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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Elder (US Pat. No. 6,523,776).
Regarding claim 1, Elder discloses A utilities support system configured to support one or more utilities, the utilities support system comprising: a base; one or more caster assemblies extending downwardly from the base; an upright beam extending upwardly from the base; and utilities retainers extending from the upright beam, wherein each of the utilities retainers defines a retaining channel configured to retain one or more portions of the one or more utilities, wherein one or more of the utilities retainers are upwardly angled in relation to the base (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image1.png
569
760
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Elder discloses wherein the one or more caster assemblies comprise: a first caster assembly extending downwardly from a first end of the base; and a second caster assembly extending downwardly from a second end of the base, wherein the first end is opposite from the second end (see fig 1).
Regarding claim 3, Elder discloses further comprising a support bracket extending downwardly from the base (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image2.png
806
852
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Elder discloses further comprising a bracing fin extending from the upright beam opposite from the utilities retainers (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image3.png
806
982
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Elder discloses wherein the bracing fin connects to a support pad secured to the base (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image4.png
806
852
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Elder discloses wherein the utilities retainers comprise: a bed; and a back connected to the bed, wherein the retaining channel is defined, at least in part, between the bed and the back (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image5.png
806
871
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Elder discloses wherein the bed comprises a plurality of parallel extension beams (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image6.png
806
871
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Elder discloses A method for a utilities support system, the utilities support system comprising: a base; one or more caster assemblies extending downwardly from the base; an upright beam extending upwardly from the base; and utilities retainers extending from the upright beam, wherein each of the utilities retainers defines a retaining channel, wherein one or more of the utilities retainers are upwardly angled in relation to the base, the method comprising: retaining one or more portions of one or more utilities within the retaining channel (see discussion of claims above). It is noted that under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. It can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. Moreover, the method is no more than a recitation of the apparatus in a method claim. It has been held that to be entitled to weight in method claims, the recited structure limitations therein must affect the method in a manipulative sense, and not amount to the mere claiming of a use of a particular structure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is allowed.
Claims 7 and 9-19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art when taken alone or in combination does not appear to teach or fairly suggest at this time the combination of limitations of independent claim 21. In particular, the prior art discloses variations of castered carts for supporting utilities (see references cited). However, the prior art does not teach the combination of a utilities support system configured to support one or more utilities, the utilities support system comprising: a base having a first end and a second end opposite from the first end, wherein the base includes one or more mounting channels configured to receive and retain portions of tie rods, which are configured to couple the utilities support system to one or more other utilities support systems; a first caster assembly extending downwardly from the first end of the base; a second caster assembly extending downwardly from the second end of the base; a support bracket extending downwardly from the base between the first caster assembly and the second caster assembly; an upright beam extending upwardly from the base; a bracing fin extending from the upright beam, wherein the bracing fin connects to a support pad secured to the base; and utilities retainers extending from the upright beam opposite from the bracing fin, wherein each of the utilities retainers defines a retaining channel configured to retain one or more portions of the one or more utilities, wherein the utilities retainers are upwardly angled in relation to the base, wherein the utilities retainers comprise: a bed including a plurality of parallel extension beams, wherein the bed is upwardly angled approximately 5 degrees in relation to a longitudinal plane of the base; a curved back connected to the bed, wherein the retaining channel is defined, at least in part, between the bed and the back; a retaining door configured to be selectively moved between a closed position, in which the retaining channel is closed, and an open position, in which the retaining channel is opened, wherein the retaining door is formed of polyoxymethylene; and one or more liners formed of polyoxymethylene, wherein the one or more liners comprise a slot. Regarding claims 7 and 9-19, the prior art does not appear to teach or fairly suggest the utilities support system of claim 6, wherein the back is curved; the utilities support system of claim 6, wherein the bed is upwardly angled; the utilities support system of claim 1, wherein one or more of the utilities retainers comprises a retaining door configured to be selectively moved between a closed position, in which the retaining channel is closed, and an open position, in which the retaining channel is opened; The utilities support system of claim 1, wherein one or more of the utilities retainers comprises one or more liners; The utilities support system of claim 1, wherein the base comprises one or more mounting channels configured to receive and retain portions of tie rods, which are configured to couple the utilities support system to one or more other utilities support systems; The utilities support system of claim 1, further comprising one or more protective covering shrouds extending over one or more portions of the one or more caster assemblies; The utilities support system of claim 1, further comprising end caps that are configured to be selectively secured to and removed from the utilities retainers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB B MEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-3535. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-7.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
JACOB B. MEYER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3613
/JACOB B MEYER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights