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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Status of Claims
In a preliminary amendment filed 4/22/2024, Applicant amended the abstract, amended claims 1-6, 8-10, cancelled claim 7, and added new claims 11-21. This amendment is acknowledged. Claims 1-6 and 8-21 are pending and are currently being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/22/2024 was filed before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1, “at” should read “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim does not end with a period. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 7 “a two” should likely read “two”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3 “axes” should read “axis”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4 “axes” should read “axis”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4 “axes” should read “axis”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 8, “axes” should read “axis”, in line 11, “axes” should read “axis”, in line 18, “axes” should read “axis”, and in line 20, “the respective” should likely read “each respective”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3 “axes” should read “axis”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3 “axes” should read “axis”. 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 1-6 and 8-10 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the middle” in line 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the middle” in line 12 and 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the relatively wide cross section of the first stiffening wall” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the relatively wide cross section of the first stiffening wall” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the surface of the first stiffening wall” in line 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “each mold cavity” in line 4, “the mold cavity forming the surface of the first stiffening wall” in line 5, the relatively wide cross section of the first stiffening wall” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Regarding Claims 4 and 8-10, the gate limitations as presented and best understood appear that they would be part of the injection molding apparatus and they are not actually part of the toy building element. The toy building element after forming by injection molding may have the gate mark as discussed in claim 7 which would actually part of the toy building element caused by the injection molding process, however how that mark was applied or formed on the building element does not seem particularly relevant to the structural definition of the building element. The method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself and therefore these limitations, which appear to be structure of the injection molding system and not part of the toy building element itself are not given significant patentable weight as they are not part of the building element and therefore are irrelevant to the structure of the presented building element. These claims appear to be drawn towards either the injection molding apparatus or method of forming the building element using an injection molding gate and therefore it is unclear how the gate would be considered part of the “toy building element” as presented as the gate does not seem to be part of the toy building element (Fig. 5 shows the molding system including the gate for forming the toy building element, but they are not part of the toy element resulting structure (Fig. 1-4)). It appears that these limitations should be presented in a separate method of forming the claimed toy building element or an injection molding apparatus that forms the claimed toy building element, both of which would be restricted from consideration as they are distinct and separate inventions from the toy building element itself. Therefore, in this case, these claims as best understood (converted from method claims 8-10 in the initial claim submission filed 4/22/2024) are being interpreted as the building element must be capable of being formed using the claimed gate of claims 4 and 8-10. Further, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed (or formed) does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations (Ex parte Masam, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987)).
Claim 3 is therefore rejected as they depend on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
(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 1-5 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reijnhard US Pat. No. 3,611,609.
Reijnhard teaches:
In Reference to Claim 1
A toy building element for at toy building set (toy building element 2 for a toy building set, Fig. 1-11), the toy building element having:
an integrally injection molded body (main body 104 is a synthetic plastic material which is injection molded in one piece as is common and known in the art, Col. 1 lines 28-33, Col. 4 lines 47-58, Fig. 1-5) comprising:
at least two adjacent tubular connector sockets extending along mutually parallel tube axes between two mutually identical and parallel surfaces (the upper and lower surfaces of the block form mutually identical and parallel surfaces that adjacent tubular connector sockets 5 (four adjacent sockets shown in Fig. 1, wherein the middle two may be considered the sockets) extend between and through to form parallel socket tubes each having central axes, Fig. 1-5),
two mutually equidistant connecting flanges extending from diametrically opposite sides of one of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets to diametrically opposite sides of the other one of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets so that the two adjacent tubular connector sockets are spaced apart by the connecting flanges and form a first channel between them, the first channel extending between the two parallel surfaces and having a relatively wide cross section close to each of the connecting flanges and a relatively narrow cross section in the middle between the connecting flanges (the solid side surfaces of the blocks between adjacent sockets form pairs of flanges that space the adjacent sockets from one another (Fig. 1-2), each flange having a central apertured/channel area that extends between the upper and lower surfaces (8/9), wherein the channel areas have a slightly curved hour-glass like shape that is wider near the outer edge of the block/connecting flange and thinner in the central/middle area between the connecting flanges where the sockets are closest, Fig. 1-2), and
a first stiffening wall arranged in the first channel, the first stiffening wall dividing the first channel into a first channel part close to one of the two parallel surfaces and a second channel part close to the other of the two parallel surfaces (stiffening wall 8 is formed within the channel between the upper and lower surfaces of the block with a first upper part above the wall and a second lower part 9 below the wall, Fig. 1), and at least a section of the first stiffening wall positioned closer to one of the two parallel surfaces than it is to the other one of the two parallel surfaces (the bottom surface of the wall 8 is significantly closer to the lower parallel surface/face of the block than the upper parallel surface of the wall/face of the block, Fig. 1).
In Reference to Claim 2
The toy building element according to claim 1, further comprising:
a third tubular connector socket extending along a third tube axis being parallel with said two mutually parallel tube axes (there are four adjacent connector sockets in building element 2, wherein the third may be the left or right most socket, Fig. 1-2), wherein,
the two mutually equidistant connecting flanges further extend from diametrically opposite sides of one of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets and to diametrically opposite sides of the third tubular connector socket so that the third tubular connector socket is spaced apart from said one of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets, forming a second channel between them, the second channel extending between the two parallel surfaces and, similar to the first channel, having a relatively wide cross section close to each of the connecting flanges and a relatively narrow cross section in the middle between the connecting flanges (the solid side surfaces of the blocks between adjacent sockets form pairs of flanges for each adjacent socket that space the adjacent sockets from one another (Fig. 1-2), each flange having a central apertured/channel area that extends between the upper and lower surfaces (8/9), wherein the channel areas have a slightly curved hour-glass like shape that is wider near the outer edge of the block/connecting flange and thinner in the central/middle area between the connecting flanges where the sockets are closest, Fig. 1-2), and
a second stiffening wall is arranged in the second channel in the middle between the two parallel surfaces (stiffening wall 8 is formed within each channel between the upper and lower surfaces of the block with a first upper part above the wall and a second lower part 9 below the wall, Fig. 1).
In Reference to Claim 3
The toy building element according to claim 2, wherein the parallel tube axes of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets and the third tubular connector socket are arranged equidistantly along a straight line, forming a beam structure (the three socket axes are arranged equidistant along a common line forming a beam structure, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 4
The toy building element according to claim 1, further comprising a cone shaped tapered pinpoint gate (cone shaped tapered point connection element 23 may be connected to the building block, or a socket 4 of another building block may be connected to the building block which also has a tapered cone shaped pinpoint gate (open aperture therethrough) which may broadly be considered “cone shaped tapered pinpoint gate” elements, Fig. 1-4).
In Reference to Claim 5
The toy building element according to claim 1, wherein the relatively wide cross section of the first stiffening wall is parallel with the two parallel surfaces (stiffening wall has upper and lower surfaces which are parallel to the upper and lower surfaces of the block, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 11
A toy building element (toy building element 2 for a toy building set, Fig. 1-11) comprising:
a housing (104) defining:
two parallel surfaces connected by two sidewall flanges (the upper and lower surfaces of the block form mutually identical and parallel block connecting faces/surfaces that adjacent tubular connector sockets 5 extend through, pairs of flanges are formed by the solid side surfaces of the blocks between adjacent sockets that space the adjacent sockets from one another (Fig. 1-2));
a first channel extending between the two parallel surfaces, the first channel having a relatively wide cross-section proximate to the two sidewall flanges and narrowing progressively away from the two sidewall flanges (each flange having a central apertured/channel area that extends between the upper and lower surfaces (8/9), wherein the channel areas have a slightly curved hour-glass like shape that is wider near the outer edge of the block/connecting flange and thinner in the central/middle area between the connecting flanges where the sockets are closest, Fig. 1-2), and
a stiffening wall intersecting the first channel, dividing the first channel into a two separate parts (stiffening wall 8 is formed within the channel between the upper and lower surfaces of the block with a first upper part above the wall and a second separate lower part 9 below the wall, Fig. 1), the stiffening wall positioned closer to one of the two parallel surfaces than it is to the other one of the two parallel surfaces (the bottom surface of the wall 8 is significantly closer to the lower parallel surface/face of the block than the upper parallel surface of the wall/face of the block, Fig. 1).
In Reference to Claim 12
The toy building element according to claim 11, further comprising a first tubular connector socket adjacent the first channel, the first tubular connector socket extending along a first tube axes between the two parallel surfaces (four adjacent sockets 5 extend between the upper and lower surfaces and between flanges to form parallel spaced socket tubes each having central axes, Fig. 1-5).
In Reference to Claim 13
The toy building element according to claim 12, further comprising a second tubular connector socket disposed adjacent the first channel, on an opposite side of the first channel as the first tubular connector socket, the second tubular connector socket extending along a second tube axes between the two parallel surfaces (four adjacent sockets 5 extend between the upper and lower surfaces and between flanges to form parallel spaced socket tubes each having central axes, Fig. 1-5, wherein the second socket may be other of the middle two sockets spaced on the opposite side of the first central channel sitting between the adjacent sockets, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 14
The toy building element according to claim 13, wherein the first and second tube axes are parallel each other but perpendicular to the two parallel surfaces (each adjacent socket has a respective parallel axis that is perpendicular to the horizontal upper and lower parallel block connecting faces/surfaces, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 15
The toy building element according to claim 13, wherein the housing further defines a second channel adjacent the second tubular connector socket, the second channel extending between the two parallel surfaces, the second channel having a relatively wide cross-section proximate to the two sidewall flanges and narrowing progressively away from the two sidewall flanges (one of the outer channels is formed between either of the outer sockets having the same shape as the first, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 16
The toy building element according to claim 15, further comprising a third tubular connector socket disposed adjacent the second channel, on an opposite side of the second channel as the second tubular connector socket, the third tubular connector socket extending along a third tube axes between the two parallel surfaces (one of the outer sockets 5 is formed in the same manner as the first and second and spaced by the second channel, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 17
A toy building element (toy building element 2 for a toy building set, Fig. 1-11) comprising:
a housing (2) defining: two parallel surfaces connected by two sidewall flanges (the upper and lower surfaces of the block form mutually identical and parallel block connecting faces/surfaces that adjacent tubular connector sockets 5 extend through, pairs of flanges are formed by the solid side surfaces of the blocks between adjacent sockets that space the adjacent sockets from one another (Fig. 1-2));
a first channel extending between the two parallel surfaces, the first channel having a relatively wide cross-section proximate to the two sidewall flanges and narrowing progressively away from the two sidewall flanges (each flange having a central apertured/channel area that extends between the upper and lower surfaces (8/9), wherein the channel areas have a slightly curved hour-glass like shape that is wider near the outer edge of the block/connecting flange and thinner in the central/middle area between the connecting flanges where the sockets are closest, Fig. 1-2);
a first tubular connector socket adjacent the first channel, the first tubular connector socket extending along a first tube axes between the two parallel surfaces;
a second tubular connector socket disposed adjacent the first channel, on an opposite side of the first channel as the first tubular connector socket, the second tubular connector socket extending along a second tube axes between the two parallel surfaces (four adjacent sockets 5 extend between the upper and lower surfaces and between flanges to form parallel spaced socket tubes each having central axes, Fig. 1-5, wherein the first two may be the middle two sockets with the first central channel sitting between the sockets);
a second channel adjacent the second tubular connector socket, the second channel extending between the two parallel surfaces, the second channel having a relatively wide cross-section proximate to the two sidewall flanges and narrowing progressively away from the two sidewall flanges (one of the outer channels is formed between either of the outer sockets having the same shape as the first);
a third tubular connector socket disposed adjacent the second channel, on an opposite side of the second channel as the second tubular connector socket, the third tubular connector socket extending along a third tube axes between the two parallel surfaces (one of the outer sockets 5 is formed in the same manner as the first and second and spaced by the second channel); and
a plurality of stiffening walls intersecting each channel, dividing the respective channel into a two separate parts (stiffening wall 8 is formed within each of the channels between the upper and lower surfaces of the block with a first upper part above the wall and a second separate lower part 9 below the wall, Fig. 1).
In Reference to Claim 18
The toy building element according to claim 17, wherein the first, second, and third tube axes are parallel each other but perpendicular to the two parallel surfaces (each adjacent socket has a respective parallel axis that is perpendicular to the horizontal upper and lower parallel block connecting faces/surfaces, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 19
The toy building element according to claim 17, wherein the housing further defines a third channel solely adjacent the third tubular connector socket, the third channel extending between the two parallel surfaces, the third channel having a relatively wide cross-section proximate to the two sidewall flanges and narrowing progressively away from the two sidewall flanges (if the first two sockets are the two left sockets, moving to the right would be the third socket, third channel, and fourth socket as claimed as each has the same shape as discussed above, Fig. 1-2).
In Reference to Claim 20
The toy building element according to claim 17, wherein the housing further defines a fourth tubular connector socket disposed solely adjacent the third channel, the fourth tubular connector socket extending along a fourth tube axes between the two parallel surfaces (if the first two sockets are the two left sockets, moving to the right would be the third socket, third channel, and fourth socket as claimed as each has the same shape as discussed above, Fig. 1-2).
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 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 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Reijnhard as applied to claim 1 above.
In Reference to Claim 6
Reijnhard teaches:
The toy building element according to claim 1, wherein the relatively wide cross section of the first stiffening wall comprises a gate mark arranged at a surface of the first stiffening wall facing the one of the two parallel surfaces (stiffening wall has upper and lower surfaces which are parallel to the upper and lower surfaces of the block capable of having a gate mark (location where material is injection molded or mark resulting from injection molding) made thereon, Fig. 1-2, wherein an injection molding process would leave an injection molding gate mark thereon somewhere on the surface).
The resulting structure of the injection molding process is the same regardless of the molding gate used and gate mark location of position made on the toy building element. One having ordinary skill in the art would have understood it to be obvious to have formed the gate mark (a slight mark or point on the body caused by the injection mold filling location) on a portion of the block that would not affect the usage or connection of the blocks with one another and generally out of sight in order to keep the block aesthetically pleasing and as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70) and it has been held that that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art (In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)). In this case, it is known that a gate mark is generally made during the process of injection molding, which would inherently be on a part of the product, however the placement of the mark does not functionally or structurally change the resulting product and as discussed above, one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that it would be preferred that this mark would be generally out of sight during use and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to position the gate mark provided during the injection molding process in an area out of sight and out of the way of any building block engage surface of portion so as to not affect the building blocks in performing their general task of connecting to other building blocks.
In Reference to Claim 8
Reijnhard teaches:
The toy building element according to claim 1, further comprising a gate arranged in a mold cavity forming the surface of the first stiffening wall facing the one of the two parallel surfaces of the toy building element (a gate and mold cavity would need to inherently be used to form the resulting toy building element by injection molding as taught by Reijnhard (Col. 1 lines 28-33, Col. 4 lines 47-58) and as discussed in the 112 section above).
The resulting structure of the injection molding process is the same regardless of the molding gate used and gate mark location of position made on the toy building element. One having ordinary skill in the art would have understood it to be obvious to have formed the gate with the claimed cone angle on a portion of the block (stiffening wall) that would not affect the usage or connection of the blocks with one another and generally out of sight in order to keep the block aesthetically pleasing and as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70) and it has been held that that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art (In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)). In this case, it is known that shape of the cone gate used to form the gate mark is generally made during the process of injection molding, which would inherently be on a part of the product, however the shape of the gate and the placement of the mark does not functionally or structurally change the resulting product and as discussed above, one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that it would be preferred that this mark would be generally out of sight during use and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to position the gate and gate mark provided during the injection molding process in an area out of sight and out of the way of any building block engage surface of portion so as to not affect the building blocks in performing their general task of connecting to other building blocks.
In Reference to Claim 9
Reijnhard teaches:
The toy building element according to claim 1, further comprising a gate arranged for each mold cavity in a surface of the mold cavity forming the surface of the first stiffening wall facing the one of the two parallel surfaces of the toy building element (a gate and mold cavity would need to inherently be used to form the resulting toy building element by injection molding as taught by Reijnhard (Col. 1 lines 28-33, Col. 4 lines 47-58) and as discussed in the 112 section above).
The resulting structure of the injection molding process is the same regardless of the molding gate used and gate mark location of position made on the toy building element. One having ordinary skill in the art would have understood it to be obvious to have formed the gate with the claimed cone angle on a portion of the block (stiffening wall) that would not affect the usage or connection of the blocks with one another and generally out of sight in order to keep the block aesthetically pleasing and as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70) and it has been held that that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art (In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)). In this case, it is known that shape of the cone gate used to form the gate mark is generally made during the process of injection molding, which would inherently be on a part of the product, however the shape of the gate and the placement of the mark does not functionally or structurally change the resulting product and as discussed above, one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that it would be preferred that this mark would be generally out of sight during use and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to position the gate and gate mark provided during the injection molding process in an area out of sight and out of the way of any building block engage surface of portion so as to not affect the building blocks in performing their general task of connecting to other building blocks.
In Reference to Claim 10
Reijnhard teaches:
The toy building element according to claim 9, wherein the gate is a cone shaped tapered pinpoint gate with a cone angle between 8 - 15 degrees and having a smallest cross section closest to the mold cavity (a gate and mold cavity would need to inherently be used to form the resulting toy building element by injection molding, wherein the element of Reijnhard is capable of being formed by a cone pinpoint gate with a cone angle as claimed as taught by Reijnhard (Col. 1 lines 28-33, Col. 4 lines 47-58) and as discussed in the 112 section above).
The resulting structure of the injection molding process is the same regardless of the molding gate used and gate mark location of position made on the toy building element. One having ordinary skill in the art would have understood it to be obvious to have formed the gate with the claimed cone angle on a portion of the block (stiffening wall) that would not affect the usage or connection of the blocks with one another and generally out of sight in order to keep the block aesthetically pleasing and as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70) and it has been held that that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art (In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)). In this case, it is known that shape of the cone gate used to form the gate mark is generally made during the process of injection molding, which would inherently be on a part of the product, however the shape of the gate and the placement of the mark does not functionally or structurally change the resulting product and as discussed above, one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that it would be preferred that this mark would be generally out of sight during use and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to position the gate and gate mark provided during the injection molding process in an area out of sight and out of the way of any building block engage surface of portion so as to not affect the building blocks in performing their general task of connecting to other building blocks.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reijnhard as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Sisamos US Pub. No. 2020/0261819.
In Reference to Claim 21
Reijnhard teaches:
The toy building element according to claim 17 as rejected above.
Reijnhard fails to teach:
Wherein the housing further defines a cross-shaped connector socket disposed solely adjacent the first channel, the cross-shaped connector socket extending along a cross-shaped connector axes between the two parallel surfaces.
Further, Sisamos teaches:
A similar toy building element for at toy building set (toy building element 104 for a toy building set 100, Fig. 1-12), the toy building element having:
an integrally injection molded body (main body 104 is generally formed in one integral piece by injection molding as is common and known in the art, [0003]) comprising:
at least two adjacent tubular connector sockets extending along mutually parallel tube axes between two mutually identical and parallel surfaces (the upper and lower surfaces of the block form mutually identical and parallel block connecting faces/surfaces that adjacent tubular connector sockets 114 extend between and through to form parallel socket tubes each having central axes 116, Fig. 1-5, 9, 12),
two mutually equidistant connecting flanges extending from diametrically opposite sides of one of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets to diametrically opposite sides of the other one of the two adjacent tubular connector sockets so that the two adjacent tubular connector sockets are spaced apart by the connecting flanges and form a first channel between them, the first channel extending between the two parallel surfaces and having a relatively wide cross section close to each of the connecting flanges and a relatively narrow cross section in the middle between the connecting flanges (the solid side surfaces of the blocks between adjacent sockets form pairs of flanges that space the adjacent sockets from one another, each flange having a central apertured/channel area that extends between the upper and lower surfaces, wherein the channel areas have a slightly curved triangular or hour-glass like shape that is wider near the outer edge of the block/connecting flange and thinner in the central/middle area between the connecting flanges where the sockets are closest, Fig. 1-4, 9, 12),
a first stiffening wall arranged in the first channel, the first stiffening wall dividing the first channel into two separate parts (a central stiffening wall divides the channel into two triangular shaped channels, Fig. 1-4, 9, 12), and
a cross-shaped connector socket disposed solely adjacent the first channel, the cross-shaped connector socket extending along a cross-shaped connector axes between the two parallel surfaces (the sockets 114 may include cross-shaped sockets, which may be placed at an end of the building block adjacent a circular tube socket to allow for connection of different types of connectors in a building block set (ex. rod 106, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Reijnhard to have formed the building block to have included a cross-shaped socket in order to allow different types of connecting members known in the art to make the building block toy more interactive, interesting, and fun to play with and as this shape is known and commonly used in building block elements in the art and may prevent rotation between connected members as desired as taught by Sisamos ([0008], [0014], [0018], [0028], [0050]-[0053]).
Brief Discussion of Other Prior Art References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the references cited page for publications that are noted for containing similar subject matter as the applicant. For example, Krog (5,964,635), Kossmann (D616,505), Wang (2018/0264373), Lin (CN203663455) appear to teach similar toy building elements having most or all of the claimed elements.
Conclusion
If the applicant or applicant’s representation has any questions or concerns regarding this office action or the application they are welcome to contact the examiner at the phone number listed below and schedule and interview to discuss the outstanding issues and possible amendments to expedite prosecution of this application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER R NICONOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7419. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8-6 MST.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/ALEXANDER R NICONOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights