DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on February 12, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on February 12, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rooney (US 2014/0245660).
As to claim 1, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device comprising:
a body 30; and
a first removable area 34 attached to the body via a first perforation 28 (Figures 1-2).
As to claim 2, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the removable area 34 is comprised of a square shape (Figures 1-2; paragraph [0012]).
As to claim 3, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the removable area 34 is comprised of a circular shape (Figures 1-2).
As to claim 6, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device comprised of a second removable area 34 (Figures 1-2).
As to claim 7, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the second removable area 34 is attached to the body 30 (Figures 1-2).
As to claim 8, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the second removable area 34 is aligned and a distance away from the first removable area 34 (Figures 1-2).
As to claim 9, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the second removable area 34 attaches to the body 30 via a second perforation 28 (Figures 1-2).
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.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rooney.
As to claims 4 and 5, Rooney fails to disclose a post-hole stencil device wherein the body is comprised of a transparent 3-ply plastic material. Rooney does not disclose any structural or functional significance as to the specific material of the body; other than that it is bendable (paragraph [0010]).
Applicant is reminded that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use, wherein there is no structural or functional significance disclosed as to the specific material of an element, is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Rooney wherein the body is comprised of a transparent 3-ply plastic material, as Rooney does not disclose any structural or functional significance as to the specific material of the body; other than that it is bendable, and as such selection of material is a design consideration within the skill of the art which would yield expected and predictable results.
Claims 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rooney in view of Raab (US 9,719,273).
As to claim 10-14, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device comprising:
a body 30;
a first removable area 34 attached to the body via a first perforation 28;
wherein the first removable area is comprised of either a square shape or a circular shape; and
a stake 37 (Figures 1-2; paragraph [0012]).
Rooney discloses a device wherein the first removable area is either a square shape or a circular shape; instead of comprising a second removable area positioned within the first removable area and attached to the first removable area via a second perforation, and wherein the second removable area is comprised of the other of the square shape or the circular shape of the first removable area.
Raab teaches a device comprising a first removable area 104C,104D attached to a body via a first perforation and comprised of a square shape or a circular shape; and a second removable area 104B positioned within the first removable area and attached to the first removable area via a second perforation, and wherein the second removable area is comprised of a circular shape; the concentric first and second removable areas enabling the device to be utilized with fence posts of different diameters and different cross-sectional shapes, providing for greater utility of the device (Figures 11-12; C11 L50-54). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Rooney to comprise a second removable area positioned within the first removable area and comprising the other of the square shape or the circular shape of the first removable area, as taught by Raab, in order to enable the device to be utilized with fence posts of different diameters and different cross-sectional shapes, providing for greater utility of the device.
As to claim 15, Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the ground stake 37 is comprised of a pointed ground stake (Figures 1-2).
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sentz (US 7,591,081) in view of Rooney.
As to claims 1-3, Sentz discloses a post-hole stencil device comprising:
a body 300; and
a first slit 304 (Figures 1-3).
Sentz discloses a device comprising a slit; instead of a removable area attached to the body via a first perforation, wherein the removable area is comprised of a square shape or a circular shape.
Rooney teaches a device comprising a removable area 34 attached to a body 30 via a first perforation 28, wherein the removable area is comprised of a square shape or a circular shape; the perforated removable area shaped to correspond to a fence post, providing for easier insertion of the fence post therethrough (Figures 1-2; paragraph [0012]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Sentz to comprise perforated removable areas shaped to correspond to fence posts, as taught by Rooney, in order to provide for easier insertion of the fence post therethrough.
As to claims 4 and 5, Sentz fails to disclose a post-hole stencil device wherein the body is comprised of a transparent 3-ply plastic material. Sentz does not disclose any structural or functional significance as to the specific material of the body.
Applicant is reminded that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use, wherein there is no structural or functional significance disclosed as to the specific material of an element, is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Sentz wherein the body is comprised of a transparent 3-ply plastic material, as Sentz does not disclose any structural or functional significance as to the specific material of the body, and as such selection of material is a design consideration within the skill of the art which would yield expected and predictable results.
As to claim 6, Sentz as modified by Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device comprised of a second removable area (304 Sentz Figure 2; 34 Rooney Figure 1).
As to claim 7, Sentz as modified by Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the second removable area (304 Sentz Figure 2; 34 Rooney Figure 1) is attached to the body 300 (Figures 1-3).
As to claim 8, Sentz as modified by Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the second removable area (304 Sentz Figure 2; 34 Rooney Figure 1) is aligned and a distance away from the first removable area (304 Sentz Figure 2; 34 Rooney Figure 1).
As to claim 9, Sentz as modified by Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the second removable area(304 Sentz Figure 2; 34 Rooney Figure 1) attaches to the body 300 via a second perforation (28 Rooney Figure 1).
Claims 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sentz in view of Rooney and Raab.
As to claims 10-14, Sentz discloses a post-hole stencil device comprising:
a body 300; and
a first slit 304 (Figures 1-3).
Sentz fails to disclose a device comprising a stake.
Rooney disclose a device comprising a stake 37; the stake securely retaining body 30 in place prior to mounting of fence posts 14, providing for easier assembly (Figures 1-2). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Sentz to comprise a stake, as taught by Rooney, in order to securely retain the body in place prior to mounting of the fence posts, providing for easier assembly.
Sentz discloses a device comprising a slit; instead of a removable area attached to the body via a first perforation, wherein the removable area is comprised of a square shape or a circular shape.
Rooney teaches a device comprising a removable area 34 attached to a body 30 via a first perforation 28, wherein the removable area is comprised of a square shape or a circular shape; the perforated removable area shaped to correspond to a fence post, providing for easier insertion of the fence post therethrough (Figures 1-2; paragraph [0012]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Sentz to comprise perforated removable areas shaped to correspond to fence posts, as taught by Rooney, in order to provide for easier insertion of the fence post therethrough.
Sentz as modified by Rooney discloses a device wherein the first removable area is either a square shape or a circular shape; instead of comprising a second removable area positioned within the first removable area and attached to the first removable area via a second perforation, and wherein the second removable area is comprised of the other of the square shape or the circular shape of the first removable area.
Raab teaches a device comprising a first removable area 104C,104D attached to a body via a first perforation and comprised of a square shape or a circular shape; and a second removable area 104B positioned within the first removable area and attached to the first removable area via a second perforation, and wherein the second removable area is comprised of a circular shape; the concentric first and second removable areas enabling the device to be utilized with fence posts of different diameters and different cross-sectional shapes, providing for greater utility of the device (Figures 11-12; C11 L50-54). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Sentz as modified by Rooney to comprise a second removable area positioned within the first removable area and comprising the other of the square shape or the circular shape of the first removable area, as taught by Raab, in order to enable the device to be utilized with fence posts of different diameters and different cross-sectional shapes, providing for greater utility of the device.
As to claim 15, Sentz as modified by Rooney discloses a post-hole stencil device wherein the ground stake (37 Rooney Figure 1) is comprised of a pointed ground stake (Figures 1-3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (10:00 am-7:00 pm EST).
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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571)270-5788. 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.
02/26/26
/MICHAEL P FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619