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 .
Xylobone Fish created by Brian Maupin
Regarding claim 1, Brian Maupin discloses an outdoor musical instrument, the outdoor musical instrument comprising: a support post having a top end and a bottom end, the bottom end being mounted to an outdoor surface; a metal dish having a top surface and a bottom surface, the metal dish extending downward from a center to a lower circumferential edge; in which the metal dish is mounted to the top of the support post; in which the metal dish is configured to replicate the cap of a mushroom and the support post (concrete post as described in the video) is configured to replicate the stem of the mushroom; and in which the metal dish is configured to produce a note when the top surface is struck by a mallet (see the elements in the video).
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 2-4, 7-11, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maupin.
Regarding claim 2, Maupin herein the top surface of the metal dish comprises a plurality of dots.
Maupin does not disclose the specific use of dots that are etched therein.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the device as disclosed in Maupin to include etched dots since the use of etching metal is well known and conventional in the art.
Regarding claim 3, Maupin does not disclose wherein the metal dish comprises an anodized aluminum alloy.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the device as disclosed in Maupin to include an anodized aluminum alloy since this is material that will well known in metal devices.
Regarding claim 4, Maupin does not disclose the use of an isolator.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to provide an isolator on the bottom surface of the metal dish in order to separate the top end of the support post since these isolators are a means of dampening percussion musical instruments.
Regarding claims 7-10, Maupin does not disclose the specific dimensions as recited by the applicant.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date o provide the specific dimensions as recited by the applicant as a matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 11, Maupin does not disclose the specific use of a rounded edge as recited by the applicant.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to provide the rounded as recited by the applicant as a matter of design choice.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Maupin does not disclose the use of a base plate.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to provide the post as disclosed in Maupin to a base at the lower end as of a post recited in order the provide a support means for a musical instrument.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Maupin does not disclose a base plate that is attached to an in-ground post, wherein the base plate is attached to an outdoor surface.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to provide t the post as disclosed in Maupin to a base at the lower end as of a post recited in order the provide a support means for a musical instrument.
Claims 5, 6, 18, and 19 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY R LOCKETT whose telephone number is (571)272-2067. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 pm M-F.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at 571-270-7938. 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.
/KIMBERLY R LOCKETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights