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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 51-93 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/20/2026.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,692,572. Although the claims are not identical, each feature recited in claims 21-50 of the instant application are met by the combination of claims in the granted patent.
Claims 21-50 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,692,573. Although the claims are not identical, each feature recited in claims 21-50 of the instant application are met by the combination of claims in the granted patent.
Claims 21-50 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,959,512. Although the claims are not identical, each feature recited in claims 21-50 of the instant application are met by the combination of claims in the granted patent.
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) 21-40, 46-48, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US Patent Publication 20160215513) in view of Liu (US Patent 20160222686 herein after Liu ‘868).
Regarding Claim 21, Liu shows an above ground pool, comprising a first frame member (111) including a first opening (near 5); a second frame member (111) including a second opening (near 5); a vertical frame member (2); a frame joint (4) comprising: a first joint portion (see annotated figure below) including a first base (see annotated figure below) located entirely within a first outer wall of the first joint portion, a first pin (5) movable relative to the first base, the first pin configured to engage the first opening thereby coupling the first joint portion to the first frame member (Fig.6); a second joint portion (see annotated figure below) including a second base (see annotated figure below) located entirely within a second outer wall (see annotate figure below) of the second joint portion, a second pin (5) movable relative to the second base, the second pin configured to engage the second opening thereby coupling the second joint portion to the second frame member; and a vertical joint portion (see annotated figure below) connected to the first and second joint portions and configured to couple to the vertical frame member; and a liner (B) positioned around the first and second frame members (fig.7); Liu fails to show a perimeter of the first joint portion is shaped to resist rotation between the first joint portion and the first frame member. Liu ‘868 teaches a pool that includes a perimeter of the first joint portion is shaped to resist rotation between the first joint portion and the first frame member (paragraph 11). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include joint portion that is rotation resistant in order to ensure installation was easier.
PNG
media_image1.png
748
984
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 22-27, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, but ails to show the perimeters being elliptical. Liu ‘868 teaches a pool wherein the perimeter of the first joint portion is substantially elliptical (paragraph 11). The perimeter of the first joint portion has a continuous slope (paragraph 11). A perimeter of the second joint portion is shaped to resist rotation between the second joint portion and the second frame member (paragraph 11). The perimeter of the second joint portion is substantially elliptical (paragraph 11). The perimeter of the second joint portion has a continuous slope (paragraph 11). A perimeter of the vertical joint portion is shaped to resist rotation between the vertical joint portion and the vertical frame member (paragraph 11). ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include joint portion that is rotation resistant in order to ensure installation was easier.
Regarding Claim 28, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein the first joint portion and the second joint portion are substantially collinear with each other (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 29, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein the first joint portion and the second joint portion are substantially perpendicular to each other (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 30, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein the first joint portion and the second joint portion form an obtuse angle in a horizontal plane (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 31-32, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, but is silent as to the width of the frame joint and the distance between the first and second pin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have included an appropriate distance between the first and second pin order to ensure the device was able to support the joint portions.
Regarding Claim 33, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein the first joint portion has a first outer end and the vertical joint portion has an outer surface, a first horizontal distance between the outer surface of the vertical joint portion and the first pin being less than a second horizontal distance between the first outer end of the first joint portion and the first pin (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
530
700
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 34, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 33, wherein the second joint portion has a second outer end, a third horizontal distance between the outer surface of the vertical joint portion and the second pin being less than a fourth horizontal distance between the second outer end of the second joint portion and the second pin (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
530
700
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 35, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, but fails to show a joint portion including a spring. Liu ‘868 teaches the first joint portion further includes a first spring (151), the first spring and the first pin (152) both being received within a vertical guide (121) of the first base, the first pin being biased outward through a first hole in the first outer wall of the first joint portion and the first opening of the first frame member to couple the first frame member and the first joint portion together (Fig.5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a spring in order to ensure the vertical support is attached to the joint portion.
Regarding Claim 36, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 35, wherein the vertical guide restricts a translational movement of the first pin along a vertical direction (Fig.6).
Regarding Claim 37, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 35, wherein the vertical guide includes a first locator which locates a first end of the first spring (6) and the first pin includes a second locator which locates a second end of the first spring.
Regarding Claim 38, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 37, wherein the first locator is received within the first spring, and the second locator receives the first spring (fig.6).
Regarding Claim 39, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 37, wherein the first spring is a helical spring (5) having an inner diameter and an outer diameter (Fig.6), the first locator being sized to fit within the inner diameter of the first spring (Fig.6), and the second locator being sized to receive the outer diameter of the first spring.
Regarding Claim 40, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 37, wherein the first pin (5) includes a shoulder (top portion) which cooperates with the first outer wall of the first joint portion to limit a maximum separation distance between the first pin and the first locator of the first base (Fig.6).
Regarding Claim 46, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein the perimeter of the first joint portion is a perimeter of the first outer wall of the first joint portion (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 47, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein the perimeter of the first joint portion is an outer perimeter of the first outer wall of the first joint portion (see annotated figure above).
Regarding Claim 48, Liu shows the above ground pool of claim 21, wherein a shape of an inner perimeter of the first outer wall of the first joint portion matches a shape of an outer perimeter of the first outer wall of the first joint portion (see annotated figure below).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 41-45, 49, 50 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN ASHLEY CRANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5198. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays & Tuesdays 8 am - 4pm.
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 Angwin can be reached at 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 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.
/LAUREN A CRANE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights