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 § 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.
Claim 41 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.
Regarding claim 41, it is unclear how the release member is positioned intermediate the anchor and the enclosing member when the release member and the enclosing member comprise the anchor. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 37, 41-45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jang Woo Seog, Korean Patent Document KR20150122426.
Regarding claim 37, Seog discloses a coupling assembly comprising: an anchor (see Fig. 3) comprising: at least one jaw (10) having an internal jaw side and an external taper (as shown), the internal jaw side configured to interfere with movement of the coupleable member relative to the anchor; and a body (20) with an internal taper (21) complementary to, and abutting against, the external taper (see Fig. 3); and an enclosing member (50, 60), the enclosing member at least partly surrounding the anchor (as shown in Fig. 3) and having at least one opening (in which 20 sits) to allow passage of the coupleable member to the anchor inside the enclosing member; and a release member (63) movable relative to the body between an armed position and a release position; wherein the coupling assembly is configured so that, when the release member is in the armed position, the at least one jaw is configured to engage the coupleable member and the body and thereby prevent separation of the coupleable member from the anchor (see Fig. 5), and, when the release member is actuated to move to the release position, the release member forces the at least one jaw to disengage the body (see Fig. 5, generally); and wherein the enclosing member comprises at least one opening through which a tool is insertable to urge the release member towards the release position (see Fig. 5, opening through which tool 35 is inserted). The phrases “configured to interfere with movement of the coupleable member relative to the anchor,” “to allow passage of the coupleable member to the anchor inside the enclosing member,” “configured so that, when the release member is in the armed position, the at least one jaw is configured to engage the coupleable member and the body and thereby prevent separation of the coupleable member from the anchor, and, when the release member is actuated to move to the release position, the release member forces the at least one jaw to disengage the body,” and “through which a tool is insertable to urge the release member towards the release position” are statements of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 41, Seog discloses a coupling assembly wherein the release member is located intermediate the enclosing member and the anchor (see Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 42, Seog discloses a coupling assembly wherein the release member is located between a cap of the enclosing member (see Fig. 5; portion of the enclosing member 60 located beneath 63) and the at least one jaw (see Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 43, Seog discloses a coupling assembly comprising a bias member (70) configured to pre-engage the anchor by biasing the external taper of the at least one jaw and the internal taper of the body together. The phrase “configured to pre-engage the anchor by biasing the external taper of the at least one jaw and the internal taper of the body together” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 44, Seog discloses a coupling assembly comprising: the coupling assembly as claimed in claim 37; and a coupleable member (43) locatable within, and coupleable to, the coupling assembly.
Regarding claim 45, Seog discloses a coupling assembly wherein the couplable member is a lifting device (when removed or “lifted”).
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.
Claim(s) 47-52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seog, Korean Patent Document KR20150122426 in view of ZHOU ZHAODI, Chinese Publication CN112726584.
Regarding claim 47, Seog discloses a coupling assembly comprising: at least a building structure (paragraph 2); at least one coupling assembly as claimed in claim 37; and at least one coupleable member (43), the at least one coupleable member comprising a first coupleable member having first and second ends (the top and bottom as shown in Fig. 5, respectively), but does not disclose the structure is at least one a column, the at least one column comprising a first column, the first end of the first coupleable member coupleable with the first column and the second end of the first coupleable member coupleable with the at least one coupling assembly. Zhaodi teaches a column (200). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the assembly in a prestressed column structure an effective holding means. Once assembled, all portions of the coupleable member will be coupled to the column as well as the coupling assembly either directly or via intermittent component(s).
Regarding claim 48, the prior art as modified discloses a coupling assembly but does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one coupling assembly is connected to a base plate secured to a substrate. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the concrete column would be connected to a base plate secured to a foundation, as it is notoriously well known in the art for concrete structures.
Regarding claim 49, the prior art as modified discloses a coupling system but does not specifically disclose a bearing plate fastened to an end of the first column. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the concrete column would be connected to a [bearing] plate secured to a foundation, as it is notoriously well known in the art for concrete structures.
Regarding claim 50, the prior art as modified discloses a coupling system wherein the coupling assembly is attached to the bearing plate (once the components are assembled they will all be attached to one another).
Regarding claim 51, the prior art as modified discloses a coupling assembly wherein the coupling assembly is at least partly located inside the first column (see Zhaodi Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 52, the prior art as modified discloses a coupling assembly wherein the coupling assembly is located entirely or at least almost entirely inside the first column (see Zhaodi Fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 38-40, 46, 53-57 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 closest prior art of record fails to disclose or make obvious a coupling assembly having two openings as claimed, a tine insertable through one of the openings as claimed, nor the release member capable of performing in the manner as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GISELE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)270-7326. The examiner can normally be reached M-T,Th-F 7:30am-4:30pm.
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, 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.
GISELE D. FORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/GISELE D FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3633