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
Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on February 24th, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on February 24th, 2026, is acknowledged.
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 1-10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the phrases “the arc length of the top arc-shaped groove”, “the arc-shaped grooves”, “the top circular groove”, and “the strength”, which lack antecedent basis. The preceding claim language refers to “an arch-shaped groove”, and it is not clear if the claimed “top arc-shaped groove” is attempting to reference “an arc-shaped groove”, or a different groove, and therefore, the phrase “the top arc-shaped groove” technically lacks antecedent basis. In addition, the phrase “the arc length” lacks antecedent basis, rendering the claim indefinite. An arc-shaped groove may have multiple arc lengths. In particular, since any arc-shaped groove has multiple sidewalls, each with an arc length (and generally, an inner sidewall of an arc-shaped groove is shorter than an adjacent, outer sidewall), it is unclear which “arc length” is being referenced by the claim. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as reciting “an arc length of a top arc-shaped groove”. With respect to the phrase “the arc-shaped grooves”, it is noted that the preceding claim language only recites a singular arc-shaped groove, and therefore, this limitation lacks antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as reciting a plurality of arc-shaped grooves. With respect to the phrase “the top circular groove”, the preceding claim language does not recite a top circular groove, and therefore, this limitation lacks antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as reciting a top circular groove. With respect to the phrase “the strength”, the preceding claim language does not recite a strength. It is noted, also, that the claim does not say what strength is being fortified (i.e., a strength of the bracket device versus a strength of the groove or cover, specifically). The claim also does not say what type of strength (i.e., a tensile strength vs a tear strength, for example). In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as directed to any measure of strength with respect to any part of the claimed bracket device.
Claims 2-10 are rejected due to dependence on indefinite claim 1.
Claim 2 recites the phrase “the top of each corner complete element”, “the arc length”, “the top arc-shaped groove”, “the two corners”, “the convex rings”, and “the strength”, each of which lack antecedent basis. It is noted that a corner complete element may have multiple tops (or top portions), multiple arc lengths may be present, multiple top arc-shaped grooves may be present, and more than two corners may be present. In addition, it is unclear which of the corners is meant by the phrase “the two corners”, which convex rings are meant by “the convex rings”, and the location and type of strength. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as directed to “a top of each corner complete element”, “an arc length”, “a top arc-shaped groove”, “a pair of corners”, “a plurality of convex rings” and “a strength of any part of the bracket device”.
Claims 3-4 are rejected due to dependence on indefinite claim 2.
Claims 3 and 5 recite “the same plane”, which lacks antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claims will be interpreted as directed to a same plane.
Claim 6 recites “the bottom”, “the arc length”, “the bottom arc-shaped groove”, “the plurality of bracket devices”, “the bottom circular groove”, “the top circular groove” each lack antecedent basis. It is noted that multiple bottoms and arc lengths may be present (in which case, it is not clear which bottom or arc length, specifically, is referenced by the claim), and the preceding claim language does not recite the presence of a bottom arc-shaped groove, a plurality of bracket devices, a bottom circular groove, and a top circular groove. In addition, the claim is directed to a singular bracket device, yet the present claim recites multiple bracket devices, which is a logical impossibility. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as directed to “a bottom”, “an arc length”, “a bottom arc-shaped groove”, “a bottom circular groove” and “a top circular groove”. In addition, the claimed bracket device will be construed as capable of being combined to form a bracket system comprising a plurality of first bracket modules and a plurality of bracket devices.
Claims 7-10 are rejected due to dependence on indefinite claim 6.
Claim 7 recites “the top,”, “the arc length”, “the bottom”, “the top circular grooves”, “the bottom circular grooves”, “the top bracket devices”, and “the bottom bracket devices”, which all lack antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as reciting a top, an arc length, a bottom, a plurality of top circular grooves, and a plurality of bottom circular grooves. In addition, the claimed bracket device will be interpreted as capable of being used in a system comprising a plurality of top bracket devices and a plurality of bottom bracket devices.
Claims 8-9 are rejected due to dependence on indefinite claim 7.
Claim 8 recites “the three top bracket devices”, “the same plane”, and “the three bottom bracket devices” each lack antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as directed to “a same plane”. In addition, the claimed bracket device will be interpreted as capable of being used in a system comprising three top bracket devices and three bottom bracket devices.
Claim 10 recites “the same plane”, which lacks antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claim will be interpreted as directed to a same plane. In addition, the claim is indefinite as it is directed to a singular bracket device, yet recites the presence of three top bracket devices and three bottom bracket devices, which is contradictory. It is not clear how a bracket device can be both itself and six of itself. In the interest of compact prosecution, the claimed bracket device will be interpreted as capable of being used in a system comprising three top bracket devices and three bottom bracket devices.
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 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gooden et al (US2015/0284914A1).
With regards to claim 1, Gooden discloses a modular cell and matrix system for supporting a load bearing feature such as tree roots (i.e., a bracket device for tree pit root management) comprising more than three modular cells 10 (i.e., at least three bracket elements) each modular cell comprising a elongated rods 32 (i.e., center brackets, as they form a center of the resulting system), a set of sides 14 (i.e., side brackets), and cylindrical columnar legs 20 (i.e., connecting brackets), wherein a corner is formed between two adjacent sides (i.e., between two adjacent side brackets), and an entrance of a hollow core 23 (i.e., an arc-shaped groove) is formed at the top of each corner (Gooden: abstract; para. [0144]-[0146] and [0152]-[0153]; Figs. 1-3 and 12). With respect to the phrase “the arc length of the top arc-shaped groove is one-third of the circumference of a circle”, it is noted that the claim does not define the circle (i.e., the arc length need only be one-third of the length of the circumference of an unspecified, hypothetical circle). It is submitted that, given the arc length of the entrance of hollow core 23, a circle having a circumference which is three times the arc length, is possible (i.e., the circle is not positively recited) (Gooden: Figs. 1-3). The cylindrical columnar legs 20 (i.e., connecting brackets) include engagement points 22 and 24, which are used to connect sides 14 to elongated rods 32 (i.e., the connecting brackets connect the center bracket and the side brackets, respectively) (Gooden: Figs. 1-3). Due to the inclusion of hollow cores 23, the modular cells are stackable, corner-to-corner (i.e., wherein when three corners of the bracket elements are connected, top arc-shaped grooves of the three corners are connected to form a top circular groove, in this case, the top-most bracket element providing the top circular groove) (Gooden: Figs. 3, 9, and 12). In addition, a circular vertical linking member 54 (i.e., a cover comprising a convex ring) may be inserted into any of the hollow cores 23 (i.e., and therefore, into the top circular groove) (Gooden: Figs. 5 and 7). It is submitted that the mere presence of material (such as the material of circular vertical linking member) is capable of providing strength (and therefore, the function of fortifying strength is met by the structure of Gooden). Although Gooden depicts square-shaped bracket elements, the broader disclosure of Gooden notes that, instead, a hexagonal structure may be selected, in which case, each of the bracket elements are hexagonal bracket elements, and each hexagonal bracket element would have six side brackets and six connecting brackets (Gooden: para. [0097]).
With regards to claim 5, Gooden further depicts at least three of its modular cells (i.e., bracket devices) as arranged on a same plane and joined to form a center hole. It is noted that the center hole may be used for a root ball to pass through, depending on the size of the root ball (i.e., the claim is rather broad, as, technically, any small grouping of root material may be used to form a “root ball” which passes through) (Gooden: Fig. 3). Alternatively, it is clear from Figure 12 of Gooden that a plant is capable of fitting through a formed center hole (Gooden: Fig. 12).
Examiner’s Note
Presuming the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is overcome, claims 2-4 and 6-10 would be considered allowable over the prior art of record.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of subject matter which distinguishes over the prior art of record.
The closest prior art of record is Gooden et al (US2015/0284914A1).
With respect to present claim 2, Gooden fails to disclose or teach a plurality of first corner complete elements and a plurality of second corner complete elements, such that a top arc-shaped groove is formed on the top of each first corner complete element. The vertical linking members (54) of Gooden is considered to read on the claimed plurality of covers. However, due to the inclusion of vertical linking members (54), the structure of Gooden does not comprise a location at which first corner complete elements may be provided (i.e., essentially, the bracket device of Gooden is already capped by a material). Gooden additionally discloses an embodiment with caps 26, though the caps 26 are not capable of butting two corners (i.e., they are located in a single corner), and therefore, caps 26 are not considered to constitute either first or second corner complete elements of the present claims.
Claims 3-4 depend from present claim 2, and therefore, they include the same distinguishing subject matter of present claim 2.
With respect to present claim 6, Gooden fails to disclose or teach a bottom arc-shaped groove formed at the bottom each corner, and further, a configuration where a first end of a column is inserted into a bottom circular groove of a top bracket device, and a second end of the column inserted into a top circular groove of a bottom bracket device.
Claims 7-10 depend from present claim 6, and therefore, they include the same distinguishing subject matter of present claim 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETHAN WEYDEMEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-1907. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Maria V. Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
/ETHAN WEYDEMEYER/
Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights