DETAILED ACTION
The Examiner acknowledges Claims 1, 6, 7 and 13 have been amended, Claims 10-12 and 14-20 have been cancelled and Claims 21-30 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the 112 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Let it be known that a “simple connection” is a bolted joint that is non-moment resistant. And a “moment connection” where moment is transferred between members.
Applicant's arguments and amendments with respect to the Prior Art rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive:
The first argument is that Richard never mentions anything about erection of a building. However, claim 1 does not recite erection of a building. 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).
The next argument is that Richard’s disclosed connection is expressly a semi-rigid connection in a structural framework and not providing a simple connection in service. However, Richard discloses a bolted connection (Column 3, Lines 49-50) thus meeting the requirements of the simple connection.
The final argument is toward claims 3 and 4. However, the Examiner’s interpretation of these claims is met by Richard. Transmission of bending moment (Column 4, Line 19) is transmission force in beams and columns (Column 4, Lines 14-15) is delayed because the moment is reduced (Column 4, Lines 45-46) for an initial rotational range (Column 4, Line 18); and a rotational stiffness (Column 4, Line 8) of the connection structure (Column 6, Lines 47-48) is negligible over an initial rotational range because the bolt is only snug thus allowing slip (Column 5, Lines 29-31), then increases after the initial rotational range when it reaches the end of the slot (Column 5, Lines 66-67).
Election/Restrictions
In the reply filed on 07 April 2026, the Applicant elected Figures 8-14. The Examiner finds amended claim 6 and new claims 21-26 and 28 to be directed towards an embodiment of Figures 15-17 and are thus withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Both claims 29 and 30 depend from themselves.
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)(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 1-10, 12-14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent # 8,365,476 to Richard et al.
Regarding claim 1, Richard teaches in Figure 6, a beam (200) (Column 5, Line 16) to column (100) (Column 5, Line 16) connection assembly (Column 3, Line 4) for a building [structure (Column 1, Line 25)], comprising: a column (100) having a first fixture structure (300) [gusset plate (Column 5, Lines 16-17)] on a side face of the column (100), and a beam (200) having a second fixture structure (360) [framing angles (Column 6, Line 25)] on an end portion of the beam (200), wherein the fixture structures (300/360) are engaged [attached (Column 6, Lines 24-25)] forming a connection structure (Column 6, Lines 47-48) joining the column (100) to the beam (200) at a ninety degree angle, and wherein the connection structure (Column 6, Lines 47-48) provides a moment connection (Column 6, Lines 29-32) between the column (100) and the beam (200) when being assembled with additional beams and columns [Figure 1A], and provides a simple connection [bolted (Column 3, Lines 49-50)] between the column (100) and the beam (200) when the building [structure] is fully constructed [Figure 1A].
Regarding claim 2, Richard teaches in Figure 6, the connection structure (Column 6, Lines 47-48) is a flexible moment connection (Column 6, Lines 58-59).
Regarding claim 3, Richard teaches in Figure 6, that transmission [force in beams and columns (Column 4, Lines 14-15)] of bending moment (Column 4, Line 19) between the column (100) and beam (200) is delayed [reducing the moment (Column 4, Lines 45-46)] for an initial rotational range (Column 4, Line 18).
Regarding claim 4, Richard teaches in Figure 6, a rotational stiffness (Column 4, Line 8) of the connection structure (Column 6, Lines 47-48) is negligible over an initial rotational range [the bolt is only snug thus allowing slip (Column 5, Lines 29-31)], then increases [when it reaches the end of the slot (Column 5, Lines 66-67)] after the initial rotational range.
Regarding claim 5, Richard teaches in Figure 2, the beam (200) is an I-beam [see Figure 8] having a web portion (204) (Column 5, Lines 24-25) connecting an upper flange (201) (Column 5, Line 24) to a lower flange (202) (Column 5, Line 24), the connection structure (Column 6, Lines 47-48) transferring shear (Column 3, Line 49) and rotational (Column 4, Lines 6-8) loads through the beam web (204) and at least one of the flanges (201).
Regarding claim 7, Richard teaches in Figure 6, each of the first fixture structure [the framing angle] and the second fixture structure [the gusset plate] has at least one aperture (362) (Column 6, Lines 25-27), the fixture structures [the framing angle and the gusset plate] being coupled via a pin [bolt (Column 6, Line 28)] extending through the apertures (362).
Regarding claim 8, Richard teaches in Figure 6, an elongate axis of the pin through the apertures (362) is oriented horizontally.
Regarding claim 9, Richard teaches in Figure 6, one of the apertures (362) is elongated along an axis parallel to a long axis of the beam (Column 6, Line 50).
Regarding claim 13, Richard teaches in Figure 6, the first fixture structure [the framing angle] includes two angle iron members [framing angle] mounted on the upper flange (201), each of the angle iron members (360) having an aperture (362) for receiving a pin [bolt (Column 6, Line 28)] for locking engagement [tightened to snug (Column 6, Line 29)] between the first fixture structure [the framing angle] and the second fixture structure [the gusset plate].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 27 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The Prior Art does not anticipate or make obvious a beam to column connection assembly that provides a moment connection of KS L /El greater than 2 while being assembled and less than 2 when subjected to service loads.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 ANDREW J TRIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-3657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6am-2pm 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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.
/ANDREW J TRIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
