This is a Final office action for serial number 18/820387.
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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on April 2, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of patent 11702842 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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.
Claim(s) 10, 11 and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
Anselmo 9,431,802 in view of Poulakis 20150027070.
Anselmo discloses:
Claim 10. A roof equipment support comprising: a platform having a length and a width; a pair of sidewalls extending from the platform, wherein an angle between the platform and at least one of the pair of sidewalls within the interior cavity is an acute an angle; a top wall extending between the pair of sidewalls and offset from the platform, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, and the top wall define the interior cavity wherein the interior cavity that extends the length of the platform from a first end to a second end; a pair of strut extensions extending from the top wall, wherein the pair of strut extensions and the top wall define a channel; and wherein a cross-sectional profile of the support is constant along an entirety of the length of the platform.
Claim 11. The roof equipment support of claim 10, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are unitary.
Claim 13. A roof equipment support comprising: a platform configured to be coupled to a roof; a pair of sidewalls extending from the platform, wherein the pair of sidewalls define an interior cavity that is open at at least one end; a top wall extending between the pair of sidewalls and offset from the platform and configured to support at least a portion of a structural or mechanical unit; and a pair of strut extensions extending from the top wall, wherein each of the strut extensions comprises a hook at a distal end that defines a substantially 180 degree bend, wherein the pair of strut extensions and the top wall define a channel that extends at least a portion of the length of the roof equipment support, and wherein a cross-sectional profile of the roof equipment support is constant along an entirety of the length of the platform.
Claim 14. The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are formed from a same material.
Claim 15. The roof equipment support of claim 14, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are unitary.
Claim 16. The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein a cross-section of the interior cavity has a substantially trapezoidal shape.
Claim 17 The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein a width of the platform is greater than a spacing (since the spacing can between a width shorter than the platform width which is closest to the top wall) between the pair of sidewalls.
Claim 18. The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein a width of the top wall is less than the width of the platform.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Structural or mechanical unit)][AltContent: textbox (channel)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Top wall)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Interior cavity)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (180 degree bend)][AltContent: textbox (Pair of Strut extensions)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (sidewalls)][AltContent: textbox (platform)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
644
524
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Anselmo discloses all of the limitations of the claimed invention except for (claim 1) the at least one support wall disposed in the interior cavity and extending between two or more of the platform, the sidewalls, and the top wall, wherein the top wall, the at least one support wall, and the pair of sidewalls define a single upper lumen configured to receive piping or conduit and (claim 19) at least one support wall extends from the sidewalls.
Poulakis teaches it is known to have
(Claims 11 and 13) at least one support wall disposed in the interior cavity (33 and 37) and extending between two or more of the platform, the sidewalls (left and right 27), and the top wall (35), wherein the top wall (35), the at least one support wall (31), and the pair of sidewalls (left and right 27) define a single upper lumen (area between 31) configured to receive piping or conduit.
(Claim 19) at least one support wall (31) extends (meaning away from) from the sidewalls .
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Single upper lumen)]
PNG
media_image2.png
336
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success to have modified Anselmo to have included at least one support wall disposed in the interior cavity and extending between two or more of the platform, the sidewalls, and the top wall, wherein the top wall, the at least one support wall, and the pair of sidewalls define a single upper lumen and at least one support wall extends from the sidewalls as taught by Poulakis for the purpose of supporting cables or conduits.
Claim(s) 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anselmo 9,431,802, as discussed above, in view of Sorkin 7,322,158.
Claim 10. A roof equipment support comprising: a platform having a length and a width; a pair of sidewalls extending from the platform, wherein an angle between the platform and at least one of the pair of sidewalls within the interior cavity is an acute an angle; a top wall extending between the pair of sidewalls and offset from the platform, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, and the top wall define the interior cavity wherein the interior cavity that extends the length of the platform from a first end to a second end; a pair of strut extensions extending from the top wall, wherein the pair of strut extensions and the top wall define a channel; and wherein a cross-sectional profile of the support is constant along an entirety of the length of the platform.
Claim 11. The roof equipment support of claim 10, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are unitary.
Claim 13. A roof equipment support comprising: a platform configured to be coupled to a roof; a pair of sidewalls extending from the platform, wherein the pair of sidewalls define an interior cavity that is open at at least one end; a top wall extending between the pair of sidewalls and offset from the platform and configured to support at least a portion of a structural or mechanical unit; and a pair of strut extensions extending from the top wall, wherein each of the strut extensions comprises a hook at a distal end that defines a substantially 180 degree bend, wherein the pair of strut extensions and the top wall define a channel that extends at least a portion of the length of the roof equipment support, and wherein a cross-sectional profile of the roof equipment support is constant along an entirety of the length of the platform.
Claim 14. The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are formed from a same material.
Claim 15. The roof equipment support of claim 14, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are unitary.
Claim 16. The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein a cross-section of the interior cavity has a substantially trapezoidal shape.
Claim 17 The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein a width of the platform is greater than a spacing (since the spacing can between a width shorter than the platform width which is closest to the top wall) between the pair of sidewalls.
Claim 18 The roof equipment support of claim 13, wherein a width of the top wall is less than the width of the platform.
Anselmo discloses all of the limitations of the claimed invention except for
for (claim 1) the at least one support wall disposed in the interior cavity and extending between two or more of the platform, the sidewalls, and the top wall, wherein the top wall, the at least one support wall, and the pair of sidewalls define a single upper lumen configured to receive piping or conduit; (claim 19) at least one support wall extends from the sidewalls; (claim 12 and 20) wherein the at least one support wall defines a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform.
Sorkin teaches it is known to have:
Claim 12 wherein the at least one support wall defines a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform.
Claim 19, wherein the at least one support wall extends from the sidewalls.
Claim 20 wherein the at least one support wall defines a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Support wall
Sidewall 46/48)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Pipe rest with curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (platform)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
518
336
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success to have modified Anselmo to have included at least one support wall disposed in the interior cavity and extending between two or more of the platform, the sidewalls, and the top wall, wherein the at least one support wall extends from the sidewalls; wherein the at least one support wall defines a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform as taught by Sorking for the purpose of providing supplemental vertical support to the top wall to prevent failure and to provide a means for supporting additional objects.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 are allowed.
A roof equipment support comprising: a platform having a length and a width; a pair of sidewalls extending from the platform, wherein an angle between the platform and at least one of the pair of sidewalls within an interior cavity is an acute angle; a top wall extending between the pair of sidewalls and offset from the platform, wherein the platform, the pair of sidewalls, and the top wall define the interior cavity , wherein the interior cavity extends the length of the platform from a first end to a second end, and wherein the interior cavity is open at both the first end and the second end; and a pair of strut extensions extending from the top wall, wherein each of the strut extensions comprises a hook at a distal end that includes a substantially 180 degree bend, wherein each of the strut extensions has a planar portion substantially perpendicular to the platform, and wherein the pair of strut extensions and the top wall define a channel that extends the length of the platform; wherein a cross-sectional profile of the support is constant along an entirety of the length of the platform.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that,
Even if the cross-member 52 of Sorkin could be considered a support wall, which is not conceded, it does not disclose or suggest that "the top wall, the at least one support wall, and the pair of sidewalls define a single upper lumen configured to receive piping or conduit," as required by claim 10. Rather, third leg 50 of Sorkin divides the area above the cross-member 52 into two. Further, the openings 58 and 60 are not configured to receive piping or conduit, as claimed. Rather, "[t]he openings 54, 56, 58 and 60 allow a free flow of concrete therethrough so as to enhance the ability of the concrete reinforcing bar support to be fully secured within the concrete structure." (Col. 7, 11. 25-29.) Nor are the openings 58 and 60 "defined" by the cross- member 52 of Sorkin, as they are actually formed in an intermediate wall above cross-member 52 in Sorkin. For at least these reasons, Sorkin fails to make up for the deficiencies of Anselmo with respect to independent claim 10 (or its dependent claim 12).
the examiner’s response are in the following remarks. Sorkin clearly teaches "the top wall, the at least one support wall, and the pair of sidewalls define a single upper lumen configured to receive piping or conduit”. Sorkin discloses top wall (20), at least one support wall (interior support wall as applicant points out), and the pair of sidewalls (48/46 upper region) define a single upper lumen (58) since, the claim does not include closed transitional phrase, “consisting of” but includes the open transitional phrase “comprising” therefore Sorkin clearly meets the applicant’s claimed invention.
[AltContent: textbox (Support wall (wall surrounding area 58) which is located between sidewall 46/48 and top wall 20 therefore defining a single upper lumen 58)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Top wall 20)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
518
336
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In response to applicant’s argument,
Further, Sorkin fails to disclose or suggest that the "at least one support wall defines a
pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform," as required by claim 12. Contrary to the assertion in the Office Action, the openings 58 and 60 "defined" by the cross-member 52 of Sorkin, as they are actually formed in an intermediate wall above cross-member 52 in Sorkin. For at least this additional reason, claim 12 is allowable over the cited references. Reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejection is respectfully requested.
the examiner’s response are in the following remarks. Sorkin clearly "at least one support wall defines a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform". Sorkin disclose at least one support wall (see figure annotated the interior support wall shown annotated below), defines a pipe rest portion (upper section of 58) that is curved with a concavity (see figure below in an upwards direction relative to the platform (12) since the claim does not include the closed transitional phrase, “consisting of” but includes the open transitional phrase “comprising” therefore Sorkin clearly meets the applicant’s claimed invention since as shown below pipe rest portion (lower section of 58) is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform.
[AltContent: textbox (Support wall defining a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform (wall surrounding area 58) )][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (platform)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Top wall 20)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
518
336
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to remarks pertaining to claim 11, the office action mailed on January 14, 2026 inadvertently left out number 11 (representing claim 11) within the rejected statement on page 11. Claim 11, however, was recited and included under the “Anselmo discloses” on page 11 of the office action providing support, evidence, and/or proof that claim 11 should have been included in the “claims rejected” statement. This final office action has corrected the typographical error under the “rejected statement” and claim 11 has been included within the claims rejected statement resulting in a proper final office action.
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 KIMBERLY T WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6826. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 9:00am-5:30pm flexible schedule.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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 T WOOD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights