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 “the two ends of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region converge, and/or imaginary, continuous extensions of the two ends of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region intersect” (i.e., both or only one and only the other is present in the invention, note that neither is illustrated) and the limitation: “at least a section of the contour of the blocking region extends at an angle other than 0 to the continuous connection”; 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 5, 7-8, 11-17, 20 and 22-23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the right angle " in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 line 16 recites “a scaffold element” is it one of the two established in line 1 of the claim? the same issue applies to line 21 of claim 1. And are the locking element and scaffold element in line 33-34 the same as those in line 21?
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the locking accommodation" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 line 26 appears to need preposition “of” between “the blocking regions” and “the at least two transverse connecting openings”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the ends of the receiving region " in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the contour of the blocking region " in line 23-24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "its end faces" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites “at least one connecting disc” is this in addition to what is in claim 1 incorporated into claim 12? The issue of re-establishing elements already in claim 1 occurs in several instances in claim 12 and the same issue in claim 16 with regards to claims 1 and 12 incorporated within claim 16.
Claim 22 recites the limitation " transverse direction " in 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
NOTE: Above are none-limiting examples of antecedent basis issues. Applicant is required to review the claim set in its entirety for similar issues of lack of or re-establishing antecedent basis for limitations already established.
transverse direction
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 5, 7-8, 11-17, 20 and 22-23 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.
All instances of the recitation “and/or” i.e., claims 1, 2, 12, 14 and 15, causes indefiniteness; applicant is reminded that the clause “and/or” is interpreted such that A and/or B, means that the invention must illustrate that it functions with A and B, only A without B, and only B without A. For instance, the recitation “the two ends of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region converge, and/or imaginary, continuous extensions of the two ends of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region intersect”, in claim 1, is not illustrated for either limitation, and hence not with only one of them; as well as the recitation “the two arms of the U are disposed at an angle other than 0 to the continuous connection, and/or the two arms of the U are disposed at an angle other than 0 to the section of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region” in claim 2, is not clear as to how both can be exclusive or occurring together; as none limiting examples.
Dependent claims are rejected at least for depending from a rejected claim.
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, 2, 5, 7, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PERI, WO (2020/083821) in view of Aluma, WO (98/44220).
In regards to claim 1 PERI discloses:
A connecting disc (10; figs. 1-3) for connecting at least two scaffold elements (intended use), comprising:
a basic body (10) having a first main surface (12a; top surface of 10) and a second main surface (12b; bottom surface of 10) which is disposed opposite of the first main surface (figs. 1-3), and having an edge surface (outer edge; 22) which runs round the basic body (figs. 1-3) and connects the first main surface and the second main surface to each other (as shown in figs. 1-3),
at least one longitudinal connecting opening (central recess 14) which extends from the first main surface to the second main surface and passes completely through the basic body (as shown in figs. 1-3 and figs. 9-10 showing stem 40 passing through opening 14), and which extends substantially at the right angle to the first main surface or to the second main surface (extending perpendicular to top and bottom surface evidenced by the perpendicular positioning of 40 with respect to the body 10),
at least two transverse connecting openings (top and bottom openings 16s; as shown in fig. 1; see annotated drawings of fig. 1 reproduced below) each of which extends from the first main surface to the second main surface and passes completely through the basic body (as shown in figs. 1-3, 9-10), and each of which extends substantially at the right angle to the first main surface or to the second main surface (each opening 16 passes through body 10), and each of which is disposed adjacent or at a distance to the longitudinal connecting opening (16s adjacent to 14; figs. 1-2),
wherein each transverse connecting opening is delimited by a peripheral contour (see annotated drawings indicating the peripheral contour of the transverse connecting openings i.e., top and bottom 16s) in a plan view of the first main surface (as shown in fig. 1), wherein the peripheral contour has a receiving region (see annotated drawings below) which is provided for receiving (intended use) a connection of a scaffold element (such as 42; fig. 15),
and the basic body has at least two additional connecting openings (right and left openings 16s; as shown in fig. 1; see annotated drawings of fig. 1 reproduced below) each of which extends from the first main surface to the second main surface and passes completely through the basic body (right and left openings 16s extending all the way through 10; figs. 1-3, 9-10), and each of which extends substantially at the right angle to the first main surface or to the second main surface (figs. 1-3, 9-10), wherein each additional connecting opening has a peripheral contour (see annotated drawings indicating the peripheral contour of the additional connecting openings i.e., right and left openings 16s) which is provided for receiving a connection (intended use) and a locking element of a scaffold element (such as 42; fig. 15), wherein the peripheral contour of each additional connecting opening comprises a curved contact area (see annotated drawings), and the at least two additional connecting openings are disposed on mutually opposing sides of the longitudinal connecting opening (right and left hand sides of center opening 14 respectively; as shown in fig. 1; reproduced below), wherein the contact areas of the two additional connecting openings are directed away from one another (right and left hand side respectively of 14; fig. 1), and an imaginary line between the two contact areas defines a second connecting direction (see annotated drawings below), wherein the first connecting direction (see annotated drawings below) is oriented perpendicular to the second connecting direction (see annotated drawings below), wherein the at least two transverse connecting openings (top and bottom openings 16s; as shown in fig. 1) are disposed on mutually opposing sides of the longitudinal connecting opening (opposite sides of 14; figs. 1-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
679
794
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 1 PERI does not disclose the peripheral contour has at least one blocking region.
Aluma teaches peripheral contour (see contour in fig. 3; Aluma; equivalent to contour of PERI) has at least one blocking region (70; fig. 3, reproduced below) which interrupts the receiving region (22; equivalent to receiving region of PERI), wherein the two ends of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region (see annotated drawings below) converge, and/or imaginary, continuous extensions of the two ends of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region intersect (see annotated drawings below), and the blocking region is provided for the locking (intended use) accommodation of a locking element of a scaffold element (such as 12; figs. 1, 3), wherein the blocking region is disposed outside of a continuous connection of the two ends of the contour of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region outside of the receiving region (see annotated drawings below), and at least a section of the contour of the blocking region (see annotated drawings below) extends at an angle other than 0 to the continuous connection (see annotated drawings below).
PNG
media_image2.png
474
620
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
550
700
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
399
471
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
380
431
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the blocking region taught by Aluma onto the peripheral contour of the transverse connecting openings of PERI for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e., to provide for a distinct indent to assist with “engagement of the locking wedge” as suggested by Aluma page 5 line 17; see highlighted excerpt below; it is provided that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that an indentation or keyway such as 70 would establish a distinct segment that prevents the wedge from sliding along the curved end contour of the opening and cause unsafe condition in addition to wear and tear due to continuous friction. The modification above subsequently teaches the blocking regions (70; Aluma) the at least two transverse connecting openings (22 Aluma equivalent to 16 PERI) are directed away from one another (fig. 1; PERI), and an imaginary line between the two blocking regions defines a first connecting direction (see annotated drawings of fig. 1 PERI above).
PNG
media_image6.png
322
822
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2 PERI as modified by Aluma teaches the blocking region is implemented in a U-shape in a plan view of the first main surface (see annotated drawings below), wherein the two arms of the U are disposed at an angle other than 0 to the continuous connection (see annotated drawings below), and/or the two arms of the U are disposed at an angle other than 0 to the section of the receiving region adjoining the blocking region (see annotated drawings below).
PNG
media_image7.png
393
429
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 5 PERI as modified by Aluma teaches the longitudinal connecting opening and the receiving region are disposed at a distance to each other, and the blocking region is disposed on the side of the receiving region disposed opposite of the longitudinal connecting opening (as shown in annotated Aluma fig. 3; 70 on side of 22 opposite of longitudinal connecting opening).
PNG
media_image8.png
512
683
media_image8.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 7 PERI discloses the longitudinal connecting opening comprises a transition to the receiving region (see annotated drawings below).
PNG
media_image9.png
390
516
media_image9.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 8 PERI discloses the longitudinal connecting opening and the additional connecting opening are disposed at a distance to each other (see annotated drawings above under claim 1)., and the contact area is disposed on the side of the additional connecting opening disposed opposite of the longitudinal connecting opening (see annotated drawings above under claim 1).
In regards to claim 11 PERI discloses the basic body is made of an iron-based material (taught by PERI; see highlighted excerpt below), and the longitudinal connecting opening and the transverse connecting opening are cutouts in the basic body which are connected to each other, and which are incorporated in the basic body by punching or laser cutting (product by process limitation; although taught by PERI; see highlighted excerpt below).
PNG
media_image10.png
92
580
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
96
626
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PERI, WO (2020/083821) in view of Aluma, WO (98/44220).
In regards to claim 12 PERI and Aluma teaches:
A standard (100; fig. 9, 10; PERI) comprising at least one connecting disc according to claim 1 (as described for claim 1 above; PERI), further comprising at least one connection sleeve (40; fig. 9, 10; PERI) which is inserted into and fixedly connected to the longitudinal connecting opening (longitudinal connecting opening 14; as shown in figs. 9, 10; PERI), wherein the connection sleeve has a central axis (central axis Z; PERI) which extends in its longitudinal direction (as shown in figs. 9, 10; PERI), wherein the central axis is oriented substantially perpendicular to the first main surface and/or to the second main surface (as shown in figs. 9, 10; PERI), wherein the connection sleeve comprises a connection interface (46; PERI) provided for the connection to a scaffold element (such as 42/44; fig. 9; PERI) in or on at least one of its end faces (as shown in fig. 9; PERI).
PNG
media_image12.png
451
565
media_image12.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 13 PERI discloses the connection sleeve is formed by a pipe section (pipe section 40; fig. 0, 10), and the connection interface is formed by a receptacle (46), which, starting from an end face (end face of 56), extends into the interior of the connection sleeve (as shown in figs. 9, 10).
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PERI and Aluma as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Schwoerer, US (2004/0231922).
In regards to claims 14 and 15 PERI and Aluma does not teach at least one connecting hook.
Schwoerer taches the connection sleeve (21; figs. 3, 4) comprises at least one connecting hook (25, 29 forming a hook; fig. 3) which, starting from the outer circumferential surface of the connection sleeve (sleeve 12; equivalent to sleeve of PERI), extends in a direction radially away from the central axis (element 29 extending away from sleeve 12; fig. 3), wherein the connecting hook is disposed at a distance to the connecting disc (29 a distance from 14; fig. 3) in the direction of the central axis (upward parallel top central axis of 12), and, in a plan view of the first main surface and/or the second main surface (fig. 3; Schwoerer), the connecting hook extends parallel to a direction extending from the centre point of the longitudinal connecting opening to the blocking region of a transverse connecting opening (29 parallel to line between the centre point of the longitudinal connecting opening of PERI to the blocking region of Aluma once taught onto the peripheral contour of PERI as detailed above) (claim 14).
in a plan view of the first main surface and/or the second main surface, the connecting hook extends in the first connecting direction (line between two 23s across from each other as shown in fig. 3) (claim 15).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the connecting hook taught by Schwoerer onto the sleeve of PERI as modified by Aluma for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e., to secured to the associated rosette independently of the railing element and, in its state attached to the rosette, supports the railing holding element above the rosette as suggested by Schwoerer claim 1.
Claims 16, 17, 20, 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PERI, WO (2020/083821) in view of Aluma, WO (98/44220).
In regards to claim 16 PERI and Aluma teaches:
A scaffold section (figs. 9-14; PERI) comprising at least one standard (100; fig. 9, 10; PERI) according to claim 12 (as described for claim 12 above), further comprising:
at least one scaffold element (42/44) which comprises an interface (46) including a connection (at claws 48a, b) and a locking element (56; fig. 12), wherein the locking element is designed so that it is movable relative to the connection (insertable and removable from 46), and, in a locked state, the locking element projects beyond the connection (as shown in phantom dotted line in fig. 12),
wherein the connection is introduced into the receiving region of a transverse connecting opening of the connecting disc (into 16 as described in claim 11; excerpt below of PERI), and the locking element is introduced into the blocking region of the same transverse connecting opening (once the blocking region of Aluma is taught onto the peripheral contour of PERI, where locking pin 20 sits in the blocking region 70; fig. 3; Aluma), wherein, between the blocking region and the locking element, at least in sections, a positive connection is given which prevents a rotational movement of the scaffold element (in the same manner as in the current invention) relative to the standard in a rotational axis parallel to the central axis (in the same manner as in the current invention).
PNG
media_image13.png
72
712
media_image13.png
Greyscale
It is further provided that, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the wedge shaped locking pin taught by Aluma, in place of the cylindrical shaped pin of PERI, once the blocking region is utilized, in order to have the blocking region proper functionality, which is a subsequence of the teaching of the blocking region 70 of Aluma.
In regards to claim 17 PERI as modified by Aluma teaches the locking element projects beyond the continuous connection of the receiving region (56; fig. 12; PERI or as modified 20 fig. 4 Aluma).
In regards to claim 20 PERI as modified by Aluma teaches the scaffold section comprises at least one additional scaffold element (additional elements 12; fig. 3; Aluma) having a locking element and a connection (connections of 12s, similar to each other fig. 3; Aluma), wherein the additional scaffold element is connected to an additional connecting opening (another one of eight openings 22; fig. 3; Aluma), wherein the locking element and the connection are introduced into the additional connecting opening (fig. 3; Aluma), and the locking element abuts on the curved contact area (as shown in figs. 2 and 3; Aluma), wherein the additional scaffold element is rotatable relative to the standard about a rotational axis parallel to the central axis by an angle of up to 60 (rotatable once unattached and reattached to a different opening; where eight openings shown in fig. 3 Aluma are 45 degrees offset from each other hence rotatable relative to the sleeve “up to 60 degrees”) .
In regards to claim 22 PERI as modified by Aluma teaches the standard is oriented in the scaffold section so that the first connecting direction extends between two transverse connecting openings in the transverse direction of the scaffold, and the second connecting direction extends between two additional connecting openings in the longitudinal direction of the scaffold, wherein the longitudinal direction of the scaffold is the direction in which the scaffold section has its longest dimension, and wherein the transverse direction of the scaffold is oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the scaffold (note that selectively attaching scaffolding elements such as 12s to several, e.g., two or four across from each other to two, four or more of the eight receiving openings as shown in fig. 3 Aluma would fulfil the different arguments such as what is described above i.e., “the first connecting direction extends between two transverse connecting openings in the transverse direction of the scaffold” and “the second connecting direction extends between two additional connecting openings in the longitudinal direction of the scaffold”).
In regards to claim 23 PERI as modified by Aluma teaches at least three scaffold elements are provided (three 12s; fig. 3 Aluma), wherein the locking element and the connection of the first scaffold element are inserted into a transverse connecting opening (selectively attaching scaffolding elements such as 12s to several, e.g., two or four across from each other to two, four or more of the eight receiving openings as shown in fig. 3 Aluma), and the locking elements and connections of the two other scaffold elements (20s; Aluma) are respectively inserted into an additional connecting opening (note that selectively attaching scaffolding elements such as 12s to several, e.g., two or four across from each other to two, four or more of the eight receiving openings as shown in fig. 3 Aluma would fulfil the different arguments such as what is described above i.e., “locking elements and connections of the two other scaffold elements are respectively inserted into an additional connecting opening”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to PTO-892 form for list of cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIREF M MEKHAEIL whose telephone number is (571)270-5334. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7 Mon-Fri.
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 Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/S.M.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights