DETAILED ACTION
This is the Final Office Action for application number 18/576,600 - PREFABRICATED POOL, filed on 1/4/24. Claims 1-6, 9, 11, 13-14, 16-17, 20-23, 28-31 are pending. Claims 7-8, 9 (second nine), 10, 12, 15, 18-19, 24-27 have been canceled.
This Final Office Action is in response to applicant’s reply dated 10/9/25. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Applicant's amendment necessitated any new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
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, one or more starter bars attached to one or more sidewalls via one or more inserts of claims 21 and 31, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
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) 1-6, 9, 11, 13-14, 16-17, 23 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermans et al. (WO 2019/157564) in view of Humphreys (GB 2332014 A).
Regarding Claim 1 Hermans shows a prefabricated pool (10) comprising: a pool shell having one or more sidewalls (110); the pool shell being formed from a settable material (¶ [0013] cementitious material/concrete); and wherein the one or more sidewalls include one or more inserts (150), the one or more inserts being physically held in position by the set settable material (¶ [0043-0045]).
Hermans fails to show wherein a cover is attached to one or more sidewalls via one or more inserts. However, Humphreys shows attaching a cover (7) to one or more sidewalls (at 6) via insert (5; Fig. 1). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans to include attaching a cover to one or more sidewalls via inserts as shown by Humphreys for the purpose of protecting the pool from debris when not in use.
Regarding Claim 2 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1,wherein there is a plurality of inserts (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 3 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 2,wherein the inserts have an attachment portion (threads; ¶ [0043]) and a locking portion (welding; ¶ [0043] once welded prevents rotation of the inserts 150).
Regarding Claim 4 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 3, wherein the attachment portion is in the form of a hole that is internally threaded (Fig. 4, ¶ [0043]).
Regarding Claim 5 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 3, wherein the locking portion prevents rotation of the insert about a longitudinal axis of the insert with respect to the sidewall (welding; ¶ [0043] once welded prevents rotation of the inserts 150).
Regarding Claim 6 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 3, wherein the locking portion includes one or more apertures or projections that engage with the hardened or cured settable material (the welds would be considered projections and engage with the settable material via the re-rod 130).
Regarding Claim 9 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1 wherein a length of one or more inserts may be less than half the wall thickness (Fig. 4; wall thickness encasing the re-rod; insert is attached at the vertical which is on the outside of the horizontal re-rods, therefore the insert is less than half the wall thickness).
Regarding Claim 11 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1,wherein the inserts are located within the sidewall between the reinforcement elements (attached to some; between others 130; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 13 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1, wherein a peripheral edge of a substantially planar sidewall is substantially the same thickness as the sidewall itself (¶ [0020]).
Regarding Claim 14 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1, wherein the pool shell includes a floor (100), the sidewalls being connected to the floor (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 16 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1, wherein the pool shell may include one or more steps (120, 122) or seats (160) that form part of the internal swimming hollow (100), and an external cavity (140) is formed under the steps or seat.
Regarding Claim 17 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 16, wherein one or more of the sidewalls located adjacent a step or seat extend past an end of the step (142; Fig. 5) to define the external cavity.
Regarding Claim 23 Hermans shows a method of producing a prefabricated pool, comprising the steps of: locating one or more inserts (150) within a mould (¶ [0023, 0043]), the locating of the inserts in the mould being where the sidewalls are formed; pouring a settable material into the mould so that the settable material partially surrounds the inserts; and allowing the settable material to set, thereby causing the settable material to physically hold in position the one or more inserts (0023, 0043, 0046]).
Hermans fails to show attaching a cover to one or more sidewalls via one or more inserts. However, Humphreys shows attaching a cover (7) to one or more sidewalls (at 6) via insert (5; Fig. 1). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans to include attaching a cover to one or more sidewalls via inserts as shown by Humphreys for the purpose of protecting the pool from debris when not in use.
Regarding Claim 29 Hermans shows the method of claim 23, further including the step of transporting the pool shell too and installing the pool shell at a desired location away from where the pool shell was moulded (¶ [0025]).
Claim(s) 20, 21, 30 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermans et al. (WO 2019/157564) in view of Humphreys (GB 2332014 A) in view of Sellinger (US 10,478,377).
Regarding Claim 20 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1, but fails to show wherein one more fence posts, fence panels and/or fence brackets are attached to the sidewalls via the one or more inserts. However, Sellinger shows using support brackets (15) for decking (21) which conventionally has railing/fencing; support brackets 15 are capable of being use for attaching fencing (note, col. 5, lines 61-67 and col. 6, lines 0-16). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans to include a support bracket for the purpose of attaching decking and railing/fencing for providing the user a place to sunbathe or entertain next to the pool as shown by Sellinger.
Regarding Claim 21 Hermans shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1, but fails to show wherein one or more starter bars or reinforcement bars are attached to one or more sidewalls via one or more inserts. However, Sellinger shows using support brackets (15); support brackets (15) which are capable of being use for reinforcement bars (note, col. 5, lines 61-67 and col. 6, lines 0-16). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans to include a support bracket for the purpose of attaching poured decking for providing the user a place to sunbathe or entertain next to the pool as shown by Sellinger.
Regarding Claim 30 Hermans shows the method of claim 23, but fails to show including the step of attaching one or more fence posts, fence panels and/or fence brackets to the sidewalls of the pool shell via the one or more inserts. However, Sellinger shows using support brackets (15) for decking (21) which conventionally has railing/fencing; support brackets 15 are capable of being use for attaching fencing (note, col. 5, lines 61-67 and col. 6, lines 0-16). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans to include a support bracket for the purpose of attaching decking and railing/fencing for providing the user a place to sunbathe or entertain next to the pool as shown by Sellinger.
Regarding Claim 31 Hermans shows the method of claim 23, but fails to show including the step of attaching one or more starter bars or reinforcement bars to the sidewalls of the pool shell via one or more inserts. However, Sellinger shows using support brackets (15); support brackets (15) which are capable of being use for reinforcement bars (note, col. 5, lines 61-67 and col. 6, lines 0-16). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans to include a support bracket for the purpose of attaching poured decking for providing the user a place to sunbathe or entertain next to the pool as shown by Sellinger.
Claim(s) 22 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermans et al. (WO 2019/157564) in view of Humphreys (GB 2332014 A) in view of Bouchard et al. (US Pub. 2010/0071816).
Regarding Claim 22 Hermans as combined shows the prefabricated pool of claim 1, and shows a cover is attached to one or more sidewalls via one or more inserts. Humphreys fails to show the cover comprises a skirt extending over the side of the sidewalls. The skirt being attached to the one or more sidewalls via the insert. However, Bouchard shows it is known to provide a cover (12) with a skirt (shown at 20; Fig. 1) and wherein the skirt extends over the sidewalls and is attached to the sidewall via a catch that is attached to the sidewall (Fig. 1). Therefore because Hermans as combined shows attaching a cover via inserts and Bouchard shows a cover with a skirt the skirt attached to the sidewalls via a catch, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans as combined to include attaching a cover to one or more sidewalls via inserts as shown by Bouchard for the purpose of protecting the pool from debris when not in use.
Regarding Claim 28 Hermans as combined shows the method of claim 23, and shows a cover is attached to one or more sidewalls via one or more inserts. Humphreys fails to show the cover comprises a skirt extending over the side of the sidewalls. The skirt being attached to the one or more sidewalls via the insert. However, Bouchard shows it is known to provide a cover (12) with a skirt (shown at 20; Fig. 1) and wherein the skirt extends over the sidewalls and is attached to the sidewall via a catch that is attached to the sidewall (Fig. 1). Therefore because Hermans as combined shows attaching a cover via inserts and Bouchard shows a cover with a skirt the skirt attached to the sidewalls via a catch, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hermans as combined to include attaching a cover to one or more sidewalls via inserts as shown by Bouchard for the purpose of protecting the pool from debris when not in use.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/9/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand the starter bars and that a drawing of the starter bars need not be shown. The Office respectfully disagrees. While it is common to include starter bars or mesh in re-bar concrete reinforcement, in some cases starter reinforcement may not be necessary and may depend on the type of concrete, the load bearing capacity needed and the environmental conditions. In this case, the drawings would indicate the placement of the starter bars and the configuration in relation to the inserts and the sidewalls. The starter bars must be shown as it determines the structure of the inserts in relation to the reinforcement bars and the sidewalls as claimed in claims 21 and 31. Therefore the drawing objection has been maintained.
In response to applicant's argument that Hermans ferrules are intended for processes such as pre-tensioning reinforcing rods prior to concrete pouring, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention 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. The ferrules are capable of performing as inserts after the concrete is poured and therefore meet the claim language.
Applicant further argues the intended use of the Humphreys reference and argues that the ferrules of Hermans are heavy duty and implemented for structural purposes. However, the ferrules are capable of being use as inserts and therefore meet the claim language.
Applicant argues that Humphreys discloses a garden pool molding and that the cover is a rigid mesh and the heavy duty ferrule arrangement of Hermans is very different from the light duty inserts of Humphreys. However, it is to be understood that Humphreys teachings and suggestions of using inserts to attach a cover are being used to modify the Hermans invention and not an actual bodily incorporation. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Applicant argues that Hermans teaches away from the ferrules being used for inserts and they are typically covered after molding and placement. However, Herman goes on in the last line of (¶ [0043]) to include that the ferrules may “be exposed in either the inner surface or outer surface of the plunge pool 10 (with corresponding connection occurring from the inside or outside of the plunge pool 10)”. Hermans details that the ferrules may be exposed or covered and therefore does not teach away from maintaining exposed ferrules after placement. As such the rejection of record has been maintained and meets the claim language in full.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Romano (US Pub. 2015/0337551) shows a prefabricated pool; Desjoyaux et al. (US Pub. 2007/0000190) shows a pool panel connection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE J SKUBINNA whose telephone number is (571)270-5163. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Thursday, 9:30 AM to 6PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, DAVID ANGWIN can be reached on 571-270-3735. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTINE J SKUBINNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754 2/6/2026