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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/9/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the support face having a thickness larger than a thickness of the second face as recited in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims contain numerous grammatical errors (e.g. “the roof element is be connected” in claim 7). Appropriate correction is required. Carefully review the claims for proper grammar.
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 1-13 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, line 1 recites, “A roof element made from a roof element”. Are these two roof elements different? Claim terms should be clearly differentiated from each other. It is not understood how a roof element is made from itself.
Claim 1, lines 8-10 recites, “wherein the first aperture is arranged in a support face of the hexagonal ISO corner portion having a thickness being larger than a thickness of the second face”. It is not understood what is meant by “a support face… having a thickness being larger than a thickness of the second face”. The drawings and the specification do not depict nor mention the support face having a thickness that is larger than a thickness of the second face. A “face” is understood to be a surface such that it is not understood how one face would be thicker than another face. The specification states that “a wall thickness of the corner portion 3 comprising the second aperture 32 is less than a wall thickness of the support face 31’ comprising the first aperture 31”. Is this what was intended to be claimed? For examination purposes, this is all the limitation has been interpreted and examined.
Claim 1 recites “four hexagonal ISO corner portions”. The corner portions are shown in Fig. 3B as essentially cubic in nature. “Hexagonal” means 6 sides as in a two dimensional shape or three dimensional forms with a 6 sided base structure, such as prisms. It appears that Applicant may be conflating 6 sided in two dimensions (hexagonal) and 6 sided in three dimensions (cubic). Based on the disclosure, “hexagonal” has been examined as cubic in nature.
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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Severance et al., WO 2017/019638.
Regarding claim 1:
Severance discloses a roof element made from a roof element resembling a roof of an ISO freight container, the roof element comprising:
- a first face for, in a position of use, forming a downwardly facing surface of the roof element;
- a second face opposite the first face; and
- four hexagonal ISO corner portions, wherein each of the four hexagonal ISO corner portions comprises a first aperture configured for receiving a twistlock element, wherein characterized in that the first aperture is arranged in a support face of the hexagonal ISO corner portion having a thickness being larger than a thickness of the second face, the support face being closer to the first face than the second face of the roof element.
It is noted that the ISO construction of Severance is a two story building formed of ISO containers. Limitations are not read into the claims. The claimed “roof element” is not required to have a particular shape. Wherein the upper container is placed over the lower container as shown in Fig. 1, it is considered to be a roof element.
PNG
media_image1.png
304
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 6:
Severance discloses a shelter comprising at least one roof element according to claim 1 (refer to Fig. 1), and a support (102A) for carrying the roof element in an elevated position;
wherein the support is connected to the roof element via the first apertures of the corner portions.
PNG
media_image2.png
254
208
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Severance et al., WO 2017/019638 in view of De Azambuja, US 2009/0217600.
Regarding claim 2:
Severance does not specify wherein the corner portions are made from an ISO 1161 corner casting.
De Azambuja discloses a modular shelter wherein corner portions are made from an ISO 1161 corner casting (para. 0044).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill to construct the corner castings of Severance from an ISO 1161 corner casting as suggested by De Azambuja in order to provide standard components for compatibility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 7-11 and 12-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of Severance et al., WO 2017/019638 discloses a roof element with ISO corner portions but fails to disclose the specifics of a second aperture, two threaded bolts, attachment of the roof element to the support via an aperture in a side portion of the corner casting, roof elements hingedly interconnected by hinged brackets and a second aperture arranged in a face of the corner portion opposite the support face comprising the first aperture.
The determination of allowability was made based on the best understanding of the claims. If the claims are amended to be broader than best understood, a subsequent prior art rejection may be introduced.
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 BRENT W HERRING whose telephone number is (571)270-3661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6:00p MT.
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, Brian Glessner can be reached at (571)272-6754. 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.
/BRENT W HERRING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights