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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
Claim 5: “at least one engagement seat is carried on the support frame by fixing means”.
Claim 15: “said support base being retracted or internal with respect to the horizontal cantilevered position”.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 15 recites the limitation, “said support base being retracted or internal with respect to the horizontal cantilevered portion”, it is unclear which portion of this structure is being retracted or is internal, and the instant application fails to provide any additional details to support the structural limitations claimed.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: “said support base being retracted or internal with respect to the horizontal cantilevered portion”, it is unclear which portion of this structure is being retracted or is internal, and the instant application fails to provide any additional details to support the structural limitations claimed.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-7, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Armond (US 20240108145 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Armond teaches a furnishing composition comprising: a plurality of furnishing modules (elements 15) which are modular (abstract) according to a variable configuration (Figures 1-3), wherein each of said furnishing modules is provided with a support frame (abstract) having a support base (elements 20) and at least one engagement seat (elements 25), directed along a vertical axis (inasmuch as applicant has claimed), perpendicular to a support plane (elements 30) of the furnishing composition, at least one connecting rod (elements 35 and 50) comprising an arm (element 37) ending, at opposite ends, with a pair of fixing pins (elements 39) projecting perpendicularly to said arm (Figure 3), said fixing pins being at least partially counter-shaped with respect to said engagement seats so as to be able to be engaged in said engagement seats according to a shape coupling (Figure 3 inasmuch as applicant has claimed), and wherein the fixing pins of said at least one connecting rod are engaged in respective engagement seats of two furnishing modules adjacent to each other (Figure 3).
Regarding claim 2, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said at least one engagement seat and said fixing pins are axial-symmetric with respect to an axis of axial-symmetry parallel to said vertical axis (inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 3, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said at least one engagement seat and said fixing pins are cylindrical or conical (Figure 3).
Regarding claim 4, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said at least one engagement seat is integral with the support frame (Figure 1 inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 5, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said at least one engagement seat is carried on the support frame by fixing means (Figures 1-9 inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 6, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said engagement seats are open downwards, i.e., facing the support surface plane of the furnishing composition (Figures 1-9 may be rotated 360 degrees to satisfy the limitation inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 7, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein the fixing pins are facing upwards, on a side opposite the support plane of the furnishing composition (Figures 1-9 may be rotated 360 degrees to satisfy the limitation inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 12, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said at least one engagement seat is through with respect to the support frame (Figure 3 inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 13, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein said fixing pins are shaped so that, in an assembly configuration on the engagement seats, the fixinq pins completely cross the engagement seats and protrude from an upper part of the engagement seats, opposite the support plane of the furnishing composition (Figures 1-9 may be rotated 360 degrees to satisfy the limitation inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 14, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein the support frame of each furnishing module is provided with a plurality of engagement seats arranged peripherally with respect to the same support frame (as depicted in Figures 1-9).
Regarding claim 15, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein the support frame is provided with the support base (as discussed in response to claim 1), directed in a vertical direction (Figures 1-9), and a horizontal cantilevered portion that supports said at least one engagement seat (any of the sides of the base in Armond satisfy this limitation), said support base being retracted or internal with respect to the horizontal cantilevered portion (side portions of Armond’s base satisfy this limitation as best understood by Examiner).
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) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armond (US 20240108145 A1) in view of Hensel (US Patent No. 3129472).
Regarding claim 8, Armond teaches the invention in claim 1, wherein in each connecting rod, at least one of said fixing pins but fails to specifically teach wherein the fixing pins are provided with bayonet attachment, arranged in diametrically opposite positions to each other, and wherein at least one of said engagement seats is provided with radial gaps, diametrically opposite each other, shaped so as to create a mechanical connection with said bayonet attachments. However, use of bayonet fixtures to connect articles of furniture is well known in the art as is evidenced by Figures 1-19 and Col. 1, line 1- Col. 2 line 17 of Hensel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the fixing pins of Armond with the bayonet fixtures and gaps found in Hensel, in order to provide a simple and convenient detachable annular engagement mechanism (as taught by Hensel).
Regarding claim 9, Armond in view of Hensel teaches the invention in claim 8, wherein, in an assembly configuration, the radial gaps are misaligned with respect to the bayonet attachments (as depicted in Figures 1-19 of Hensel inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Regarding claim 10, Armond in view of Hensel teaches the invention in claim 8, wherein a connection between two adjacent furnishing modules occurs by interposing two connecting rods, each having a fixing pin provided with bayonet attachments (as depicted in Figures 1-9 of Armond), inserted in the respective engagement seat (Figures 1-9 of Armond), in turn provided with radial gaps, by virtue of an opposite clockwise/counter-clockwise movement which brings said two connecting rods in a position substantially orthogonal to a coupling side of the same two furnishing modules (Figures 7-11 and Col. 1, line 1- Col. 2 line 17 of Hensel as discussed in the response to claim 8).
Regarding claim 11, Armond in view of Hensel teaches the invention in claim 8, wherein the bayonet attachments of said fixing pins are aligned and symmetrical along joining centres of the fixing pins of the connecting rod (Figure 3 of Armond inasmuch as applicant has claimed).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is 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 JUSTIN MICHAEL HESTON whose telephone number is (571)272-3099. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday: 0500-1400, Thursday-Friday by appointment only.
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, Timothy D Collins can be reached at 571-272-6886. 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.
/JUSTIN MICHAEL HESTON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3644