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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the aforementioned claim sets forth a physical structure/configuration that is inconsistent with that which is disclosed within the Cadavis and Gaor references (discussed in greater depth infra), which is the prior art combination closest to Applicant’s claimed invention, and there would be no obvious reason to modify Cadavis and Gaor to the extent necessary to satisfy Applicant’s claim 9 limitations.
With respect to claim 9, the provision of a hinge assembly bearing a plurality of plates is well known (such as that which might be found upon an ordinary door assembly within a building), but providing such a plate-based hinge in the assembly of Cadavis in view of Gaor would require a modification of an already-modifying reference (serving no independent purpose other than to simply satisfy Applicant’s claim limitation requirement), which would be strongly indicative of an application of improper hindsight reasoning.
Claim 9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections 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.
Note that any change to the scope of the claimed invention related to the aforementioned claims may potentially affect the determinations/treatment of claims set forth supra.
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 8-16 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.
The claim 8 recitation of “at an angle toward the first support projection direction and the second support projection direction” is unclear. Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The claim 8 recitation of “the hinge assembly define a pivot axis” is unclear. Does Applicant actually intend to recite “the hinge assembly defining a pivot axis”? Additionally, it is unknown how the recited structure of the hinge assembly, including its “first portion” and “second portion”, can “define” a pivot axis. Should the “first portion” and “second portion” exist in axial form/shaping? Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The claim 9 recitation of “the first and second portions of the hinge assembly comprise plates defining planes” appears to conflict with the claim 8 recitation of “the hinge assembly (comprised of a first portion and a second portion) define a pivot axis”. Note that a plane and an axis have different shapes. Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The claim 11 recitation of “through openings havening a pattern resembling a flag” is unclear. Exactly how can an opening have a pattern resembling a flag? Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The claim 11 recitation of “an applique on a rigid panel resembling a flag” is unclear, as it is unknown whether the recited “applique” or the recited “rigid panel” should resemble a flag. Exactly what structure/configuration is sought? Please review/revise/clarify.
The term “conventional” in claim 15 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “conventional” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 10, 12-14 and 16 are rejected as depending (directly or indirectly) from rejected independent claim 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 8 and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0151212 to Cadavis (“Cadavis”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,395,217 to Gaor (“Gaor”).
Regarding claim 8, Cadavis discloses a flag assembly (e.g. sign supporting device 10, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 34) comprising: i) a mast (e.g. vertical post 14, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 34) having a proximal end (e.g. lower end, as shown in fig. 1) and a distal end (e.g. upper end, as shown in fig. 1) with a length (e.g. vertical dimension, as shown in fig. 1) extending between (fig. 1) the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) and the distal end (aforementioned upper end); ii) a first support (e.g. top instance of channels 30, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 41), the first support (aforementioned top instance of channels 30) projecting away from (fig. 1) the mast (14) in a first support location (e.g. upper end of mounting frame 20, as shown in fig. 1); iii) a second support (e.g. bottom instance of channels 30, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 41), the second support (aforementioned bottom instance of channels 30) projecting away from (fig. 1) the mast (14) in a second support location (e.g. lower end of mounting frame 20, as shown fig. 1), the second support location (aforementioned lower end of mounting frame 20) being intermediate of (fig. 1) the distal end (aforementioned upper end) and the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) of the mast (14), the second support location (aforementioned lower end of mounting frame 20) being closer to (fig. 1) the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) of the mast (14) than the first support location (aforementioned upper end of mounting frame 20), the first support location (aforementioned upper end of mounting frame 20) being closer to (fig. 1) the distal end (aforementioned upper end) of the mast (14)) than the second support location (aforementioned lower end of mounting frame 20); and iv) a flag element (e.g. flat panel 12, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 34) disposed between (per para. 41, top and bottom edges of panel 12 are received in top and bottom instances of channels 30) the first and second supports (aforementioned top and bottom instances of channels 30); v) wherein the first support (aforementioned top instance of channels 30) projects away from (fig. 1) the mast (14) in a first support projection direction (e.g. outward direction shown in fig. 1), the second support (aforementioned bottom instance of channels 30) projects away from (fig. 1) the mast (14) in a second support projection direction (e.g. outward direction shown in fig. 1), the first support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in fig. 1) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in fig. 1) are parallel to each other (fig. 1); vi) wherein the mast (14) is adapted and configured to be mounted to (i.e. “supported in”, as discussed at para. 34) an object (e.g. the ground, as discussed at para. 34) at or adjacent to the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) of the mast (14) in a manner such that the mast (14) projects away from (fig. 1) the object (aforementioned ground) in a direction extending from (fig. 1) the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) of the mast (14) to the distal end (aforementioned upper end) of the mast (14) at an angle toward (fig. 1) the first support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in fig. 1) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in fig. 1).
Cadavis does not disclose wherein the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) of the mast (14) comprises a hinge assembly, the hinge assembly includes a first portion that is adapted and configured for connection with the object (aforementioned ground), and a second portion that is hingedly connected to the first portion with the mast (14) projecting from the second portion, the hinge assembly define a pivot axis parallel to the first support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in fig. 1) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in fig. 1).
Gaor teaches the concept of providing a proximal end (e.g. bottom end 40, as shown in fig. 4) of a mast (e.g. pole 36, as shown in fig. 4) comprising a hinge assembly (e.g. swivel connection member 44 and base 12, together, as shown in fig. 4), the hinge assembly (44 and 12, together) including a first portion (e.g. base 12, alone, as shown in fig. 4) that is adapted and configured for connection with (fig. 5) an object (e.g. vehicle 16, as shown in fig. 5), and a second portion (e.g. swivel connection member 44, alone, as shown in fig. 4) that is hingedly connected to (compare figs. 1 and 4-5) the first portion (12, alone) with the mast (36) projecting from (figs. 4-5) the second portion (44, alone), the hinge assembly (44 and 12, together) defining a pivot axis (e.g. axis about which swivel connection member 44 and base 12 pivot relative to each other, as shown in figs. 1 and 4).
Given that Cadavis and Gaor both concern flag assemblies intended to project from surfaces (Cadavis ground and Gaor vehicle 16), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the lower end of the Cadavis vertical post 14 with a Gaor swivel connection member 44 and base 12 assembly, in order to provide the benefit of allowing the Cadavis sign supporting device 10 to extend upward at a desired angle, as discussed at Gaor col. 2, lines 49-51. Note that the Cadavis flat panel 12 is rotatable about vertical post 14 (Cadavis para. 34), and as such, pursuant to the above combination, the Cadavis flat panel 12 may indeed be rotated to a position in which the Cadavis top and bottom instances of channels 30 extend in a direction parallel to the axis about which the Gaor swivel connection member 44 and base 12 pivot relative to each other.
Regarding claim 10, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 8 wherein the angle is less than 90 degrees (per the combination set forth in the rejection of claim 8, supra, an angle may be selected as desired; see Gaor fig. 4).
Regarding claim 11, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 8 wherein the flag element (Cadavis 12) comprises one of (a) through openings (e.g. Cadavis sockets 52, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 52) having a pattern (Cadavis fig. 1) resembling a flag (Cadavis fig. 1) and (b) an applique (e.g. Cadavis insert 32, as shown in fig. 1 and discussed at para. 42) on (Cadavis fig. 1) a rigid (Cadavis fig. 1) panel (note that Cadavis element 12 is a panel, per para. 42) resembling a flag (Cadavis fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 8 but does not disclose: i) a third support projecting from the mast (Cadavis 14) at a third support location, the third support location being intermediate of the proximal end (aforementioned lower end) of the mast (Cadavis 14) and the second support location (aforementioned lower end of Cadavis mounting frame 20), the third support projects away from the mast (Cadavis 14) in a third support projection direction, the third support projection direction being parallel to the first support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in Cadavis fig. 1) and the second support projection direction (aforementioned outward direction shown in Cadavis fig. 1); and ii) a further panel disposed between the second and third supports.
However, it has been held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In the instant matter, providing the Cadavis mounting frame 20 with an additional instance of channels 30 beneath the bottom instance of channels 30 shown in Cadavis fig. 1 and an additional instance of Cadavis panel 12 retained between said Cadavis fig. 1 bottom instance of channels 30 and the proposed newly added instance of channels 30 would simply permit a display of additional information as desired.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the Cadavis mounting frame 20 with an additional instance of channels 30 beneath the bottom instance of channels 30 shown in Cadavis fig. 1 and an additional instance of Cadavis panel 12 retained between said Cadavis fig. 1 bottom instance of channels 30 and the proposed newly added instance of channels 30, in order to provide the benefit of permitting a display of additional information as desired.
Regarding claim 13, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 12 wherein the further panel (aforementioned additional instance of Cadavis panel 12) comprises a flag (Cadavis fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 8 wherein the distal end (aforementioned upper end) of the mast (Cadavis 14) comprises (i.e. carries, as shown in Cadavis fig. 1) a light (e.g. uppermost instance of Cadavis light 46, as shown in fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 8 wherein the flag element (Cadavis 12) has a conventional top (e.g. upper edge, as shown in Cadavis fig. 1) and a conventional bottom (e.g. lower edge, as shown in Cadavis fig. 1), the conventional top (aforementioned upper edge) of the flag element (Cadavis 12) is adjacent (Cadavis fig. 1) the first support (aforementioned top instance of Cadavis channels 30).
Regarding claim 16, Cadavis in view of Gaor discloses the flag assembly of claim 8 further comprising a light array (e.g. plurality of Cadavis lights 46, as shown in fig. 1) adapted and configured to illuminate (Cadavis fig. 1 and para. 50) the flag element (Cadavis 12).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN V LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5052. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5:00PM.
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 J. Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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.
/JUSTIN V LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights