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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-11) in the reply filed on 04/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para0011, line 5, “Teh” should be changed to --The--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
Figures 1-11,15 are objected to for excessive shading, see MPEP 1.84(m) which requires line drawings only.
Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 5,6,8,11 is(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 5 recites “wherein the sealing engagement comprises the coupling”. However, this recitation renders the claim vague and indefinite because claim 1 requires both a sealing engagement and a coupling independently. It is not clear how the sealing engagement could comprise the coupling as then recited in claim 5.
Claim 6 recites “to receive the shaft”. There is a lack of antecedent basis.
Claim 6 further recites “the other of the shaft and the resilient receiver.” There is a lack of antecedent basis for both of these terms.
Claim 8 recites “the release comprising”. There is a lack of antecedent basis. Further it is not clear what is meant by “the release”.
Claim 11 recites “wherein the plurality of channels are defined by partial channels formed in the bottom surface and the top surface of each panel, and wherein the partial channels in the bottom surface are laterally offset from the partial channels in the top surface”. However, this renders the claim vague and indefinite because as seen in fig 12 of the instant application, partial channels that are laterally offset are formed by adjacent panels not the bottom and top surfaces of each stack of panel as claimed i.e. as currently recited the partial channels of the bottom surface and the top surface are not laterally offset but are centrally aligned.
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.
Claim(s) 1,2,4,5,6,8,9,10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritz (US 20210127644 A1) in view of Jiang et al. herein Jiang (US 20240083623 A1) and in view of Stokhuijzen (US 5984441 A).
Regarding claim 1:
Ritz discloses:
A nesting block, comprising: (abstract and figs)
a stack of panels, (10, Figs 1-5)
each panel having a top surface, a bottom surface, a front edge, a back edge, and opposed side edges that extend between the front edge and the back edge, (see top, bottom, front, back, and opposed side edges of bricks 10 made of two adjacent bricks 10, para0044, figs 1-5)
wherein adjacent panels in the stack of panels comprise a top panel (top 10, fig 1)
and a bottom panel, (bottom 10, fig 1)
the adjacent panels comprising:a plurality of channels defined by the bottom surface of the top panel and the top surface of the bottom panel, (11, para0044)
each channel having an open end at the front edge of the top and bottom panels and a closed end toward the back edge of the top panel and the bottom panel; (Figs 1-4, see how channels 11 are open at the front edge and closed at the back edge of each panel 10)
and a sealing engagement between the bottom surface of the top panel and the top surface of the bottom panel, (19+20, figs 1-5, para0045)
the sealing engagement sealing along the back edge and the opposed side edges when the top panel is coupled to the bottom panel. (para0045, Figs 1-5)
Ritz doesn’t disclose:
a hinge connection that connects the back edges of the top panel and the bottom panel; and
Jiang discloses:
a hinge connection that connects the back edges of the top panel and the bottom panel; and (64+68+67+66, para0028-0032)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the back edges of the top and bottom panels of Ritz such that they comprised a hinge connection as taught by Jiang to removable snap the top and bottom panels together (Jiang).
Ritz as modified doesn’t disclose:
a coupling that releasably couples the top panel and the bottom panel, the coupling comprising a first coupling part carried by the top panel and a second coupling part carried by the bottom panel;
Stokhuijzen discloses:
a coupling that releasably couples the top panel and the bottom panel, (5+6+15, fig 6-7, col 3 ln 36-49)
the coupling comprising a first coupling part carried by the top panel (15+6)
and a second coupling part carried by the bottom panel; (5)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the top and bottom panels of Ritz as modified such that they comprised a coupling as taught by Stokhuijzen to provide for a releasable coupling between the top and bottom panels (Stokhuijzen).
Regarding claim 2:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the channels have a circular cross-section. (11, para0044, figs 1-5)
Regarding claim 4:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the sealing engagement comprises a tongue and groove engagement. (19+20, fig 1-5, para0045)
Regarding claim 5:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the sealing engagement comprises the coupling. (as best understood, (19+20, fig 1-5, para0045)
Regarding claim 6:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the hinge connection comprises a first hinge part (66, fig 5b+5c)
and a second hinge part, (68, fig 5b+5c)
wherein the first hinge part comprises a shaft or a resilient receiver (66, fig 5b+5c)
configured to receive the shaft and the second hinge part comprises the other of the shaft and the resilient receiver. (68, fig 5b+5c)
Regarding claim 8:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the coupling is a resilient clip and a clip receiver, (5+6+15, fig 6+7)
the release comprising an aperture that permits access to the resilient clip, (see aperture of 6)
wherein pressure applied to the resilient clip via the aperture causes the resilient clip to disengage from the receiver. (col 3 ln 36-49)
Regarding claim 9:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the stack of panels comprises a capping panel, (see top panel of 10)
a base panel, (see bottom panel of 10)
and a plurality of intermediate panels. (see intermediate panels of 10)
Regarding claim 10:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 9 and Ritz further discloses:
wherein the number of intermediate panels is adjustable. (para0044-0045, figs 1-5)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritz in view of Jian and in view of Stokhuijzen, as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Novich (US D666780 S).
Regarding claim 3:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 but doesn’t disclose:
further comprising grooves in the opposed side edges for mounting in a nesting block holder.
Novich discloses:
further comprising grooves in the opposed side edges for mounting in a nesting block holder. (see grooves in opposed side edges, fig 8)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the opposed side edges of Ritz as modified such that they comprised grooves as taught by Novich to allow for easier gripping of the panels.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritz Ritz in view of Jian and in view of Stokhuijzen, as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Dunn et al. herein Dunn (US 20230137385 A1).
Regarding claim 7:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 but doesn’t disclose:
wherein each panel further comprises an alignment engagement, the alignment engagement comprising alignment pins in the top surface or the bottom surface.
Dunn discloses:
wherein each panel further comprises an alignment engagement, the alignment engagement comprising alignment pins in the top surface or the bottom surface. (30, fig 2-11, para0050)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the panels of Ritz as modified such that they comprised alignment engagement as taught by Dunn to allow the panels to be stacked to provide compact space saving arrangement (Dunn).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritz Ritz in view of Jian and in view of Stokhuijzen, as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Barnes (US 3191199 A).
Regarding claim 11:
Ritz as modified discloses claim 1 but doesn’t disclose:
wherein the plurality of channels are defined by partial channels formed in the bottom surface and the top surface of each panel, and wherein the partial channels in the bottom surface are laterally offset from the partial channels in the top surface.
Barnes discloses:
wherein the plurality of channels are defined by partial channels formed in the bottom surface and the top surface of each panel, and wherein the partial channels in the bottom surface are laterally offset from the partial channels in the top surface. (15a, figs 4-5, col 24-39)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the channels of Ritz as modified such that were laterally offset as taught by Barnes to provide for a large number of bee-cell openings (Barnes).
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHADA M ALGHAILANI whose telephone number is (571)272-8058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (7:30am - 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, Peter Poon can be reached on 571-272-6891. 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.
/SHADA MOHAMED ALGHAILANI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/PETER M POON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights