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) because they fail to show “wherein said second edge connective structure comprises a recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end, and said upright projection comprises a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion” as described in the specification. Both the specification and the drawing is silent on any mention of “a recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end”. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation of claim 1 appears to lack written description support for the following limitation:
“wherein said second edge connective structure comprises a recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end,
and said upright projection comprises a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion”
A review of the specification paragraph 15-17 appears to lack support for “wherein said second edge connective structure comprises a recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end” as the specification fails to provide any description of having recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end.
Additionally, the specification paragraph 15-17 appears to lack any description of an upright projection with “a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion”. A review of paragraph 15-17 only provides a teaching of the benefit of the upright projection for (1) positively connected to each other and are not simply abutting against each other, and (2) the mating connection of upright projection 20 received in the crevice 22 allows for relative vertical motion between the adjoining walls. It is silent on the description of an upright projection with “a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warmisnky US 20090282749 and in view of Hannig WO 2012101171
Claim 1: The Warminsky reference provides a teaching of a training system comprising (see abstract);
shoot house walls connected to each other (see paragraph 30 wall panel being connected together3393), each of said walls being constructed of a ballistic penetration-resistant material (see paragraph 25 “the walls in each modular unit 150 include armored panels and/or armored ballistic panels to maintain the integrity of the walls when rounds are shot in the modular unit 150 “), and each of said walls comprising front and back surfaces extending from first and second edge connective structures (see paragraph 36).
The Warminsky reference is silent on the teaching of
wherein said second edge connective structures comprises an upright projection received in a crevice located in said first edge connective structure that allows for relative vertical motion between adjoining ones of said walls,
wherein said second edge connective structure comprises a recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end,
and said upright projection comprises a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion,
and said horizontal portion of said upright projection is positioned at a ground-touching bottom surface of said second edge connective structure and
said crevice has an open end that extends to a ground-touching bottom surface of said first edge connective structure.
However, the Hannig reference provides a teaching of wherein said second edge connective structures (see FIG. 5A item 22 second edge connective structure) comprises an upright projection (see FIG. 5A item 18a) received in a crevice located in said first edge connective structure (see FIG. 5A item 23 for the first edge connective structure and FIG. 5A item 16a for the crevice that is located in said first edge connective structure) that allows for relative vertical motion between adjoining ones of said walls (the examiner notes that the open nature of the crevice 16 and upright projection 18a will allow for relative vertical motion between adjoining ones of said walls)
wherein said second edge connective structure comprises a recess having an open end (see FIG. 5A item 22 as the second edge connective structure having a recess having an open end and see FIG. 5A the recess between numeral 20 and 18b) that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end(see FIG. 5A interaction between the edge 14 and recess 11 )
and said upright projection comprises a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion (see FIG. 5A item 18A and opening 16a and 16b )
and said horizontal portion of said upright projection is positioned at a ground-touching bottom surface of said second edge connective structure (see FIG. 5A item 18a is positioned from the ground-touching surface of said second edge structure)) and
said crevice has an open end that extends to a ground-touching bottom surface of said first edge connective structure (see FIG. 5A item 16a the crevices extend the entire length of the connective structure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Warminsky reference with the feature of:
wherein said second edge connective structures comprises an upright projection received in a crevice located in said first edge connective structure that allows for relative vertical motion between adjoining ones of said walls,
wherein said second edge connective structure comprises a recess having an open end that is horizontally open outwards from an outer edge of said second edge connective structure and having a closed end horizontally opposite to said open end,
and said upright projection comprises a horizontal portion extending horizontally outwards from said closed end of said recess and a vertical portion that extends upright from said horizontal portion,
and said horizontal portion of said upright projection is positioned at a ground-touching bottom surface of said second edge connective structure and
said crevice has an open end that extends to a ground-touching bottom surface of said first edge connective structure; as taught by the Hannig reference, in order provide a secure mating structure between two wall panels.
Claim 2: The Warminsky reference is silent on the teaching of wherein said first and second edge connective structures comprise mating male and female connective structures.
However, the Hannig reference provide a teaching of wherein said first and second edge connective structures comprise mating male and female connective structures (see FIG 5A item 13 and 11 are connective structures with multiple male and female connective structure e.g.: item 10 and 13 and 18 and 16a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Warminsky reference with the feature of wherein said first and second edge connective structures comprise mating male and female connective structures, as taught by the Hannig reference, in order provide a secure mating structure between two wall panels.
Claim 3: The Warminsky reference is silent on the teaching of wherein said first edge connective structure comprises two edge members that slant outwards towards each other to form an arrow-head shape when viewed from above said walls.
The Hannig reference provides a teaching of wherein said first edge connective structure comprises two edge members that slant outwards towards each other to form an arrow-head shape when viewed from above said walls (see FIG 5A when view from above shows arrow-head shaped when viewed above said wall).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Warminsky reference with the feature of wherein said first edge connective structure comprises two edge members that slant outwards towards each other to form an arrow-head shape when viewed from above said walls, as taught by Hannig reference, in order provide a secure mating structure between two wall panels.
Claim 4: The Warminsky reference is silent on the teaching of wherein said second edge connective structure comprises two edge members that slant inwards towards each other to form an arrow-receptacle shape when viewed from above said walls.
However, the Hannig reference provides a teaching of wherein said second edge connective structure comprises two edge members that slant inwards towards each other to form an arrow-receptacle shape when viewed from above said walls (see FIG 5A when view from above shows arrow-head shaped when viewed above said wall).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Warminsky reference with the feature of wherein said second edge connective structure comprises two edge members that slant inwards towards each other to form an arrow-receptacle shape when viewed from above said walls, as taught by Hannig reference, , in order provide a secure mating structure between two wall panels.
Claim 5: The Warminsky reference provides a teaching of wherein said upright projection is positioned in said second edge connective structure and said crevice is formed in said first edge connective structure (see unlabeled upright projection on FIG 7 item 205 and unlabeled upright projection between FIG 7 item 210);
Claim 7: The Warminsky reference provides a teaching of comprising a shoot house constructed of said wall (see FIG 1 item 100 a two level shoothouse).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warmisnky US 20090282749 and in view of Hannig WO 2012101171 and further in view of Gosling et al WO 2021119167
Claim 6: The Warminsky reference is silent on the teaching of wherein said upright projection is formed with a chamfered or slanted surface.
However, the Gosling reference provides a teaching of wherein said upright projection is formed with a chamfered or slanted surface (see paragraph 33 chamfer 139).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Warminsky reference with the feature of wherein said upright projection is formed with a chamfered or slanted surface, as taught by the Gosling et al, in order to provide snug fit for between the wall panels (see paragraph 33).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ROBERT J UTAMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1676. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 17:30 Monday - Friday.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715