DETAILED ACTION
The Examiner acknowledges Claims 1-10 have been cancelled and Claims 11-20 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments have been considered but are moot because the amendments have necessitated a new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
Claim 12 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. This claim recites “the first telescopic member of the body” but depends from claim 11 that recited “tool engagement with a drive arrangement of a first telescopic member of the body” in the alternative because of the “comprising one or a combination of” thus not positively reciting “the first telescoping member”.
Claim 17 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. This claim recites “the drive mechanism of the first telescopic member” but depends from claim 11 that recited “tool engagement with a drive arrangement of a first telescopic member of the body” in the alternative because of the “facilitated by one or a combination of” thus not positively reciting “the drive arrangement of the first telescoping member”.
Claim 19 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. This claim recites “the first telescopic member of the body” but depends from claim 18 that recited “tool engagement with a drive arrangement of a first telescopic member of the body” in the alternative because of the “comprising one or a combination of” thus not positively reciting “the first telescoping member”.
Claim 21 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. This claim is a multiple dependent claim depending from either claim 11 or claim 18. Claim 11 already set forth “wherein adjustment of a vertical height of the pedestal assembly relative to the substrate surface is facilitated by a drive arrangement comprising one or a combination of: manual movement of at least one of the plurality of operably connected telescopic members of the body, and; tool engagement with a drive arrangement of a first telescopic member of the body”. So it is unclear why the manual movement and tool engagement are again called for. And since claim 11 limits the drive arrangement to these two things it becomes unclear with adding the extension rings and the one or more stackable slope connectors. Also, claim 18 already set forth “wherein adjustment of a vertical height of the pedestal assembly is facilitated by one or a combination of: manual movement of at least one of the plurality of operably connected telescopic members of the body, and; tool engagement with a drive arrangement of a first telescopic member of the body”. So it is unclear why the manual movement and tool engagement are again called for. And since claim 18 limits the drive arrangement to these two things it becomes unclear with adding the extension rings and the one or more stackable slope connectors.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claims 11-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent # 8,156,694 to Knight, III et al.
Regarding claim 11, Knight teaches in Figure 2, a system [assembly (Column 6, Lines 45-46)] for leveling (Column 7, Lines 29-30) a construction surface (Column 1, Line 8) and supporting (Column 1, Line 8) at least one construction element [floor (Column 1, Line 9)], the system comprising at least one pedestal assembly (101) (Column 7, Line 18) comprising: a base (106) (Column 7, Lines 33-34) for supporting the pedestal assembly (101) on a substrate surface [fixed surface (Column 7, Lines 40-42)]; and a body [coupling member (Column 8, Line 42)] comprising a plurality of operably connected (Column 7, Lines 24-27) telescopic members (110/110’), the body [coupling member] operatively coupled (Column 7, Lines 35-38) to the base (106); wherein adjustment of a vertical height (Column 7, Lines 28-30) of the pedestal assembly (101) relative to the substrate surface (Column 7, Line 30) is facilitated by a drive arrangement [threads engaging threads (Column 11, Lines 20-21)] comprising: manual movement [operator can adjust (Column 11, Line 22)] of at least one of the plurality of operably connected (Column 7, Lines 24-27) telescopic members (110/110’) of the body [coupling member], and; tool engagement (Column 11, Lines 7-8) with a drive arrangement (174d, Fig 3) [tab member (Column 11, Lines 8-9)] of a first telescoping member (110) of the body [coupling member].
Regarding claim 12, Knight teaches in Figure 3, the drive arrangement (174d) of the first telescopic member (110) of the body [coupling member] is accessible via an aperture (170d) [slot (Column 10, Line 65) of at least the first telescopic member (110) of the body.
Regarding claim 13, Knight teaches in Figure 2, each of the base (106), and the plurality of operably connected telescopic members (110/110’) are operatively coupled (Column 7, Lines 24-27 and 35-38) to each other for adjusting the vertical height (Column 11, Lines 23-24) of the pedestal assembly by relative rotational movement (Column 11, Line 20).
Regarding claim 14, Knight teaches in Figure 2, the relative rotational movement (Column 11, Line 20) is assisted by screw thread configuration (Column 9, Line 63) of the telescopic members (110/110’).
Regarding claim 15, Knight teaches in Figure 2, the base (106) comprises a housing (112) [base extension (Column 7, Lines 45-46)] and a base plate (114) (Column 7, Line 46) that are releasably connectable [to one of the telescoping members] for insertion of height extenders [more telescoping members].
Regarding claim 16, Knight teaches in Figure 2, at least one extension ring (142) [support plate (Column 8, Line 14)] adapted for attachment to the pedestal assembly (101).
Regarding claim 17, Knight teaches in Figure 2, the drive arrangement (174d, Fig 3) [tab member (Column 11, Lines 8-9)] of the first telescoping member (110) is a mesh [locking engagement] drive [the tab engages with the aperture for locking (Column 10, Lines 4-6)].
Regarding claim 21, Knight teaches in Figure 2, adjustment of a vertical height (Column 7, Lines 28-30) of the pedestal assembly (101) relative to the substrate surface (Column 7, Line 30) is facilitated by a drive arrangement [threads engaging threads (Column 11, Lines 20-21)] comprising: manual movement [operator can adjust (Column 11, Line 22)] of at least one of the plurality of operably connected (Column 7, Lines 24-27) telescopic members (110/110’) of the body [coupling member], and; tool engagement (Column 11, Lines 7-8) with a drive arrangement (174d, Fig 3) [tab member (Column 11, Lines 8-9)] of a first telescoping member (110) of the body [coupling member].
Regarding claim 18, Knight teaches in Figure 2, a pedestal assembly (Column 6, Lines 45-46) for leveling (Column 7, Lines 29-30) a construction surface (Column 1, Line 8) and supporting (Column 1, Line 8) at least one construction element [floor (Column 1, Line 9)], the pedestal assembly comprising: a base (106) (Column 7, Lines 33-34) for supporting the pedestal assembly (101) on a substrate surface [fixed surface (Column 7, Lines 40-42)]; a body [coupling member (Column 8, Line 42)] comprising a plurality of operably connected (Column 7, Lines 24-27) telescopic members (110/110’), the body [coupling member] operatively coupled (Column 7, Lines 35-38) to the base (106); wherein adjustment of a vertical height (Column 7, Lines 28-30) of the pedestal assembly (101) relative to the substrate surface (Column 7, Line 30) is facilitated by manual movement [operator can adjust (Column 11, Line 22)] of at least one of the plurality of operably connected (Column 7, Lines 24-27) telescopic members (110/110’) of the body [coupling member], and; tool engagement (Column 11, Lines 7-8) with a drive arrangement (174d, Fig 3) [tab member (Column 11, Lines 8-9)] of a first telescoping member (110) of the body [coupling member].
Regarding claim 19, Knight teaches in Figure 3, the drive arrangement (174d) of the first telescopic member (110) of the body [coupling member] is accessible via an aperture (170d) [slot (Column 10, Line 65) of at least the first telescopic member (110) of the body.
Regarding claim 11, Knight teaches in Figure 2, a kit of parts [assembly (Column 6, Lines 45-46)] for a pedestal assembly (101) (Column 7, Line 18) for leveling (Column 7, Lines 29-30) a construction surface (Column 1, Line 8) and supporting (Column 1, Line 8) at least one construction element [floor (Column 1, Line 9)], the kit or parts comprising: a pedestal assembly base (106) (Column 7, Lines 33-34); a pedestal assembly body [coupling member (Column 8, Line 42)] that is operably couplable (Column 7, Lines 24-27) to the base (106) and comprises one or more telescopic body members (110/110’), each body member (110/110’) operatively connectable or coupleable to another respective telescopic body member (Column 7, Lines 35-38); and: a drive arrangement (174d, Fig 3) operably associated with at least one telescopic body member (110) and which is adapted for tool engagement (Column 11, Lines 7-8) to adjust a vertical height (Column 11, Lines 5-7) of the pedestal assembly (101).
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 ANDREW J TRIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-3657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6am-2pm EST.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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.
/ANDREW J TRIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights