DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Status of claims
Claims 15-28 are pending. Examiner notes the cancellation of claims 1-14 in the preliminary amendments filed February 29, 2024.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in the preliminary amendments filed on February 29, 2024, Applicant did not include replacement sheet “24” of the drawings, thus, Fig. 4 was not included in within the replacement sheets.
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 15-16, 19, 22-23, 25-26, 28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The limitation in line 6 of claim 15 should be corrected to read --for detachable attachment to [[a]] one of the connection points-- as the connection points are already defined in lines 3-4 of the claim.
The limitation in line 13 of claim 15 should be corrected to read --each of the
The limitation in line 3 of claim 16 should be corrected to read --and the interlocking profiles of each interlocking joint member are replicated-- so that it is clear within the claim that each interlocking joint member is being referred to.
Lines 2-4 of claim 19 should be corrected to read –comprises a connector, a ring, a main body, an adaptor and a connection device for a structural element assembled in a longitudinal direction thereof—so as to clearly define each of the elements of the connection assembly and that they are assembled longitudinally.
The limitation in line 8 of claim 22 should be corrected to read --the polygonal- or decagonal-shaped through hole in the ring-- as such is already defined in lines 4-5 of the claim.
Examiner suggests amending the limitation in lines 6-10 of claim 23 to read --the adaptor is provided with polygonal connection flanges at an upper side and a lower side, the connection flange on the lower side of the adapter being adapted to the polygonal recess of the main body and the connection flange on the upper side of the adaptor being adapted to the polygonal recess of the connection device for retaining the main body, adaptor and connection device together-- so as to provide the correct spelling of “adaptor” with respect to how the limitation is defined in claim 19, and to clearly define within the claim that the connection flange on the lower side (342a) is to be received by the polygonal recess (335) of the main body (330, see Fig. 6A-7A and [0168] of the instant specification) and that the connection flange on the upper side (342b) is to be received by the polygonal recess (352) of the connection device (350, see Fig. 7B-8D and [0168] of the instant specification), not the other way around.
The limitation in lines 4-5 of claim 25 should be corrected to read --to be received in the polygonal
Examiner suggests amending the limitation “transversal direction” in liens 3 and 7 of claim 26 to read --transverse direction--for clarity purposes.
The limitation in lines 3-4 of claim 26 should be corrected to read --the polygonal
The limitation in lines 9-10 of claim 26 should be corrected to read --the polygonal from, defines the connector as having a polygonal cone-shaped part, not a polygonal or decagon cone-shaped part.
The limitation in lines 2-4 of claim 28 should be corrected to read --the elongated body is configured to be received in through holes present in each of the connection device, the adaptor, the main body and the connector, and has a length adapted to respective lengths of each of the connection device, the adaptor, the main body and the connector thereof-- as the limitations “adaptor”, “main body”, and “connector” are already defined in the claims and so as to clearly communicate within the claim that the elongated body is received in through holes of each element and has a length adapted to respective lengths of each element as well.
The limitation in lines 5-6 of claim 28 should be corrected to read --the elongated body comprises a head assembly at the upper end-- as the upper end of the elongated body is already defined in claim 27.
The limitation in lines 8-9 of claim 28 should be corrected to read --the head assembly retains the ring, the main body, the adaptor and the connection device-- as the limitations “main body”, “adaptor”, and “connection device” are already defined in the claims.
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 17, 24, 26, 28 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “wherein at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints is assembled by eight or twenty identical interlocking joint members or sets of ten identical and eight identical corresponding interlocking joint members”. Claim 15, of which claim 17 depends from, defines of “one or more hollow spherical joints” in line 3 and that “at least one of the one or mor hollow spherical joints is assembled by multiple identical interlocking joint members or sets of corresponding identical interlocking joint members” in lines 10-12. It is unclear if the “at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints” of claim 17 is intending to refer to any of the “one or more” joints defined in line 3 of claim 15, or if it is intending to refer to and further define the “at least one of the one or more” joints defined in lines 10-12 of claim 15. Being that claim 17 is directed to further defining the number of interlocking joint members of a spherical joint, and lines 10-12 of claim 15 are specifically directed to defining that “at least one” of the one or more joints is assembled by multiple interlocking joint members or sets of interlocking joint members, Examiner will interpret that the joint being referred to in claim 17 is further defining of the “at least one of the one or more” joints in lines 10-12 of claim 15. As such, for the purpose of this action, Examiner will interpret claim 17 as reading as:
“wherein the at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints is assembled by eight or twenty identical interlocking joint members or sets of ten identical and eight identical corresponding interlocking joint members”.
Claim 24 recites “wherein the ring has an end surface adapted to a curvature profile of the hollow spherical joint”. Claim 15 first defines of “one or more hollow spherical joints” in line 3 and goes on to further define of “at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints” in line 10. It is unclear if “the hollow spherical joint” in claim 24 is referring to any of the one or more joints as defined in line 3 of claim 15, or if they are referring to the “at least one” of the one or more joints as defined in line 10 of claim 15. For the purpose of this action, Examiner will interpret that Applicant is referring to the “at least one” joint of claim 15, thus, Examiner will interpret claim 24 as reading as:
“wherein the ring has an end surface adapted to a curvature profile of the at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints and is at least partly elastic or compressible”.
Claim 26 recites “multiple corresponding locking ball recesses or holes are arranged in surfaces of the connection points of the hollow spherical joint” in lines 5-6. Claim 15 first defines of “one or more hollow spherical joints” in line 3 and goes on to further define of “at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints” in line 10. It is unclear if “the hollow spherical joint” in claim 26 is referring to any of the one or more joints as defined in line 3 of claim 15, or if they are referring to the “at least one” of the one or more joints as defined in line 10 of claim 15. For the purpose of this action, Examiner will interpret that Applicant is referring to the “at least one” joint of claim 15, thus, in view of the rejection of claim 26 and the above claim objections of claim 26, Examiner will interpret claim 26 as reading as:
“the locking assembly is ball-based and comprises multiple locking balls arranged movable in a transverse direction of the polygonal
multiple corresponding locking ball recesses or holes are arranged in surfaces of the connection points of the at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints, and
the multiple locking balls are moved in the transverse direction for activation or deactivation by insertion or retraction of the tapering lower end of the activation and deactivation member in the polygonal
Claim 28 recites the limitation “the interior end of the curved tracks” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Thus, for the purpose of this action, and in view of the claim objections of claim 28 above, Examiner will interpret claim 28 as reading as:
“wherein the elongated body is configured to be received in through holes present in each of the connection device, the adaptor, the main body and the connector, and has a length adapted to respective lengths of each of the connection device, the adaptor, the main body and the connector thereof,
the elongated body comprises a head assembly at the upper end located exterior of the connection device, thereby enabling movement of the lock pins or teeth in the curved tracks,
the head assembly retains the ring, the main body, the adaptor and the connection device axially in the connection assembly when the lock pins or teeth are received in an interior end of the curved tracks”.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Horvath (WO-9010126).
Regarding claim 15, Horvath (Fig. 1-6) discloses a construction system for assembly of a structural construction, comprising:
one or more hollow spherical joints (A, made up of core 4 and shell 5; lines 26-27 on pg. 6 of the translated description state that the core 4 is hollow; lines 20-22 on pg. 6 of the translated description state that the shell and core can be spherical), each provided with multiple connection points (7);
a connection assembly for structure elements or joints adapted for detachable attachment to a connection point of one of the one or more hollow spherical joints (locking heads 13 serve as a connection assembly for detachable attachment of structure elements 1 to the spherical joint; see pg. 5-6 of the translated description) and comprising a locking assembly for locking and unlocking the connection assembly to the respective hollow spherical joint (the locking assembly is comprised of the heads of the locking heads being enclosed by shell elements 6 of the shell 5 of the hollow spherical joint, such that the locking heads are located between the shell and the core of the hollow spherical joint; see pg. 5 of the translated description), wherein
at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints is assembled by multiple identical interlocking joint members or sets of corresponding identical interlocking joint members (the shell 5 of the hollow spherical joint is assembled by eight multiple identical interlocking joint members 6; see lines 1-4 of pg. 5 of the translated description), and
each of the multiple interlocking joint members is provided with a corresponding interlocking profile at a respective engaging side for attachment to an adjoining joint member (see interlocking profile at engaging sides of the joint members in Annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
701
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 16, Horvath discloses wherein each interlocking joint member (6) includes one or more engaging sides, and the interlocking profiles are replicated at each engaging side of the respective interlocking joint member (see the interlocking profiles at the engaging sides of the joint members in Annotated Fig. 1, each engaging side of each interlocking joint member will have an interlocking profile to join with adjacent joint members).
Regarding claim 17, Horvath discloses wherein at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints (A, made up of core 4 and shell 5) is assembled by eight or twenty identical interlocking joint members or sets of ten identical and eight identical corresponding interlocking joint members (the shell 5 of the hollow spherical joint is assembled by eight multiple identical interlocking joint members 6; see lines 1-4 of pg. 5 of the translated description).
Regarding claim 18, Horvath discloses wherein at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints (A, made up of core 4 and shell 5) comprises between two and ninety-two connection points (connection points 7, see Fig. 1-6 showing that each hollow spherical joint comprises between two and ninety-two connection points).
Claims 15-16, 18-19, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Souchal (FR-2513736).
Regarding claim 15, Souchal (Fig. 1-4) discloses of a construction system for assembly of a structural construction, comprising:
one or more hollow spherical joints (1, [0007] of the attached translated description states the joint 1 is hollow), each provided with multiple connection points (6, 7, 8, 10, 11);
a connection assembly for structure elements or joints adapted for detachable attachment to a connection point of one of the one or more hollow spherical joints (connection assembly 3 detachably attaches structure element 2 to the connection points, see [0008]-[0009] of the attached translated description) and comprising a locking assembly for locking and unlocking of the of the connection assembly to the respective hollow spherical joint (locking assembly comprising screw 17 and tabs 15, 16, which allow for locking and unlocking of the connection assembly to the joint, see [0008] of the attached translated description), wherein
at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints is assembled by multiple identical interlocking joint members or sets of corresponding identical interlocking joint members (joint member 1 is formed by identical interlocking joint members 4 and 5), and
each of the multiple interlocking joint members is provided with a corresponding interlocking profile at a respective engaging side for attachment to an adjoining joint member (each joint member has an interlocking profile formed by projections 12 and 13 on a first engaging side and an interlocking profile formed by recesses 18, 19 on a second engaging side, the interlocking profiles of each joint member 4, 5 cooperate and receive one another as described in [0007]-[0008] of the attached translated description).
Regarding claim 16, Souchal discloses wherein each interlocking joint member (4, 5) includes one or more engaging sides, and the interlocking profiles are replicated at each engaging side of the respective interlocking joint member (each joint member has an interlocking profile formed by projections 12 and 13 on a first engaging side and an interlocking profile formed by recesses 18, 19 on a second engaging side, the interlocking profiles of each joint member 4, 5 cooperate and receive one another as described in [0007]-[0008] of the attached translated description).
Regarding claim 18, Souchal discloses wherein at least one of the one or more hollow spherical joints (1) comprises between two and ninety-two connection points (connection points 6, 7, 8, 10, 11; it can be seen in Fig. 1-3 that there are between two and ninety-two connection points).
Regarding claim 19, Souchal discloses wherein the connection assembly (3) comprises a connector (comprising 15, 16), a ring (14), a main body (see Annotated Fig. 2 below), an adaptor (see Annotated Fig. 2) and connection device (17) for a structural element (2), assembled in a longitudinal direction thereof to form the connection assembly (see Fig. 4), wherein
the connector is configured for being received in the connection points of one of the one or more hollow spherical joints (see Fig. 1 and [0008] of the attached translated description), and the adapter provides a connection interface for the connection device to the main body (adaptor comprises 20 of the connection assembly, which is a connection interface that secures the main body together, see [0008] of the attached translated description).
PNG
media_image2.png
330
572
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2
Regarding claim 24, Souchal discloses wherein the ring has an end surface adapted to a curvature profile of the hollow spherical joint (end surface is the outer surface of 14, see Annotated Fig. 3 below) and is at least partly elastic or compressible (being that the ring 14 is made of a material, it will have at least some elasticity and therefore be somewhat compressible).
PNG
media_image3.png
410
351
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-23, 25, 27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 20, Souchal does not explicitly disclose wherein one of the connection points is polygonal and cone-shaped and the connector comprises a polygonal cone-shaped part adapted to be accommodated in the respective connection point.
Horvath (Fig. 1-6) discloses wherein the connection points (7) of their joint (A) are polygonal (see pg. 5 of the translated description stating that connection points 7 are octagonal) so that the can receive the octagonal shape of the corresponding structural members (1, see pg. 5 of the attached translated description).
However, it would not be obvious to modify Souchal with the teachings of Horvath to have the connection points be polygonal, as such would interfere with the intended connection between the connection assembly of Souchal and their respective joint, and would not allow for the connection assembly to be properly received within their connection points. Further, even if one were to modify Souchal with Horvath, such combination would still be lacking the cone-shape of the connection points and the polygonal cone-shaped part of the connector.
There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation, absent Applicant’s own disclosure, to modify Souchal to have the above stated features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Regarding claim 22, Souchal does not explicitly disclose wherein the connector further comprises an elongated polygonal- or decagonal shaped part, the ring is provided with a polygonal- or decagonal shaped through hole, the main body is at a lower side provided with a polygonal- or decagonal-shaped recess, and the polygonal- or decagonal-shaped through hole in the ring and the polygonal- or decagonal-shaped recess in the main body are adapted for receiving and accommodating the connector.
It would not be obvious to modify Souchal to have such features, as such would require a non-obvious structural redesign of the connection assembly of Souchal and thus go against the intended function and design of the connection assembly of Souchal.
There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation, absent Applicant’s own disclosure, to modify Souchal to have the above stated features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Regarding claim 23, Souchal does not explicitly disclose wherein the main body has an upper end provided with a polygonal recess, the connection device has a lower side with a polygonal recess, and the adaptor is provided with polygonal connection flanges at an upper side and a lower side adapted to the polygonal recess of the main body and the polygonal recess of the connection device for retaining the main body, adaptor and connection device together.
It would not be obvious to modify Souchal to have such features, as such would require a non-obvious structural redesign of the connection assembly of Souchal and thus go against the intended function and design of the connection assembly of Souchal.
There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation, absent Applicant’s own disclosure, to modify Souchal to have the above stated features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Claims 26, 28 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN J BAYNES whose telephone number is (571)270-1852. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30AM-4:30PM 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, Amber Anderson can be reached on 571-270-5281. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KEVIN J BAYNES/Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights