disclose(s): wherein the system comprises a levelling tool (page 10, lines 5-8; it is understood the tool plate is the finishing plate 10 acts as a leveling tool) arranged between at least two devices bearing on the guide surfaces of the devices so that levelling of the wall may be performed by known building methods and satisfactory levelled wall is obtained (Figs. 8(a) & (b) & page 10, lines 5-8).
With respect to Claim 9, Patil, Screen and McCabe teach(es) the device of Claim 1.
Patil further disclose(s): wherein a method comprises the following steps: providing at least two devices (Fig. 8(a)); arranging each device) in a proximity of a wall (Fig. 8)a) & Abstract) to be levelled and between the floor and the ceiling (Fig. 8(a)) and page 9, lines 1-3); levelling each device vertically by adjustment of the telescopic bar) in relation to the respective feet of the same device (Fig. 8(a) & page 9, lines 5-8), wherein each device is vertically levelled to each other so that vertical plane is formed between the guide surfaces of the devices (Figs. 8(a) & (b) & page 10, lines 5-8); and levelling the wall by operation of the levelling tool (page 10, lines 5-8; it is understood the tool plate is the finishing plate 10 acts as a leveling tool) along the wall to be levelled (Abstract) , wherein the operation of the levelling tool includes its sliding along the guide surfaces of the devices (Abstract).
Claim(s) 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil, Screen and McCabe further in view of Guyard (US 8840087 B2; see reference in its entirety).
As best understood: Regarding Claim(s) 2, Patil, Screen and McCabe disclose(s) the device of Claim 1.
The combination does not specifically disclose: a rack and pinion mechanism, wherein the pinion is rotatably installed in one tube and the rack is fixed to another tube, so that a rotation of the pinion provides interrelated linear movement between the tubes.
However, Guyard teach(es) a device (Fig. 3) including: a rack and pinion mechanism (Fig. 3), wherein the pinion (44) is rotatably installed in one tube (11) and the rack (8) is fixed to another tube (12), so that a rotation of the pinion provides interrelated linear movement between the tubes (Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Patil, Screen and McCabe, with the further teachings of Guyard, for the purpose of controlling displacement of the tubes (col. 1, lines 32-35).
Regarding Claim(s) 6, Patil, Screen and McCabe disclose(s) the device of Claim 1.
The combination does not specifically disclose: wherein one of the tubes has smaller cross section than another one so that one of the tubes can be inserted into another one providing telescopic function, and wherein the tube with the smaller cross section comprises an additional tube at its end portion.
However, Guyard teach(es) a device (Fig. 3) including: wherein one of the tubes (12) has smaller cross section than another one (11) so that one of the tubes can be inserted into another one (Fig. 3) providing telescopic function (Fig. 3), and wherein the tube with the smaller cross section comprises an additional tube at its end portion (col. 4, lines 40-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Patil, Screen and McCabe, with the further teachings of Guyard, for the purpose of providing an extension (col. 4, lines 40-49).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The following reference(s) relate to telescopic devices: Holmbom et al. (US 11933060 B2); Melic (US 8152118 B2); Holmbom et al. (US 11933060 B2); Wang et al. (CN 111927066 B).
The following reference(s) relate to levelling devices: Finch (US 2011/0047895 A1); Reynolds (US 4027802); Molloy (US 4928916); Carbajal (US 9109892 B2); Lang (US 7665252 B2); Yu (CN 106812291A); Song et al. (CN 102182298 A).
The following reference(s) relate to foot bars: Sorensen (US 6637071 B2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANIA COURSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (7am-3:30pm).
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, Kristina Deherrera, can be reached on (303) 297-4237. 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.
/TC/
11 December 2025
/KRISTINA M DEHERRERA/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855