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 .
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 8 and 16-18 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.
Regarding claims 8 and 16-18, the phrase "in particular" / “e.g.” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-14 (8 as understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 and/or 102a2 as being anticipated by Bremers (US 3,429,601), which discloses:
1. An anchoring assembly adapted to be pre-assembled in an elongate opening (46, 52) in a structural element (41), said anchoring assembly (see FIGS 8 and 10; note that the apparatus therein could be inverted, and the claim analysis below assumes such an inversion) comprising:
- an anchoring nut (44) having a top side, a bottom side, and a threaded bore (35) with a central axis that extends from the top side to the bottom side and that defines an axial direction, the nut furthermore having lateral sides that extend from the top side to the bottom side,
- a spring made of metal, the spring having:
a spring portion (51) extending from the bottom side of the nut, for resiliently supporting the anchoring assembly on a surface of the structural element that is in line with the elongate opening,
a holding portion (49, 50) being in engagement with the nut for holding the spring on the nut, and
a gripping portion (48) extending from the top side of the nut (see inverted FIGS 8, 10) for a user to grip during installation of the anchoring assembly in the structural element (it is capable of being gripped as claimed), wherein the spring portion, holding portion, and gripping portion are monolithic (e.g., see FIG 10), and
wherein the gripping portion and the holding portion have been formed by bending the spring (product-by-process limitation does not define over the prior art structure).
4. The anchoring assembly according to claim 1, wherein the gripping portion has been bent (at the corners of 48) to be stiffer than the spring portion in the axial direction.
5. The anchoring assembly according to claim 1, wherein the gripping portion is formed as an arch (see FIG 9, where 48 forms an arch with two legs).
6. The anchoring assembly according to claim 1, wherein the holding portion (49, 50) is in engagement with the bottom side of the nut and/or with one of the lateral sides of the nut (see FIG 10, 49 and 50 contact the sides of the nut).
7. The anchoring assembly according to claim 6, wherein the holding portion is also in engagement with the top side of the nut (at the top corner thereof, e.g., see FIG 9).
8. The anchoring assembly according to claim 1, wherein the nut is provided with a recess, in particular a groove, in which the holding portion is received (see FIGS 8 and 9, which show the ribs of the nut do not extend where the holding abuts).
9. The anchoring assembly according to claim 1, wherein the holding portion is permanently fixed to the nut (absent a removal force).
10. The anchoring assembly according to claim 9, wherein the holding portion has been fixed to the nut by riveting or clinching (it is clenched thereto by the elastic retaining force).
11. A combination of the anchoring assembly according to claim 1, and a structural element (41).
12. The combination according to claim 11, wherein the structural element is a channel element which has a bottom (20, FIG 8; note again that the apparatus of FIG 8 can be inverted), sidewalls (42, 43) extending from the bottom substantially at right angles and an upper side opposite the bottom (shown at the bottom of FIG 8), wherein the upper side of the channel element comprises flanges (18, 19, 65, 66, etc.) which extend from the respective sidewalls towards each other and which delimit between them the elongate opening (46, 52; as analogously shown in FIG 1) extending over the length of the channel element
13. The combination according to claim 12, wherein in a mounted state the top side of the nut is in engagement with the flanges from below, and the gripping portion does not extend above the flanges (see FIG 8, inverted).
14. A method of manufacturing the anchoring assembly according to claim 1 (inherent as it must be produced).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-14 (8 as understood) are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bremers alone.
See the anticipation analysis of claims 1 and 4-14 above. It further would have been obvious to invert the assembly of FIG 8 in order to provide the disclosed apparatus along the top channel of a window or sliding door, rendering obvious the inverted position from that shown in FIG 8.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 15-18 (16-18 as understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bremers alone.
Regarding claims 2-3, Bremers discloses the invention with exception to the metal coil spring as claimed. However metal coil springs as claimed were well-known in the art before the effective filing date (official notice), and it would have been obvious to one of skill to use a metal coil spring as claimed in Bremer’s device in order to cheaply produce a durable rendition thereof.
Regarding claims 15-17, Bremers discloses the invention with exception to the use of a wire bending machine to bend the spring. However the use of wire bending machines to bend spring wire was well-known before the effective filing date (official notice), and it would have been obvious to use a wire bending machine to reliably and repeatably produce Bremer’s spring members.
Regarding claim 18, Bremers discloses a method for mounting an the assembly according to claim 1 in an elongate opening in a structural element, the elongate opening having a length and a width which is smaller than the length (e.g., FIG 1), and the nut of the assembly having a length and a width which is smaller than the length (e.g., FIG 14), wherein the length of the assembly is larger than the width of the elongate opening, wherein the elongate opening has a longitudinal axis and a transverse axis, and wherein the anchoring assembly has a first axis extending in a longitudinal direction and a second axis extending transverse to the first axis (e.g., FIG 1), wherein the gripping portion is adapted to be gripped, e.g. between two fingers (as understood, it is so capable), (where the preamble is given limited patentable weight if not necessary to understand the claim body), the method comprising the steps of:
- gripping the gripping portion (see obviousness analysis below), manipulating the assembly such that the first axis of the assembly is aligned with the longitudinal axis of the elongate opening (col. 3 lines 59-61),
- inserting the anchoring assembly in the opening, such that the spring portion engages a bottom surface of the structural element, the bottom surface being in line with the opening (obvious to invert from the position of FIG 8, e.g., as shown in FIG 1, and as further explained below),
- tensioning the spring portion by exerting downward pressure in the axial direction whilst gripping the gripping portion such that the top side of the nut is below the opening, and rotating the assembly about its central axis, such that the second axis of the assembly is substantially aligned with the longitudinal axis of the elongate opening (obvious to invert as explained below, also see col. 3 lines 59-61; inverted from the position of FIG 8),
- at least partially relieving the spring portion by releasing said downward pressure whilst gripping the gripping portion such that the spring portion biases the top side of the nut towards an inner surface of the structural element adjacent to the elongate opening such that the top side of the nut is in supporting engagement with said inner surface of the structural element (obvious to invert, see col. 3 lines 50-58, which can occur in a position that is inverted from that of FIG 8).
As alluded to above, it would have been obvious to invert the assembly of FIG 8 in order to provide the disclosed apparatus along the top channel of a window or sliding door. It also would have been obvious to grip portion 48 when inserting the spring/nut into the channel simply to avoid the inconvenience of compressing the spring without acting on this vertically-facing surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 4,146,074 discloses a similar spring arrangement with bottom and side retaining parts around a nut, and further including a separate top portion that could be gripped.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM M MCCALISTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1869. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 7am to 6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CRAIG SCHNEIDER, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/WILLIAM M MCCALISTER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
7/31/26
Prosecution Insights