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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 5, paragraph 22, “each member 120,130” should be changed to --each member 110,120--.
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 16 and 18 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 16 recites the limitation "the first fastener" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the second fastener" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swetish et al. (US 6,591,849 B1) in view of Nair (US 2011/0005560 A1).
Claim 1: Swetish et al. discloses a portable tent device comprising: a vertical frame member (20); a horizontal frame member (22); and a roof (24).
Swetish et al. lacks a solar panel, battery and outlet. Nair discloses a portable tent device with electrical power supply comprising: a vertical frame member (115); and a roof (105) comprised of a solar panel (110); a battery (paragraph 84); and an outlet (claims 1, 9 and 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Swetish et al. to include an electrical power supply comprised of a solar panel, battery and outlet, as taught by Nair, so that the tent could easily to be used to power electrical devices that may be desired by the user while using the tent that do not require an external power source (i.e. wall outlet, or generator).
Claims 2 and 3: Swetish et al. discloses the vertical frame member and the horizontal frame member as being telescopic (col. 5, lines 7-13).
Claim 4: Swetish et al. discloses the vertical frame member as being comprised of a foot (28).
Claim 5: Swetish et al. discloses the foot as being comprised of an opening (144).
Claim 6: Swetish et al. discloses the roof as being comprised of a waterproof fabric material (col. 3, lines 62-65).
Claim 7: Nair discloses the solar panel as being comprised of a monocrystalline solar panel, a polycrystalline solar panel, or a film solar panel (paragraphs 44 and 48).
Claim 8: Nair teaches the outlet as being positioned on the vertical frame members (see claims 9 and 10); however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to locate the outlets on any frame member desired, especially since doing so would make the outlet closer to whatever device planned to use said outlet (i.e. overhead lights would benefit from an outlet of the horizontal frame members as that location is closer to the roof/ceiling where the lights will be located, thus reducing the number of cords hanging around the canopy).
Claim 9: While Nair is silent of the exact voltage of the outlet (paragraph 57), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a 110v or 120v outlet since those are the standard outlets for everyday use in the US and thus would be compatible with a wide variety of devices/plugs.
Claim(s) 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Workman et al. (US 2013/0276382 A1) in view of Nair (US 2011/0005560 A1).
Claims 10 and 14: Workman et al. discloses a portable tent device comprising: a vertical frame member (any of elements 12 that are oriented vertically); a horizontal frame member (any of the elements 12 oriented horizontally and located between the vertical frame members); a roof (32/18) comprised of a first solar panel (paragraph 71); and a side wall (22/18) comprised of a second solar panel (paragraph71; cover 18 can include “photvoltaic panels” and cover 18 can be used to form “any one or more of a roof portion, side portions”).
Workman et al. lacks a battery and an outlet. Nair discloses a portable tent device with electrical power supply comprising: a vertical frame member (115); and a roof (105) comprised of a solar panel (110); a battery (paragraph 84); and an outlet positioned on the vertical member (claims 1, 9 and 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Workman et al. to include an electrical power supply comprised of a combination of solar panels, a battery and an outlet, as taught by Nair, so that the tent could easily to be used to power electrical devices that may be desired by the user while using the tent that do not require an external power source (i.e. wall outlet, or generator).
Claim 11: Workman et al. discloses the roof may be comprised of a rigid material (paragraph 71).
Claim 12: Nair discloses the solar panel as being comprised of a monocrystalline solar panel, a polycrystalline solar panel, or a film solar panel (paragraphs 44 and 48).
Claim 13: While Nair is silent of the exact voltage of the outlet (paragraph 57), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a 110v or 120v outlet since those are the standard outlets for everyday use in the US and thus would be compatible with a wide variety of devices/plugs.
Claims 15 and 17: Workman et al. teaches the side wall (22) as attaching to the vertical frame member via a first fastener (122; see FIG. 7) and attaching to a horizontal frame member via a second fastener (112 located at the top of the side wall; paragraph 78, “Cinch straps 122 may be positioned on the bottom, sides, and top of the wall panels 22 and configured to couple the wall panels 22 to the frame members 12 around the perimeter of the wall panels 22).
Claims 16 and 18: While Workman et al. teaches the fasteners to be cinch straps, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a clip, a clamp, a magnet, a tongue, or a groove, as these are all old and well-known connections means in the art that would provide the same function as the cinch straps.
Claim 19: Workman et al. discloses the side wall as being comprised of a waterproof fabric material (paragraph 71).
Claim 20: Workman et al. discloses the side wall may be comprised of a rigid material (paragraph 71).
Conclusion
The 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 DANIELLE JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2268. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11AM-7PM 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, David Dunn can be reached at (571)272-6670. 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.
/DNJ/Examiner, Art Unit 3636
/DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
