DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office Action on the merits for U.S. App. 18/913,233. Receipt of the Response to the Election/Restriction filed on 07/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 11 and 14 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 1-10, 12, 13, and 15-20 are examined.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant elected Species XII (Figures 12-17A) in the reply filed on 07/28/2026. Therefore, claims 11 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 07/28/2026. Applicant’s arguments that Applicant is entitled to consideration of a reasonable number of species are considered unpersuasive as the restriction was based on 34 separate and distinct species and Applicant considers 26 of such species reasonable. As will be shown below, the use of hooks upon a bracket are not new and just sharing such a feature so as to examine each and every one of such species which comprises of such a hook would not be considered reasonable as the placement and use of such hooks would require a substantial search and consideration burden. The Restriction is thus considered proper and is considered final.
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.
Claim 2 is 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 2 defines “a pair of hooks,” which renders the claimed invention indefinite since claim 1, from which claim 2 depends from, already defines at least one hook and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not know whether a pair of hooks separate from the at least one hook are being defined or whether such at least one hook is to comprise of a pair of hooks. For examining purposes and in light of the specification and drawings, claim 2 is considered to define the at least one hook of claim 1 is to comprise a pair of hooks.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-10, 12, 13, 15, 16,and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Saldana (U.S. Patent 6,799,407).
Regarding claim 1, Saldana discloses a structural support device (#20) for supporting a joist relative to a support, the structural support device comprising:
a joist engagement portion (#22) configured to engage the joist and be secured directly to the joist (see figure 9 at #10’);
a support engagement portion (#26) extending from the joist engagement portion and configured to engage the support and be secured directly to the support (see figure 9 at #10); and
at least one hook (#28) extending from one of the joist engagement portion and support engagement portion (see figure 2, where the hooks #28 extend from the support engagement portion) and configured to locate and hold the structural support device on the support prior to securing the support engagement portion to the support with a fastener (see figures 6 and 9).
Regarding claim 2, Saldana discloses a pair of hooks (#28) extending from at least one of the joist engagement portion and support engagement portion (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, Saldana discloses the joist engagement portion and support engagement portion comprise plate members (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 4, Saldana discloses the plate members each define openings (openings #32 provided on both plate members #22 and #26) for receiving fasteners for securing the joist engagement portion to the joist and the support engagement portion to the support (see figure 9).
Regarding claim 6, Saldana discloses the joist engagement portion and support engagement portion are orthogonal to each other (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Saldana discloses a tab (#24 and/or #30) extending laterally from the joist engagement portion (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 8, Saldana discloses the tab extends orthogonally to the joist engagement portion at a top of the joist engagement portion (see figure 2, where the device #20 can be rotated 180 degrees so that the tab #24 extends from a top thereof and 90 degrees from the plate #22).
Regarding claim 9, Saldana discloses at least one hook extends directly from the support engagement portion (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 10, Saldana discloses the at least one hook is configured to support an entire load of the joist when the joist is attached to the structural support device (see figure 9, where the hook is configured to prevent removal of the plate therefrom and engage the structural support so as to support a load of the joist thereon).
Regarding claim 12, Saldana discloses a stabilizing finger (#24) projecting laterally from the joist engagement portion (see figure 2).
Regarding claim 13, Saldana discloses a connection of components of a structure comprising:
a joist (#10’; see figure 9);
a header (#10) supported at a location above the ground (see figure 9, where the joist can be a ceiling joist and thus the header is a rim joist supported above the ground);
a structural support device (#20) comprising: a joist engagement portion (#22) secured directly to the joist (see figure 9), and a support engagement portion (#26) extending from the joist engagement portion and secured directly to the header (see figure 9); the securement between the support engagement portion and the header being free of welds (see figure 9, where only screws and an interference fit are used to attach such elements to one another).
Regarding claim 15, Saldana discloses a bolt securing the joist engagement portion to the joist (bolts #38 extend through holes #32 to secure the joist engagement portion to the joist #10’).
Regarding claim 16, Saldana discloses the header includes an opening and the structural support device includes a hook received in the opening (the header #10 includes an opening between flanges #16 which the hook #28 is received within and engages).
Regarding claim 18, Saldana discloses the header comprises an aperture and the structural support device further comprises a finger projecting from the joist engagement portion and received in the aperture (the header is considered to comprise of an aperture which aligns with apertures #32 of the tab #24 of the joist engagement portion, where a finger #38 projects from the joist engagement portion and is received within such an aperture as broadly defined).
Regarding claim 19, Saldana discloses in combination with other connections of the same construction collectively forming a mezzanine structure (Saldana discloses a plurality of ceiling/flooring joists can be connected to rim joists/headers to form a floor/level of the structure).
Regarding claim 20, Saldana discloses the structural support device includes a stabilizing finger projecting laterally from the joist engagement portion, the stabilizing finger extending into an opening of the header (the header is considered to comprise of an aperture which aligns with apertures #32 of the tab #24 of the joist engagement portion, where a finger #38 projects from the joist engagement portion and is received within such an aperture as broadly defined).
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) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saldana in view of Getz (U.S. Publication 2018/0094422).
Regarding claim 5, Saldana discloses the claimed invention except for the at least one opening in the joist engagement portion is slotted. However, it is highly well known in the art, as evidenced by Getz, that such brackets #102 used to attach a joist #106 to a header #104 can comprise of both apertures #190 and a slot #192 in order to attach the joist engagement portion #110 to the joist. See figures 8A and 5. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have constructed the at least one opening in the joist engagement portion of Saldana to be a slot, as taught in Getz, in order to allow for greater adjustability and attachment to the joist.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saldana in view of Lippert (U.S. Publication 2014/0115976).
Regarding claim 17, Saldana discloses the claimed invention except for a shim connected to the header generally proximate to the opening on an opposite side of the header from a side on which the structural support device is located. However, it is highly well known in the art, as evidenced by Lippert, that shims #47 can be provided between the rear surface of rim joists #33 that are to face the outer surface of an adjacent rim joist and opposite the side which a joist #22 is to be attached to the rim joist in order to provide proper spacing between such rim joists. See figures 4 and 4A. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a shim on the outer side of the header of Saldana that is opposite to the opening and where the support device is attached, as taught in Lippert, in order to provide an appropriate spacing between the header and another support structure, such as another header placed adjacent thereto.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE V ADAMOS whose telephone number is (571)270-1166. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5.
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 D Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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.
/THEODORE V ADAMOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights