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:
First and second lower actuator brackets (Claim 1)
Claim 1 independently claims mounting brackets, upper actuator mounting brackets and lower actuator mounting brackets. Ref. 110 is identified as the upper actuator bracket however refs 104/120 are only referred to as ‘mounting brackets’ with no lower actuator bracket cited
Control module (Claim 9 – if applicant intends to claim a separate control module)
Claim 9 requires a control system comprising a remote control module and remote control, as well as a control module (See Claim Objections section regarding the claiming of a remote control module and control module separately)
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
The claims, including claim 1, call for a plurality of mounting brackets, first and second upper actuator brackets and first and second lower actuator brackets. Reference characters "104" and "120" have both been used to designate the mounting bracket.
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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
Reference character “104” has been used to designate both the “plurality of mounting brackets” and the ‘lower actuator mounting brackets’.
The claims, including claim 1, call for a plurality of mounting brackets, first and second upper actuator brackets and first and second lower actuator brackets. The Specification calls reference characters "104" and “120” both as mounting brackets. Fig. 1 indicates “120” mounts the arms however “104 appears to be a lower mounting bracket for the actuators or the “first and second lower actuator brackets”. Other figures, such as Fig. 4-6, however indicate bracket “104” as supporting the arms rather than the actuator.
The mounting brackets, the upper actuator brackets and the lower actuator brackets have all been claimed as separate components. Reference “110” has been used to distinguish the upper actuator mounting bracket. It should be clarified if the lower actuator brackets are differentiated from the ‘mounting brackets’ and the numbering/labeling should be consistent.
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. 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 Objections
Claims 1 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 utilizes the phrase “may be necessary to” before describing a function of a positively claimed device/feature. The phrase “may be” creates ambiguity as to whether the language/limitations following the phrase are required.
For the purpose of examination the phrase “may be necessary to” is being interpreted as ‘configured to’.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Claim 9 is a method of using the retrofit of claim 1 and as such incorporates all the limitations of claim 1. Claim 1 and the Specification disclose the inclusion of a “control system” comprising a “remote control module” and a “remote control”. No separate and distinct ‘control module’ is disclosed and claim 10, which depends from claim 9, further defines installing a remote control module. As such it is unclear if Applicant is claiming an additional control module not previously disclosed, if the “control module” was intended to be the “control system”, if claim 10 is intended to refer to the ‘remote control’ and not the ‘remote control module’ or otherwise.
For the purpose of examination, as no separate ‘control module’ and ‘remote control module’ have been disclosed, claim 9 is being interpreted as requiring the installation of the control system claimed in incorporated claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 3392432 (Cargill) in view of US 7,752,685 (Tudor).
Regarding claim 1, Cargill discloses a spa cover lift retrofit kit comprising:
a plurality of mounting brackets (25A/25B);
wherein the plurality of mounting brackets are secured to the spa sidewalls or other spa structure through screws or another suitable fastener means (Para. 0035);
a first actuator motor (27A);
a second actuator motor (27B);
a first upper actuator mounting point (annotated figure below);
a second upper actuator mounting point (annotated figure below);
wherein the upper actuator mounting points are configured to attach a top pivot point of the actuator motors to lifting arms of the spa (Figs. 3, 9);
a first lower actuator mounting point (annotated figure below);
a second lower actuator mounting point annotated figure below);
wherein the actuator motors (27A/27B) are attached to the mounting brackets which are attached to the spa sidewalls (Para. 0035), and as such the pivot point of the actuators are also mounted to the sidewall of the spa;
PNG
media_image1.png
467
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein said upper and lower actuator mounting points are configured for pivoting motion (Para. 0035; Pivot axis 28 and operation of such a lift system);
a power supply (Fig. 12; Para. 0043 – Requires a power source and discloses use of an existing spa power source/system used for other spa functions);
a control system (41/42; Fig. 12; Para. (0042-0043); and
a switch (buttons on remote 42; Para. 0042) which manually or automatically controls the operation of the electric-assisted retrofit kit (Para. 0042-0044).
Cargill, however, discloses that the spa lifting arms and the lower portion of the actuators are connected to a singular mounting bracket instead of separate mounting brackets and lower actuator mounting brackets.
Tudor teaches a spa cover lift system (16) configured to be installed on existing spas comprising a power source (70), a controller (72) with a switch (76), an actuator (50), a lower actuator mounting bracket (60), an upper actuator mounting bracket (54) and a mounting bracket (43) for securing lifting arms (40) wherein each bracket is provided as a first and second bracket for use on opposing sides of the spa (C3 L37-46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide individual mounting brackets, upper actuator mounting brackets and lower actuator mounting brackets, as taught by Tudor, so that the positioning of the individual components of the spa cover lifting assembly can be adjusted/mounted as/where required for different spas and/or installation scenarios.
Regarding claim 4, Cargill states that the control system comprises a remote control module (41) which is controlled by a remote control (42) comprising the switch (Para. 0042).
Regarding claim 9, Cargill discloses a method of providing and using a spa cover lift retrofit kit comprising:
providing a first and second actuator motor (27A/27B);
providing a plurality of mounting brackets configured for use with an existing spa cover lift (25A/25B);
coupling the top pivot point of the actuator motors to the spa lift arms (22) (annotated figure below);
coupling the lower pivot point of the actuators to the mounting brackets (annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image2.png
467
704
media_image2.png
Greyscale
connecting the mounting brackets to the spa sidewalls or other spa structure through screws or another suitable fastener means (Para. 0035);
installing a control module (Interpreted as a control system – see claim objections above; 41/42; Fig. 12); and
establishing electrical power by connecting wiring from a power supply to said control module and to each said actuator motor (Paras. 0042-0044).
Regarding the selection of mounting brackets and other hardware for specific makes/models of spas Cargill discloses that the retrofit kit is configured for modifying existing spa covers (Para. 0020), that the brackets are attached to the existing spa and that the hardware used to assemble and secure the lift system include “other suitable fastener means” (Para. 0035). As such Cargill discloses selecting installation hardware including mounting brackets configured for use with a chosen spa make/model.
Cargill, however, does not disclose how the upper part of the actuators couple to the lift arms and does not disclose providing distinct/separate mounting brackets for the lift arms and lower actuator mounting brackets for the actuators.
Tudor teaches a spa cover lift system retrofit kit (16/48) configured to be installed on existing spas comprising a power source (70), a controller (72) with a switch (76), an actuator (50), a lower actuator mounting bracket (60), an upper actuator mounting bracket (54) and a mounting bracket (43) for securing lifting arms (40) wherein each bracket is provided as a first and second bracket for use on opposing sides of the spa (C3 L37-46). Tudor further teaches that the upper actuator brackets are coupled to an upper pivot point (56) of the actuator and to the spa cover lift arm (40) (Figs. 1, 2) while the lower actuator brackets are coupled to the lower end of the actuator and the spa body (C3 L54-61) (Figs. 1, 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide and utilize individual mounting brackets, upper actuator mounting brackets and lower actuator mounting brackets, as taught by Tudor, so that the positioning of the individual components of the spa cover lifting assembly can be adjusted/mounted as/where required for different spas and/or installation scenarios.
Regarding claim 10, as previously discussed Cargill states the method of installing and using the retrofit kit comprising installing a control system (41/42). Cargill further states that the control system comprises a control module (41) which works with a remote control (42) and as such is a remote control module installed as part of the installation of the control system.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 4,494,256 (Radtke).
Regarding claim 2, Cargill does not state whether the switch used to control the lift system is a momentary or latching switch.
Radtke teaches a covering system for a swimming pool comprising an actuator motor (22) controlled by an electronic controller (170) having a switch (172) which is a momentary switch requiring continual activation/depression (C10 L16-27) to ensure a user is present during the operation/sequence.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a momentary switch, as taught by Radtke, to ensure the opening or closing operation is completed safely and in its entirety by requiring a user be in attendance for the duration of the operation.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 6,827,120 (Last).
Regarding claim 3, Cargill does not state whether the switch used to control the lift system is a momentary or latching switch.
Last teaches a retractable cover system for a swimming pool wherein an actuator motor (22) which drives the opening and closing of the cover is controlled by a user through latching switches (50/52; C11 L23-31, C18 L64-C19 L5) which start/stop an operation with a single actuation of the switch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize latching switches, as taught by Last, so as to provide a more convenient control system/scheme which doesn’t require a user to be continually present during an opening or closing sequence of the cover.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2007/0079434 (Pellerin).
Regarding claim 5, Cargill states the provision and use of screws and other suitable fastener means for assembling and installing the spa lift assembly (Para. 0035) but doesn’t explicitly state the use of bolts and washers.
Pellerin teaches a lift system (10) for a spa cover (14) of a spa (12) comprising mounting brackets (28) and lifting arms (30) which are assembled and secured to the spa using screws (42), bolts (threaded pin 78) and washers (88).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide and utilize different existing fasteners such as screws, bolts and washers, as taught by Pellerin, to facilitate assembling/coupling different components, establishing different types of connections (fixed or pivoting) and for fastening to different materials/in different arrangements (such as bolting existing holes compared to a self-tapping screw).
Regarding claim 7, Cargill states the provision and use of screws and other suitable fastener means for assembling and installing the spa lift assembly (Para. 0035) but doesn’t explicitly state the use of bolts with bolt head covers.
Pellerin teaches a lift system (10) for a spa cover (14) of a spa (12) comprising mounting brackets (28) and lifting arms (30) which are assembled and secured to the spa using screws (42), bolts (threaded pin 78) and washers (88). The bolts (78) are further provided with bolt head covers (92) to cover the edges of the bolt head.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide and utilize bolt head covers, as taught by Pellerin, to cover the angular heads of any utilized bolts to prevent injury to users and/or provide a more aesthetically pleasing appearance.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2020/0362582 (Herman).
Regarding claim 6, Cargill states the provision and use of screws and other suitable fastener means for assembling and installing the spa lift assembly (Para. 0035) but doesn’t state the provision of covers for the heads of the screws and other fasteners.
Herman teaches a handrail system for a spa comprising a handrail (1) coupled/fastened to support legs (2) through the use of bolts, screws or other suitable fasteners (4; Para. 0030). Herman further teaches the provision and use of head covers (6) for the fasteners for aesthetic appearances and safety (Para. 0041).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide head covers for the screws, as taught by Herman, so as to cover the screws for aesthetic appearances and/or safety to prevent users or other belongings catching/cutting on the fastener heads.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2007/0256229 (Duarte).
Regarding claim 8, Cargill states that the spa lift kit can be mounted to the spa sidewalls but does not state the provision of a ‘backing’.
Duarte teaches a spa cover lift system comprising an actuator (1/318) coupled to a lifting arm (108/302) and a mounting bracket (112/304) installed on the spa body. Duarte further teaches that a backing (114/306) is provided to provide a supportive mounting surface on the spa body.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a backing, as taught by Duarte, so as to provide a supportive mounting surface on the spa body through which to attach the spa cover lift assembly.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Duarte.
Regarding claim 11, Cargill states that the spa lift kit can be mounted to the spa sidewalls but does not state the provision of a ‘backing’.
Duarte teaches a spa cover lift system comprising an actuator (1/318) coupled to a lifting arm (108/302) and a mounting bracket (112/304) installed on the spa body. Duarte further teaches providing and installing a backing (114/306) provide a supportive mounting surface on the spa body.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide and install a backing, as taught by Duarte, so as to provide a supportive mounting surface on the spa body through which to attach the spa cover lift assembly.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cargill in view of Tudor as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Herman.
Regarding claim 12, Cargill states that the method of installing the retrofit kit comprises the use of screws and other suitable fasteners assembling and installing the spa lift assembly/kit (Para. 0035) but doesn’t state the provision of covers for the heads of the screws and other fasteners.
Herman teaches a handrail system for a spa comprising a handrail (1) and support legs (2) as well as a method of assembling the handrail system through the use of bolts, screws or other suitable fasteners (4; Para. 0030). Herman further teaches the provision and use of head covers (6) for the fasteners for aesthetic appearances and safety (Para. 0041).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to install covers over the heads of any screws and bolts used to assemble and install the spa lift assembly/kit, as taught by Herman, so as to cover the screws and bolts for aesthetic appearances and/or safety to prevent users or other belongings catching/cutting on the fastener heads.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2007/0118983 (Tatum) teaches installing a backing in the frame of a spa for mounting various components to.
US 7,971,287 (Buzzetti) teaches a method and apparatus for lifting a spa cover.
US 9,574,361 (Dose) teaches a spa cover lift assembly and teaches that the mounting and assembly brackets/hardware and other components can be adjusted in size and shape depending on the spa/installation environment.
US 11,078,679 (Tournas) teaches a spa cover lift system comprising a backing installed on a spa body to which lifting components are installed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A ROS whose telephone number is (571)270-3577. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9:00-6:00.
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 Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/NICHOLAS A ROS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754