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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 4/27/2026. These drawings are accepted.
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 1, 2, and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watts in US Patent 3794054 in view of DE 202015003452 (Activa).
Regarding Claim 1, Watts teaches a hand pushed tent, characterized in that comprising a central lock having a central pole (20/30), an upper nest (26), and a lower nest (37), an upper end of the central pole is connected to the upper nest, and a lower end of the central pole is connected to the lower nest, the central pole is a telescoping pole, the retracted state (Fig. 1) of the central pole corresponds to an open state of the hand pushed tent, and the extended state (Fig. 3) of the central pole corresponds to a folded state of the hand pushed tent, a transition between the retracted and extended state of the central pole being achieved by means of pushing the lower nest to drive the central pole to retract upwards or extend downwards.
Watts is silent on the use of a locking structure. Activa teaches a tent structure including a central pole (6) with upper (1) and lower (4) nests, an upper end of the central pole is connected to the upper nest, and a lower end of the central pole is connected to the lower nest, and a locking structure (see Figs. 3-4) is provided between the central pole and the lower nest, the central pole has a retracted and extended state and the locking structure is used to locate the open state of the tent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Watts by using a locking structure as taught by Activa in order to prevent unwanted collapse of the tent.
Regarding Claim 2, Watts, as modified, teaches that in that the central pole has an upper section (28) and a plurality of telescoping sections (30, 20), wherein the plurality of telescoping sections are sequentially connected and sleeved, an upper end of the upper section is fixed to the upper nest, and an upper end of a topmost section (30) among the plurality of telescoping sections is sleeved within the upper section, and a lower end of a bottommost section (20) among the plurality of telescoping sections is fixed to the lower nest, or, a lower end of the upper section is fixed to the lower nest, and a lower end of a lowest section among the plurality of telescoping sections is sleeved within the upper section, an upper end of a topmost section among the plurality of telescoping sections is fixed to the upper nest; the plurality of telescoping sections are retracted within the upper section when the central rod is in a retracted state (See Fig. 1).
Regarding Claims 4-8, Watts, as modified, teaches that the hand pushed tent further comprising a long bone (17), a short bone (19), and a handle (35/38), the upper nest is connected to an end of the long bone, the long bone is connected to the lower nest through the short bone, the handle having a handle body (35), the lower nest having a central hole (into which 20 protrudes), and the handle body has a shaft hole (through which 20 passes) so that a lower end of the central pole passes through the lower nest and fixed in the shaft hole. Watts, as modified, is silent on the details of the locking mechanism. Activa teaches a handle having a handle body (the lower portion of 4 on which 5 moves) and a sliding sleeve (5), the lower nest having a central hole (through which 8 passes), and the handle body has a shaft hole (through which 6 passes), an upper end of the handle body is sleeved and fixed in the central hole (see Fig. 3), so that a lower end of the central pole passes through the lower nest and the sliding sleeve being slidably sleeved outside the lower end of the handle body; the locking structure further comprising a positioning ring (8.2) provided at the upper part of the central pole and a hook (9) with a hook portion (the top portion), the hook is rotatably mounted (via 10) at the lower end of the handle body, the hook is located inside the sliding sleeve, and when the central pole is in a retracted state, the hook portion of the hook is engaged with the positioning ring (see Fig. 3) to locate the opening state of the hand pushed tent; when the central rod is in an extended state, the hook portion of the hook disengages with the positioning ring (see Fig. 4); disengagement between the hook portion of the hook and the positioning ring are achieved by means of pulling the sliding sleeve downwards to rotate the hook, characterized in that a protrusion (5.1) is provided at an inner wall of the sliding sleeve, and the hook having a driving portion (9.2) and a connecting portion (9), the hook portion and the driving portion are connected through the connecting portion (see Fig. 5), and the connecting portion is rotatably mounted (via 10) at the lower end of the handle body through a rotary shaft (10), the protrusion is in contact with the driving portion of the hook, and the protrusion will press the driving portion of the hook to drive the hook portion of the hook to rotate around the rotary shaft when the sliding sleeve is pulled downwards (see Fig. 4), so that achieving the transition from engagement to disengagement between the hook part of the hook and the positioning ring, characterized in that the locking structure comprising an elastic member (11), one end of which is connected to the hook portion of the hook, and the other end of the elastic member is connected to the handle body for automatic resetting of the hook, characterized in that the driving portion of the hook deflects towards the protrusion having a inclined lower surface (9.3, 9.4) provided a space for the deflection of the driving portion of the hook, characterized in that the positioning ring having a conical lower portion (8.2), the hook portion having an inclined top (the top surface of 9.1) surface matched with the conical lower portion of the positioning ring (see Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Watts, as modified, by using the locking mechanism taught by Activa in order to securely lock the tent in the opened position.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watts, as modified, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hogan et al. in US Patent 4441518. Watts, as modified, is silent on the material used for the central pole. Hogan teaches a tent structure with a central pole (24) that is a fiberglass pole (see Column 4, lines 3-4) or a carbon fiber pole. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the central pole of Watts, as modified, by using a fiberglass pole as taught by Hogan in order to provide a durable and lightweight pole.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the addition of a locking mechanism to the Watts device would better secure the tent in the open position.
With respect to the applicant’s argument that there is no good place to position the locking mechanism on the Watts device: the locking device of Activa could be added to the lower nest of Watts (to correspond to the lower nest of Activa) and to the central pole of Watts (to correspond to the central pole of Activa).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., that “all operations performed from inside the tent” or the fact that the tent has structure which defines an inside or outside of the tent) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm.
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 5712726670. 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.
NOAH C. HAWK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/Noah Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights