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 following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s), no new matter should be entered:
Claim 22 requires “elongated or disc-shaped main body” from Claim 22 must be shown. From the Specification, the correct terminology would be “cylinder-shaped” for the joint assembly.
Claim 22 requires attachment of structure elements but looking at Figure 1, there are no structure elements (500) attached to the joint assembly (200).
Claim 24 requires the dual tenon fork to be detachably arranged to the connection surface. However, Looking at Figure 2A, the dual tenon fork would not be detachably arranged to connection surface 202.
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 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 22-42 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.
In claim 22, Line 7 recites “structure elements” and Line 8 also recites “structure elements” but Line 4 already recited “structure elements”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
In claim 22, it is unclear if it is requiring all three of these configurations on only one because of the “or” found on Line 8
Attachment of structure elements extending in a horizontal plane via a connection interface
Longitudinal ends of the at least one joint assembly are adapted for connection to structure elements extending in a vertical pane via a connection disc
Structure elements extending in a parallel vertical plane via a rotational connection module and at least one connection module
Claim 23 recites “rotational connection module”. The Examiner finds this claim unclear because Claim 22 recited “rotational connection module” on Line 9. It is unclear if these are the same or different. Furthermore, Line 8 of Claim 22 recited “rotational connection module” in the alternative due to the “or” thus for Claim 23, it wasn’t positively recited.
Claim 24 recites “the connection surface” but the Claim depends from Claim 22 that recited “exterior connection surfaces”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 24 recites “a structure element” but the Claim depends from Claim 22 that recites on Line 4 “structure elements”. Furthermore, Line 6 of Claim 24 goes on further to recite “a structure element”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 25 recites “the internal locking device” but depends from Claim 23 that recited “internal locking devices”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 26 recites “connection disc” and “rotational connection module”. It seems as though these should recite “the” in front as they are present in Claim 22 from which they depend.
Claim 26 recites “rotational connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a rotational connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 26 recites “flanges (240, d252, 303)”. It appears as though the “d” might have been a typo.
Claim 26 recites “the internal locking device” but depends from Claim 23 that recited “internal locking devices”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 27 recites “connection disc” and “rotational connection module”. It seems as though these should recite “the” in front as they are present in Claim 22 from which they depend.
Claim 27 recites “rotational connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a rotational connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 27 recites the limitation "the wider heads". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 27 recites “the internal locking device” but depends from Claim 23 that recited “internal locking devices”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 28 recites “internal locking device” and “connection module”. It seems as though these should recite “the” in front as they are present in Claims 22 and 23 from which they depend.
Claim 28 recites “connection module” but it seems as though it should be “rotational connection module”.
Claim 28 recites “internal locking device” but depends from Claim 23 that recited “internal locking devices”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "the cylinder-shaped joint assembly" but Claim 22 referred to it as “an elongated or disc-shaped”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 29 recites “the rotational connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a rotational connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "the cylinder-shaped joint assembly" but Claim 22 referred to it as “an elongated or disc-shaped”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 32 and 33 recite “the connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 33 recites “a corresponding interlocking profile” but the Claim depends from Claim 32 that already recited “corresponding interlocking profiles”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "the cylinder-shaped joint assembly" but Claim 22 referred to it as “an elongated or disc-shaped”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 34 recites the limitation "the projection". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 34 recites the limitation "the cylinder-shaped joint assembly" but Claim 22 referred to it as “an elongated or disc-shaped”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "the interlocking profile". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "the inner end". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "the wider heads". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 recites “internal locking device” but depends from Claim 23 that recited “internal locking devices”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 36 recites “the connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 36 recites the limitation "the cone-shaped locking member". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 36 recites “the rotational connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a rotational connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 36 recites the limitation "the oblique surface of the rotational connection module". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 37 recites “an upper connection members” but the grammar around “members” does not support a plurality.
Claim 39 recites “connection modules” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 39 recites “the upper profiled connection interface” but depends from Claim 37 that recited it in the alternative due to the “or” on Line 5 of the claim, thus not positively reciting it.
Claim 39 recites “connection modules” but depends from Claim 22 that recited “at least one connection module” on Line 9. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 40 recites “the upper connection member” but depends from Claim 37 that recited “an upper connection members” in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 4 of the claim.
Claim 40 recites “the upper connection member is provided with longitudinally extending elongated centered profiled recess”. It seems as though the word “a” could be between “with” and “longitudinally”.
Claim 41 recites “the connection module” but depends from Claim 22 that recited a connection module in the alternative because of the “or” on Line 8 thus it was never positively recited.
Claim 41 recites the limitation "the corresponding". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 41 recites “the upper profiled connection interface” but depends from Claim 37 that recited it in the alternative due to the “or” on Line 5 of the claim, thus not positively reciting it.
Claim 42 recites “the connection interface (600, 600a) but depends from Claim 22 that recites “a connection interface (210)”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 42 recites “the dual tenon” but depends from Claim 24 that recites “a dual tenon fork connection”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
Claim 42 recites the limitation "the other end". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 42 recites “a structural element” but depends from Claim 22 that already recited “a structural element”. It is unclear if these are the same or different.
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 22-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by German Patent # 3,620,619 to Fink.
Regarding claim 22, as best understood, Fink teaches in Figure 2, a hybrid joint assembly [assembled exhibition stand (Paragraph 0010)], comprising: at least one joint assembly (43) [node body (Paragraph 0054)] having a disc-shaped [sphere (Paragraph 0056)] main body provided with exterior connection surfaces (53, Fig 3) [annular outer contact surfaces (Paragraph 0056)] configured for attachment of structure elements (41) [truss members (Paragraph 0054)] extending in a horizontal plane via a connection interface (44) [coupling body (Paragraph 0054)], wherein longitudinal ends of the at least one joint assembly (43) are adapted for connection to structure elements (41) [truss members (Paragraph 0054)] extending in a vertical plane via a connection disc (85, Fig 7) [handle part (Paragraph 0065)] or Figure 1 shows structure elements (42) [supporting columns (Paragraph 0054)] extending in a parallel vertical plane via a rotational connection module (111, Fig 7) [actuating member (Paragraph 0075)] and at least one connection module (45) [clamping bracket (Paragraph 0054)].
Regarding claim 23, Fink teaches in Figure 8, internal locking devices (81) [core (Paragraph 0064)] configured for detachable locking of the connection disc (85) or rotational connection module (111) to the at least one joint assembly (43, Fig 6).
Regarding claim 25, Fink teaches in Figure 8, the internal locking devices (81) comprises a main body (82) [middle part (Paragraph 0064)] dual tenon fork connection (83) [coupling heads (Paragraph 0064)] and locking device (93) [hook (Paragraph 0066)] with wider heads (96) [hook surfaces (Paragraph 0067)] extending from one end thereof.
Regarding claim 26, Fink teaches in Figures 6 and 8, the joint assembly (43), connection disc (85) and rotational connection module (111) are provided with upper or lower recesses or flanges [circular annular cylinder shape (Paragraph 0065) or rotary sleeve (Paragraph 0073)] adapted to receive and accommodate the main body (82) of the internal locking device (81).
Regarding claim 27, Fink teaches in Figures 6 and 8, the joint assembly (43), connection disc (85) and rotational connection module (111) are provided with respective flanges [circular annular cylinder shape (Paragraph 0065) or rotary sleeve (Paragraph 0073)] adapted to retain the wider heads (96) of the internal locking device (81).
Regarding claim 28, Fink teaches in Figures 5 and 7, the joint assembly (43) is provided with a projection (44.1 and 44.2) [coupling body (Paragraph 0063)] at each end, and the connection disc (85), internal locking device (81) and connection module (45) are provided with respective recesses (84, 87 and 157, Fig 17) adapted for receiving and accommodating the projection (44.1 and 44.2) at arrangement to the cylinder-shaped joint assembly (43).
Regarding claim 35, Fink teaches in Figure 17, the interlocking profile of the connection module (45) at the inner end is limited by an internal annular flange (137) adapted to retain the wider heads (96, Fig 8) of the internal locking device (81).
Regarding claim 24, Fink teaches in Figures 6, 7 and 8, the connection interface (44) comprises a dual tenon fork connection (83) [coupling heads (Paragraph 0064)] and locking device (93) [hook (Paragraph 0066)] with wider heads (96) [hook surfaces (Paragraph 0067)] detachably arranged to the connection surface (53, Fig 3) via the connection interface (44) at one end, and configured to be received in a structure element connection interface (62) [end cap (Paragraph 0058)] for arrangement of a structure element (61) thereto.
Regarding claim 42, Fink teaches in Figure 6, the connection interface (62) is provided with recesses (69) at one end for receiving the dual tenon (83, Fig 7) for the connection and locking device (93) and a connection member (67) at the other end for connection to a structure element (61).
Regarding claim 29, Fink teaches in Figure 7, the rotational connection module (111) is adapted for connection to the cylinder-shaped joint assembly (43, Fig 6) at one end and is provided with an oblique surface [it is a rotary sleeve (Paragraph 0073)] wherein a rotational locking device (83) [coupling head (Paragraph 0069)] is arranged at another end [as seen].
Regarding claim 30, Fink teaches in Figure 7, the rotational locking device (83) comprises a ball joint (100) [swivel bearing (Paragraph 0069)] and a cone-shaped locking member (91, Fig 8), the ball joint (100) is accommodated spatially rotational in the rotational locking device (82), and the cone-shaped locking member (91) protrudes from the oblique surface [as seen].
Regarding claim 31, Fink teaches in Figure 8, the cone-shaped locking member (91) is a dual tenon fork connection [coupling heads (Paragraph 0064)] and locking device (93) [hook (Paragraph 0066)] with wider heads (96) [hook surfaces (Paragraph 0067)].
Regarding claim 32, Fink teaches in Figure 7, the connection module (111) is provided with corresponding interlocking profiles (113, Fig 13) [axial through-hole (Paragraph 0073)] at vertical sides thereof [Figure 1 shows them in multiple orientations thus “vertical” sides is irrelevant] enabling attachment to corresponding adjoining connection modules (111).
Regarding claim 33, Fink teaches in Figure 7, the connection module (111) is provided a corresponding interlocking profile (113, Fig 13) at a lower side thereof [Figure 1 shows them in multiple orientations thus “lower” side is irrelevant] enabling connection to longitudinal ends of the joint assembly (43).
Regarding claim 34, Fink teaches in Figure 7, the interlocking profile (113) is provided with a slot or recess (115, Figs 12-23) [cam surface (Paragraph 0074)] adapted for accommodating the projection (44.1 and 44.2, Fig 5) [coupling body (Paragraph 0063)] of the cylinder-shaped joint assembly (43).
Regarding claim 41, Fink teaches in Figure 7, the connection module (111) is provided with a locking profile (113, Fig 13) [axial through-hole (Paragraph 0073)] at a rear vertical side thereof [Figure 1 shows them in multiple orientations thus “rear vertical” side is irrelevant] adapted for connection to the corresponding profiled connection interface (44) of a mainframe column connection assembly [see Figure 1].
Regarding claim 36, Fink teaches in Figures 1 and 17, the connection module (45) includes a through hole (157) [threaded holes (Paragraph 0086)] at an oblique surface [radially oriented (Paragraph 0086)] adapted for connection with a locking member [threaded holes (Paragraph 0086)] of the rotational connection module (111) [Figure 1 shows all these elements connected together], and the oblique surface [two semi-circular rings (Paragraph 0082)] corresponds to the oblique surface [also circular cylinder shaped (Paragraph 0072)] of the rotational connection module (111).
Regarding claim 37, Fink teaches in Figure 25, at least one mainframe column connection assembly (171) [internal ring (Paragraph 0089)] comprising an upper profiled connection interface (177) [lower end section (Paragraph 0091)] and a lower profiled connection interface (181) [base plate (Paragraph 0091)] and adapted for detachable connection to each other [via threads 178/184].
Regarding claim 38, Fink teaches in Figures 24 and 25, the mainframe column connection assembly (171) is provided with an upper connection device (173) [radially oriented bridge section (Paragraph 0089)] at an upper end for arrangement to a vertical structure element (42’) via an adapted connection interface (172) [ring sections (Paragraph 0089)].
Regarding claim 39, Fink teaches in Figures 1 and 25, the upper profiled connection interface (177) and lower profiled connection interface (181) are adapted for arrangement of connection modules (45) thereto.
Regarding claim 40, Fink teaches in Figure 25, the upper connection member (177) is provided with [a] longitudinally extending elongated centered profiled recess (178) [internal thread (Paragraph 0091)] at a lower end, adapted for receiving and accommodating an upper part (183) [shaft (Paragraph 0091)] of the lower connection member (181).
Conclusion
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