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 § 112
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.
Claims 1-18 are 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.
The claims 1 and 11 recitations of “with a length…” is unclear, as it is unknown whether the previously recited “mast” or “distal end” should have this length. Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The claim 1 recitation of “the mast projects away from the object in a direction extending from the proximal end of the mast to the distal end of the mast at an angle toward the first support projection direction and the second support direction” is unclear. Does Applicant simply desire the mast to extend upward at some particular angle? Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The claim 2 recitation of “the mast projecting from the second portion” conflicts with the claim 1 recitation of “the mast is adapted and configured to be mounted to an object”. Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The term “conventional” in claims 10-11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “conventional” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The claim 11 recitation of “the mast projects in a direction away from the object from the proximal end of the mast to the distal end of the mast at an angle toward the first support projection direction and the second support projection direction” is unclear. Does Applicant simply desire the mast to extend downward at some particular angle? Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/review/clarify.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the other object". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3-9 and 12-17 are rejected as depending (directly or indirectly) from independent claims 1 and 11.
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2023/022698 A1 to Hamami (“Hamami”)- later published as U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0384557 in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,588,630 to Chen-Chao (“Chen-Chao”). Note that all references to Hamami herein shall pertain to the United States publication.
Regarding claim 1, Hamami discloses a flag assembly (e.g. flag display device 1, as shown in figs. 1-27 and discussed at para. 84) comprising: i) a mast (4, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84) having a proximal end (e.g. bottom end 5, as shown in fig. 2) and a distal end (e.g. top end 6, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84) with a length (e.g. portion between bottom end 5 and top end 6, as shown in fig. 2) extending between (fig. 2) the proximal end (5) and the distal end (6); ii) a first support (e.g. top horizontal support arm 7, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84), the first support (7) projecting away from (fig. 2) the mast (4) in a first support location (e.g. position of top horizontal support arm 7 shown in fig. 2); iii) a second support (e.g. bottom horizontal support arm 8, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84), the second support (8) projecting away from (fig. 2) the mast (4) in a second support location (e.g. position of bottom horizontal support arm 8 shown in fig. 2), the second support location (aforementioned position of bottom horizontal support arm 8) being intermediate of (fig. 2) the distal end (6) and the proximal end (5) of the mast (4), the second support location (aforementioned position of bottom horizontal support arm 8) being closer (fig. 2) to the proximal end (5) of the mast (4) than the first support location (aforementioned position of top horizontal support arm 7), the first support location (aforementioned position of top horizontal support arm 7) being closer (fig. 2) to the distal end (6) of the mast (4) than the second support location (aforementioned position of bottom horizontal support arm 8); and iv) a flag element (e.g. display panel 3, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 84) disposed between (fig. 2) the first and second supports (7 and 8, respectively); v) wherein the first support (7) projects away from (fig. 2) the mast (4) in a first support projection direction (e.g. upper horizontal direction, as shown in fig. 2), the second support (8) projects away from (fig. 2) the mast (4) in a second support projection direction (e.g. lower horizontal direction, as shown in fig. 2), the first support projection direction (aforementioned upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned lower horizontal direction) are parallel to each other (fig. 2); vi) wherein the mast (4) is adapted and configured to be mounted (fig. 18) to an object (e.g. L-shaped mounting bracket 28, as shown in fig. 18 and discussed at para. 98) at or adjacent to (compare figs. 18 and 2) the proximal end (5) of the mast (4) in a manner such that the mast (4) projects away from (fig. 18) the object (28) in a direction (e.g. vertical direction, as shown in figs. 2 and 18) extending from (fig. 2) the proximal end (5) of the mast (4) to the distal end (6) of the mast (4) at an angle (per fig. 21 and para. 100, vertical mast 4 can be angled as desired) toward (fig. 21) the first support projection direction (aforementioned upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned lower horizontal direction).
Hamami does not disclose wherein the mast (4) includes a sleeve arranged along the length of the mast (4), the sleeve being adapted and configured to receive a further mast of a further flag.
Chen-Chao teaches the concept of providing a mast (e.g. flag banner pole 5, as shown in fig. 4) including (fig. 4) a sleeve (e.g. flag pole cylinder 2, as shown in fig. 4) arranged along (fig. 4) a length (e.g. vertical dimension, as shown in fig. 4) of the mast (5), the sleeve (2) being adapted and configured to receive (fig. 4) a further mast (e.g. small flag banner pole 9, as shown in fig. 4) of a flag (e.g. small flag banner 10, as shown in fig. 4).
Given that Hamami and Chen-Chao both concern flag display assemblies, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the Chen-Chao teachings to the Hamami assembly, attaching a Chen-Chao flag pole cylinder 22 to the lower unoccupied portions of Hamami’s mast 4, in order to provide the benefit of yielding a resultant Hamami assembly that is capable of flying a plurality of flags thereon.
Regarding claim 2, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 1 wherein the proximal end (Hamami 5) of the mast (Hamami 4) comprises a hinge assembly (e.g. Hamami top leaf 35, bottom leaf 36, knuckle 37 and pin 38, together, as shown in fig. 28 and discussed at para. 101), the hinge assembly (Hamami 35, 36, 37 and 38, together) includes a first portion (e.g. Hamami bottom leaf 36, alone) that is adapted and configured for connection with (compare Hamami figs. 28 and 19) the object (Hamami 28), and a second portion (e.g. Hamami top leaf 35, alone) that is hingedly connected to (e.g. via Hamami knuckle 37 and pin 38, as shown in fig. 28) the first portion (Hamami 36, alone) with the mast (Hamami 4) projecting from (Hamami fig. 28) the second portion (Hamami 35, alone), the hinge assembly (Hamami 35, 36, 37 and 38, together) defines a pivot axis (e.g. axis along which Hamami knuckle 37 and pin 38 extend, as shown in figs. 23-28) parallel to (Hamami figs. 22 and 25-27) the first support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami lower horizontal direction).
Regarding claim 3, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 2 wherein the first and second portions (Hamami 36, alone and 35, alone, respectively) of the hinge assembly (Hamami 35, 36, 37 and 38, together) are releasably connected to each other (Hamami fig. 28).
Regarding claim 4, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 2 wherein the first and second portions (Hamami 36, alone and 35, alone, respectively) of the hinge assembly (Hamami 35, 36, 37 and 38, together) comprise plates (Hamami figs. 25-27) defining planes (Hamami figs. 25-27) parallel to (Hamami figs. 25-27) the first support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami lower horizontal direction).
Regarding claim 5, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the angle is between 60 degrees and 80 degrees.
However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In the instant matter, the particular chosen angle will determine the ultimate aesthetic effect provided by the overall assembly.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the Hamami vertical mast 4 with an angle between 60 degrees and 80 degrees in order to provide the benefit of yielding a resultant aesthetic effect as desired.
Regarding claim 6, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 1 wherein the flag element (Hamami 3) comprises one of (a) through openings having a pattern resembling a flag (Hamami claim 11) and (b) an applique on a rigid panel resembling a flag (Hamami claim 11 and fig. 21).
Regarding claim 7, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 1 further comprising: i) a third support (e.g. Hamami third support arm 42, as shown in fig. 30 and discussed at para. 107) projecting from (Hamami fig. 30) the mast (Hamami 4) at a third support location (e.g. position of Hamami third support arm 42 shown in fig. 30), the third support location (aforementioned position of Hamami third support arm 42) being intermediate of (compare Hamami figs. 2 and 30) the proximal end (Hamami 5) of the mast (Hamami 4) and the second support location (aforementioned position of Hamami bottom horizontal support arm 8), the third support (Hamami 42) projects away from (Hamami fig. 30) the mast (Hamami 4) in a third support projection direction (e.g. lowermost horizontal direction, as shown in Hamami fig. 30), the third support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami lowermost horizontal direction) being parallel to (compare Hamami figs. 2 and 30) the first support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami lower horizontal direction); and ii) a further panel (e.g. Hamami second display panel 3b) disposed between (Hamami fig. 30) the second and third supports (Hamami 8 and 42, respectively).
Regarding claim 8, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 7 wherein the further panel (Hamami 3b) comprises one of a flag (Hamami fig. 30 and para. 107) and a nameplate.
Regarding claim 9, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 1 wherein the distal end (Hamami 6) of the mast (Hamami 4) comprises at least one of a light, a camera, and an antenna (Hamami para. 93).
Regarding claim 10, Hamami in view of Chen-Chao discloses the flag assembly of claim 1 wherein the flag element (Hamami 3) has a conventional top (Hamami claim 15) and a conventional bottom (Hamami claim 15), the conventional top (Hamami claim 15) of the flag element (Hamami 3) is adjacent (Hamami claim 15) the first support (Hamami 7).
Claims 11-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamami in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,554,885 to Burny, Jr. (“Burny”).
Regarding claim 11, Hamami discloses a flag assembly (e.g. flag display device 1, as shown in figs. 1-27 and discussed at para. 84) comprising: i) a mast (4, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84) having a proximal end (e.g. bottom end 5, as shown in fig. 2) and a distal end (e.g. top end 6, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84) with a length (e.g. portion between bottom end 5 and top end 6, as shown in fig. 2) extending between (fig. 2) the proximal end (5) and the distal end (6); ii) first and second supports (e.g. top horizontal support arm 7 and bottom horizontal support arm 8, respectively, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 84), the first support (7) projecting from (fig. 2) the mast (4) in a first support projection direction (e.g. upper horizontal direction, as shown in fig. 2) at a first support location (e.g. position of top horizontal support arm 7 shown in fig. 2) along the length (fig. 2) of mast (4), the second support (8) projecting from (fig. 2) the mast (4) in a second support projection direction (e.g. lower horizontal direction, as shown in fig. 2) at a second support location (e.g. position of bottom horizontal support arm 8 shown in fig. 2) along the length (fig. 2) of mast (4), the first support projection direction (aforementioned upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned lower horizontal direction) being parallel to each other (fig. 2); and iii) a flag element (e.g. display panel 3, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 84) disposed between (fig. 2) the first and second supports (7 and 8, respectively), the flag element (3) having a conventional top (e.g. top edge 9, as shown in fig. 11 and discussed at para. 84) and a conventional bottom (e.g. bottom edge 10, as shown in fig. 11 and discussed at para. 84), the conventional top (9) of the flag element (3) being adjacent (compare figs. 11 and 2) the first support (7); iv) wherein the mast (4) is adapted and configured to be mounted (fig. 18) to an object (e.g. L-shaped mounting bracket 28, as shown in fig. 18 and discussed at para. 98) at or adjacent to (compare figs. 18 and 2) the proximal end (5) of the mast (4) in a manner such that the mast (4) projects in a direction away from (fig. 18) the object (28) from the proximal end (5) of the mast (4) to the distal end (6) of the mast (4) at an angle (per fig. 21 and para. 100, vertical mast 4 can be angled as desired) toward (fig. 21) the first support projection direction (aforementioned upper horizontal direction) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned lower horizontal direction).
Hamami does not disclose the first support location (aforementioned position of top horizontal support arm 7) being closer to the proximal end (5) of the mast (4) along the length of the mast (4) than the second support location (aforementioned position of bottom horizontal support arm 8).
Burny teaches the concept of providing a first support location (e.g. location of upper mounting loop 44, as shown in fig. 1) being closer to (fig. 1) a proximal end (e.g. pivot arm stop 34, as shown in fig. 1) of a mast (e.g. pivot arm 29, as shown in fig. 1) along a length (fig. 1) of the mast (29) than a second support location (e.g. location of lower mounting loop 46, as shown in fig. 1).
Given that Hamami and Burny both concern flag display devices, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the Burny teachings to the Hamami assembly such that the Hamami vertical mast 4 is shaped according to the Burny pivot arm 29 design, in order to provide the benefit of yielding a resultant Hamami assembly that is capable of being attached to and selectively pivotal around a flagstaff such as that of Burny’s element 14, as shown in Burny fig. 1.
Regarding claim 12, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 11 wherein the second support location (aforementioned position of Hamami bottom horizontal support arm 8, as modified in the rejection of claim 11, supra) is adjacent to the distal end (see the modification set forth in the rejection of claim 11, supra) of the mast (Hamami 4, as modified in the rejection of claim 11, supra).
Regarding claim 13, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein the angle is between 60 degrees and 80 degrees.
However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In the instant matter, the particular chosen angle will determine the ultimate aesthetic effect provided by the overall assembly.
For the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 5, supra, it would have been obvious to provide the Hamami vertical mast 4 with an angle between 60 degrees and 80 degrees.
Regarding claim 14, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 11 wherein the flag element (Hamami 3) has one of (a) through openings having a pattern resembling a flag (Hamami claim 11) and (b) an applique on a rigid panel resembling a flag (Hamami claim 11).
Regarding claim 15, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 11 further comprising: i) a third support (e.g. Hamami third support arm 42, as shown in fig. 30 and discussed at para. 107) projecting from (Hamami fig. 30) the mast (Hamami 4) at a third support location (e.g. position of Hamami third support arm 42 shown in fig. 30) in a third support direction (e.g. lowermost horizontal direction, as shown in Hamami fig. 30), the third support location (aforementioned position of Hamami third support arm 42) being intermediate of (compare Hamami figs. 2 and 30) the distal end of the mast (Hamami 4, as modified in the rejection of claim 11, supra) and the second support location (aforementioned position of Hamami bottom horizontal support arm 8), the third support (Hamami 42) projects from (Hamami fig. 30) the mast (Hamami 4) in a third support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami lowermost horizontal direction), the third support projection direction (aforementioned Hamami lowermost horizontal direction) being parallel to (compare Hamami figs. 2 and 30) the first support (Hamami 7) and the second support (Hamami 8); and ii) a further panel (e.g. Hamami second display panel 3b) disposed between (Hamami fig. 30) the second and third supports (Hamami 8 and 42, respectively).
Regarding claim 16, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 15 wherein the further panel (Hamami 3b) comprises at least one of a flag (Hamami fig. 30 and para. 107) and a nameplate.
Regarding claim 17, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 11 wherein the distal end (see the modification set forth in the rejection of claim 11, supra) of the mast (Hamami 4, as modified in the rejection of claim 11, supra) includes at least one of a light (Hamami para. 93) and a camera.
Regarding claim 18, Hamami in view of Burny discloses the flag assembly of claim 11 wherein the proximal end (see the modification set forth in the rejection of claim 11, supra) of the mast (Hamami 4, as modified in the rejection of claim 11, supra) includes one of a plate (e.g. Hamami top mounting plate 13, as shown in fig. 2) adapted and configured for connection with the other object (see the rejection under 35 USC 112, set forth supra) and a split ring assembly adapted and configured for connection with the other object (see the rejection under 35 USC 112, set forth supra).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN V LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5052. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Daniel J. Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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 V LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights