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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-3 and 5-29 are pending and have been examined in this application.
Claims 1, 3, 5 are currently amended; claims 2, 6-29 are original; claim 4 is canceled.
Claims 1-3 and 5-29 are rejected herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of the date of this action, no information disclosure statement has been filed on behalf of this case.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3 and 5-29 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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 pre-AIA 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Richards (U.S. Pat. No. 11744392 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Richards teaches a foldable support device, comprising:
a support base (110) provided with a hinged portion (portion of 131) and a mounting portion (central portion of 110) configured to mount an object to be supported;
wherein the support base has a receiving cylinder (120), and a side wall of the receiving cylinder is provided with a first limit hole (hole receiving 121), the first limit hole extending in a direction parallel to an axial direction of the receiving cylinder (horizontal or vertical axial direction);
a support leg assembly (140) hinged to the hinged portion; and
a first locking mechanism (130) movably provided on the support base, wherein the first locking mechanism has a locked state and an unlocked state, the first locking mechanism is capable of locking the support leg assembly in a folded state when the first locking mechanism is in the locked state, the first locking mechanism is capable of releasing the locking of the support leg assembly in the folded state when the first locking mechanism is in the unlocked state, and the first locking mechanism is capable of being switched between the locked state and the unlocked state.
Regarding claim 2, Richards teaches the first locking mechanism comprises:
an engaging seat (seat defined by 121) having a first position (assembled configuration) and a second position (unassembled configuration) and being operable to be switched between the first position and the second position; and
an engaging pin (142) provided in the engaging seat, wherein the engaging pin is engaged with the support leg assembly when the engaging seat is in the first position, and the engaging pin is disengaged from the support leg assembly when the engaging seat is in the second position.
Regarding claim 24, Richards the hinged portion comprises two lugs (131) arranged in parallel with each other, the two lugs enclose to form a snap-in slot (132), and an end of the support leg assembly is inserted in the snap-in slot and hinged to the two lugs.
Regarding claim 27, Richards teaches wherein when the first locking mechanism (110, 160) is in the unlocked state (not in any slot or aperture), the support leg assembly is rotated to the unlocked state by its own gravity [capable when not engaged with 132].
Regarding claim 28, Richards teaches there are at least two support leg assemblies (140), the support base (110) has at least two hinged portions (portion of 131), and the at least two support leg assemblies are hinged to the at least two hinged portions respectively.
Regarding claim 29, Richards teaches an artificial tree (Abstract) comprising a tree body and the support device according to claim 1, the tree body (10) being mounted on the mounting portion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-15, 18-23 and 25-26 are 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.
Claim 16-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD IJAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am-10:00 pm.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728227. 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.
MUHAMMAD IJAZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3631
/Muhammad Ijaz/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631