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 .
This is the first Office Action for the serial number 18/593,269, MODULAR FLOOR STAND SYSTEM, filed on 11/03/25.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group I and species I in the reply filed on 11/3/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all of groups and species should be grouped together since they don’t pose a serious burden on examiner. This is not found persuasive because there are plurality of different inventions/designs in this application which puts a serious burden on examiner to search outside of his art unit.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-8 and 14 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, line 2, “the modular floor system comprising one or more modular floor bases, each modular floor base comprising:” is indefinite because in the beginning of claim 1, line 2, states “one or more” and then later cites “each” which is confusing because it is not clear if the applicant intends to claim more than 1 modular floor base.
Claim 7, lines 3-6, “selecting” and “adjusting” are indefinite because they are considered as a method format.
Claim 14, lines 3-6, “selecting” and “adjusting” are indefinite because they are considered as a method format.
Claims 2-8 are rejected as depending on rejected claim 1.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication # 2020/0163248 to Chen.
Chen teaches a modular floor system comprising modular floor base (figure 22). The modular floor base comprising a base plate (8), framing member including vertical framing member (1) coupled to the base plate and the framing member includes a horizontal framing member (3) coupled to the vertical framing member and a sidewall plate (6) coupled to the framing member to from a cavity defined by one surface of the sidewall plate and the base plate. The cavity is configured to support piece of equipment (section 0001) on the horizontal framing member. The modular floor base comprises mounting feet (51). The sidewall plate includes perforation. The sidewall plate includes a cable opening. The mounting feet includes threaded fastener and nut. The height of the modular floor is adjusted by moving along in vertical position on the shaft of threaded fastener and adjusting the height of the nut on the shaft in selected vertical position.
PNG
media_image1.png
689
1037
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
686
845
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of US Patent # 12,532,433 to Archibald et al.
Chen teaches the modular floor system is installable on a subfloor of a data center (0002) but fails to teach the height of the modular floor base is adjusted based on a height of a raised floor on the subfloor of the data center. Archibald et al. teaches the height of raised floor on the subfloor of the data center is adjustable (column 7, lines 19-21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Chen’s modular floor base on the raised floor on the subfloor of the data center as taught by Archibald et al. to “enhance cooling by providing for air circulation beneath the cabinets”(column 7, lines 19-21 in Archibald et al.’s invention).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen.
Chen teaches the base plate but fails to teach the base plate includes perforation however in figures 59 and 62 which are a different embodiment showing perforation (89). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added perforation in Chen’s base plate from figure 22 to provide accommodation for the cable to route therein (section 0144).
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of US Patent # 6,443,542 to Lindquist et al.
Chen teaches a modular floor system comprising modular floor base (figure 22). The modular floor base comprising a base plate (8), framing member including vertical framing member (1) coupled to the base plate and the framing member includes a horizontal framing member (3) coupled to the vertical framing member and a sidewall plate (6) coupled to the framing member to from a cavity defined by one surface of the sidewall plate and the base plate. The cavity is configured to support piece of equipment (section 0001) on the horizontal framing member. The modular floor base comprises mounting feet (51). The sidewall plate includes perforation. The sidewall plate includes a cable opening. The mounting feet includes threaded fastener and nut. The height of the modular floor is adjusted by moving along in vertical position on the shaft of threaded fastener and adjusting the height of the nut on the shaft in selected vertical position.
Chen teaches the first and second modular floor bases being coupled together (see figure 23) but fails to teach each of modular floor bases comprising mounting hole for receiving bolt. Lindquist et al. teaches the first and second modular floor bases (A and B) comprising mounting hole (134a and 59a) for receiving bolt (142). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the mounting hole and bolt in Chen’s modular floor bases as taught by Lindquist et al. to provide security for connecting the two modular floor bases together.
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches the base plate but fails to teach the base plate includes perforation however in figures 59 and 62 which are a different embodiment showing perforation (89). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added perforation in Chen’s base plate from figure 22 to provide accommodation for the cable to route therein (section 0144).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED J WUJCIAK whose telephone number is (571)272-6827. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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 David Dunn can be reached at 571 272-6670. 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.
ALFRED J. WUJCIAK
Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/ALFRED J WUJCIAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636 1/22/2026