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 .
The following correspondence is a Final Office Action for application no. 18/816,615, for a BOLLARD HOLDER, filed on 8/27/2024. This correspondence is in response to applicant's reply filed on 1/22/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-10, 17, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (U.S. Pub. 2009/0090836).
Regarding claim 1, Harris teaches a bollard holder to hold a bollard to a concrete form, the bollard holder comprising: a portion for circling a portion of the bollard; an adjustable member coupled to the circling portion and for contacting the bollard, the adjustable member adjustable relative to the circling portion to adjust an orientation of the circling portion relative to the bollard; and an arm extending from the circling portion to attach the circling portion to the concrete form, wherein the arm is fixed relative to the circling portion such that the arm has a first orientation relative to the circling portion prior to attachment to the concrete form and the arm has the first orientation relative to the circling portion while attached to the concrete form, but does not teach that the portion is an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard. Harris, however teaches a bollard holder with an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard (Fig. 5) in order to completely enclose the bollard for stability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the portion of Harris in Fig. 4 as an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard in order to provide stability to the bollard in a vertical orientation on all sides, in view of Harris Fig. 5.
[AltContent: textbox (2nd adjustable member)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Flat ring)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
486
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Adjustable member/
1st adjustable member )][AltContent: textbox (Circling portion)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (tab)][AltContent: textbox (Second arm)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Removable fastener)]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Arm)]
Regarding claim 2, Harris teaches the holder of claim 1, wherein the adjustable member comprises a threaded member.
Regarding claim 3, Harris teaches the holder of claim 1, wherein the arm is configured to be attached to the concrete form via a removable fastener.
Regarding claim 6, Harris teaches the holder of claim 1, comprising a second arm extending from the encircling portion to attach the encircling portion to the concrete form, wherein the second arm is spaced an arc length from the arm.
Regarding claim 7, Harris teaches the holder of claim 1, wherein the encircling portion comprises a ring portion.
Regarding claim 8, Harris teaches the holder of claim 7, wherein the ring portion comprises a flat ring (top).
Regarding claim 9, Harris teaches the holder of claim 8, wherein the encircling portion comprises a tab extending from the flat ring and with which the adjustable member cooperates to adjust the orientation of the encircling portion relative to the bollard.
Regarding claim 10, Harris teaches the holder of claim 9, wherein the tab is threaded to facilitate cooperation with the adjustable member.
Regarding claim 17, Harris teaches a bollard holder to hold a bollard to a concrete form, the bollard holder comprising: a portion for circling a portion of the bollard; a first adjustable member coupled to the circling portion and for contacting the bollard, the first adjustable member adjustable relative to the circling portion to adjust an orientation of the circling portion relative to the bollard; a second adjustable member coupled to the circling portion and for contacting the bollard, the second adjustable member adjustable relative to the circling portion to adjust the orientation of the circling portion relative to the bollard; an arm extending from the circling portion to attach the circling portion to the concrete form; and a second arm extending from the circling portion to attach the circling portion to the concrete form, wherein the arm is fixed relative to the circling portion and the second arm is fixed relative to the circling portion such that the arm has a first orientation relative to the second arm prior to attachment of the arm and the second arm to the concrete form and the arm has the first orientation relative to the second arm while the arm and the second arm are attached to the concrete form, but does not teach that the portion is an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard. Harris, however teaches a bollard holder with an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard (Fig. 5) in order to completely enclose the bollard for stability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the portion of Harris in Fig. 4 as an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard in order to provide stability to the bollard in a vertical orientation on all sides, in view of Harris Fig. 5.
Regarding claim 18, Harris teaches the holder of claim 17, wherein the second arm is spaced an arc length from the arm.
Regarding claim 20, Harris teaches the holder of claim 17, wherein the encircling portion comprises a tab with which the first adjustable member cooperates to adjust the orientation of the encircling portion relative to the bollard.
Claim(s) 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (U.S. Pub. 2009/0090836) in view of Espinosa (U.S. Pat. 10,577,816).
Regarding claim 11, Harris teaches a method of holding a bollard (24) to a ground, comprising:
attaching an arm of a bollard holder to the ground; placing the bollard in a circling portion of the bollard holder, wherein the arm extends from the circling portion such that the circling portion is attached to the ground via the arm, and wherein an adjustable member is adjustably coupled to the circling portion and contacts the bollard such that the circling portion is at a first orientation relative to the circling portion; and adjusting the adjustable member such that the circling portion is at a second orientation relative to the circling portion, and wherein the arm is fixed relative to the circling portion such that the arm is at a same orientation relative to the circling portion when the arm is attached to the ground, when the arm is not attached to the ground, when the circling portion is at the first orientation relative to the bollard, and when the circling portion is at the second orientation relative to the bollard (based on the adjustment of the adjustable member); but does not teach that that the portion is an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard or that the method is for attaching to a concrete form.
Harris, however teaches a bollard holder with an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard (Fig. 5) in order to completely enclose the bollard for stability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the portion of Harris in Fig. 4 as an encircling portion for encircling a portion of the bollard in order to provide stability to the bollard in a vertical orientation on all sides, in view of Harris Fig. 5.
Further, Espinosa teaches a support (2) with an arms to attach to a concrete form (92) in order to ensure proper positioning when constructing a concrete arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the arms of Harris attaching the encircling portion to a concrete form in order to position a post in the desired location, and further, since the arms of Harris are for attaching to a surface, in view of Espinosa (based on the adjustment of the adjustable member).
Regarding claim 12, Harris and Espinosa teach the method of claim 11, wherein adjusting the adjustable member comprises threadingly adjusting the adjustable member relative to the encircling portion.
Regarding claim 13, Harris and Espinosa teach the method of claim 11, wherein a second adjustable member is adjustably coupled to the encircling portion and contacts the bollard such that the encircling portion is at the first orientation relative to the encircling portion, and the method comprises adjusting the second adjustable member such that the encircling portion is at the second orientation relative to the encircling portion (based on the adjustment of the adjustable member).
Regarding claim 14, Harris and Espinosa teach the method of claim 11, comprising attaching a second arm of the bollard holder to the concrete form, wherein the second arm extends from the encircling portion such that the encircling portion is attached to the concrete form via the second arm.
Regarding claim 15, Harris and Espinosa teach the method of claim 11, comprising further adjusting the adjustable member such that the encircling portion is at a third orientation relative to the encircling portion (based on the adjustment of the adjustable member).
Claim(s) 4, 5, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (U.S. Pub. 2009/0090836) in view of Espinosa (U.S. Pat. 10,577,816) in further view of Setala et al. (U.S. Pat. 5,002,252).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Harris teaches the holder of claim 1, but does not teach that the arm comprises an extension that extends to engage the concrete form while other portions of the bollard holder are spaced away from concrete formed into the concrete form, wherein the other portions of the bollard holder that are spaced away from the concrete comprise the encircling portion and a portion of the arm other than the extension of the arm. Setala, however, teaches a bollard holder comprising an arm that comprises an extension (Fig. 1) that is used to provide for height adjustment of the arm for adaptation in multiple environments. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the arm of Harris comprising an extension in order to provide adjustability to the length of the arm for use in a desired location, and further, the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art.
Further, Espinosa, teaches a support (2) with an arm to attach to a concrete form (92) in order to ensure proper positioning when constructing a concrete arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the extension extending to engage the concrete form while other portions of the bollard holder are spaced away from concrete formed into the concrete form, wherein the other portions of the bollard holder that are spaced away from the concrete comprise the encircling portion and a portion of the arm other than the extension of the arm in order to position the bollard in the desired location, and further, since the arm of Harris is for attaching to a surface.
Regarding claim 16, Harris and Espinosa teach the method of claim 11, but do not teach that attaching the arm comprises attaching an extension of the arm to the concrete form such that the encircling portion and a portion of the arm other than the extension of the arm are spaced away from concrete formed into the concrete form. Setala, however, teaches a bollard holder comprising an arm that comprises an extension (Fig. 1) that is used to provide for height adjustment of the arm for adaptation in multiple environments. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, wherein attaching the arm comprises attaching an extension of the arm to the concrete form such that the encircling portion and a portion of the arm other than the extension of the arm are spaced away from concrete formed into the concrete form in order to provide adjustability to the length of the arm for use in a desired location, and further, the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 19, Harris and Espinosa teach the holder of claim 17, but do not teach that the arm comprises an extension that extends for engagement with the concrete form while a portion of the arm other than the extension of the arm is spaced away from concrete formed into the concrete form. Setala, however, teaches a bollard holder comprising an arm that comprises an extension (Fig. 1) that is used to provide for height adjustment of the arm for adaptation in multiple environments. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, wherein the arm comprises an extension that extends for engagement with the concrete form while a portion of the arm other than the extension of the arm is spaced away from concrete formed into the concrete form in order to provide adjustability to the length of the arm for use in a desired location, and further, the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner notes that the correct reference number for the prior art references Setala et al. is U.S. Pat. 5,002,252.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKEISHA J. SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-5781. The examiner can normally be reached Normal hours: M/Th 7-4; T 9-5; W 7-3; F 7-4.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/NKEISHA SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 April 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights