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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-11 are pending and have been examined in this application
This communication is the first action on the merits
Claims 1-11 are rejected herein
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation ”a rotational structure” and “a limiting surface.” In the specification, on page 5, paragraph 0034, the limiting surface is listed as part of the rotational structure. Thus, claim 1 contains subject matter that was not described in the specification in such a way to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-11 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 is indefinite because it is unclear in light of the specification whether the inventor regards that “the limiting surface” is part of “the rotational structure” or not. Appropriate correction/explanation is required.
Claim 4 is indefinite because it recites “wherein the second end of the limiting component disengages from the limiting surface, in response to the limiting component moves to the first position in the first movable groove; and wherein the second end of the limiting component locks onto the limiting surface, in response to the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove.” The tense appears to be incorrect here. This can be amended to ”wherein the second end of the limiting component disengages from the limiting surface, in response to the limiting component moving to the first position in the first movable groove; and wherein the second end of the limiting component locks onto the limiting surface, in response to the limiting component moving to the second position relative to the first movable groove.” Appropriate correction/explanation is required.
Claim 5 is indefinite because it recites “the second end of the limiting component disengages from the plurality of limiting surfaces, in response to the limiting component moves to the first position in the first movable groove; and wherein the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove, the second end of the limiting component locks onto one of the plurality of limiting surfaces, in response to the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove.” The tense appears to be incorrect here. This can be amended to “the second end of the limiting component disengages from the plurality of limiting surfaces, in response to the limiting component moving to the first position in the first movable groove; and wherein the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove, the second end of the limiting component locks onto one of the plurality of limiting surfaces, in response to the limiting component moving to the second position relative to the first movable groove.” Appropriate correction/explanation is required.
Claim 6 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “a second movable groove is provided on the rotating base, communicating with the first movable groove.” Appropriate correction/explanation is required.
Claim 11 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “guiding limiting hole that coordinates with the second movable groove.” Appropriate correction/explanation is required.
Dependent claims 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are rejected based on their respective dependencies.
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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US Pat. No. 4886230 A) in view of Chen (US Pat. No. 6216317 B1)
Regarding claim 1, Jones teaches a tripod with an adjustable angle, comprising: a tripod body (all attached to hip 18 above the legs, including hip 18). However, Jones does not teach the claimed specifics of the connection between the legs and the tripod body.
Chen teaches a limiting surface (34); a support leg (10), movably connected to the tripod body via a rotational structure(11, 12, 15, 22, , 30, , 33, 32 ); and a movable rotation-limiting assembly(14, 13, 20, 21) connected to the support leg, the movable rotation-limiting assembly capable of interacting with the limiting surface to adjust an angle between the tripod body and the support leg; and wherein in a first position, the movable rotation-limiting assembly disengages from the limiting surface (14 disengages from 34), permitting the support leg to rotate relative to the tripod body; and wherein in a second position, the movable rotation-limiting assembly engages the limiting surface (14 engages 34), securing the support leg to the tripod body.
Jones and Chen are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem-solving area e.g. turning a member around a pivoting structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the tripod body of Jones with the rotational mechanism of Chen. The motivation would have been to allow for sturdy control of the angle of the legs.
Regarding claim 2, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 1, wherein in the first position, the movable rotation-limiting assembly is capable of permitting manual rotation of the support leg in a first direction or in a second direction; and wherein in the second position, the movable rotation-limiting assembly is capable of limiting manual rotation of the support leg in the second direction.
Regarding claim 3, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 1, wherein the rotational structure comprises a rotating head (Chen; 30 and 32 including the hole) on the tripod body, a rotating base (Chen; rotating base containing slot 11, inner hole 12, and a hole for pivoting member 33) at a first end of the support leg, and a rotating shaft (Chen; pivoting member 33) connecting the rotating head with the rotating base.
Regarding claim 4, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 3, wherein the movable rotation-limiting assembly comprises a limiting component (Chen; urging block 14); a first movable groove is provided on the rotating base (Chen; slot 11 and inner hole 12), and the limiting surface is located at an end of the rotating head (Chen; retaining portion 34 including toothed slot 341 located at the end of 32); a first end of the limiting component is movably positioned (Chen; 141 sits in inner hole 12) within the first movable groove (Chen; slot 11 and inner hole 12), and a second end of the limiting component interacts with the limiting surface (Chen; 143 engages 341); wherein the second end of the limiting component disengages from the limiting surface, in response to the limiting component moves to the first position in the first movable groove (Chen; 143 disengaged from 341); and wherein the second end of the limiting component locks onto the limiting surface, in response to the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove (Chen; 143 engaged into 341).
Regarding claim 5, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 4, wherein a plurality of limiting surfaces (Chen; retaining portion 34 includes many toothed slots 341) are arranged around the rotating shaft (Chen; 33) on the rotating head (Chen; 30 including the hole)； wherein the limiting component moves to the first position in the first movable groove, the second end of the limiting component disengages from the plurality of limiting surfaces, in response to the limiting component moves to the first position in the first movable groove (Chen; 143 disengaged from 341, urging block 14 moves down within inner hole 12); and wherein the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove, the second end of the limiting component locks onto one of the plurality of limiting surfaces, in response to the limiting component moves to the second position relative to the first movable groove (Chen; 143 engaged into 341, urging block 14 moves up within inner hole 12).
Regarding claim 6, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 4, wherein the movable rotation-limiting assembly further comprises an unlocking button (Chen; press rod 20) a second movable groove(Chen; hole 15) is provided on the rotating base, communicating with the first movable groove(Chen; hole 15 intersects inner hole 12); the unlocking button is movably arranged within the second movable groove (Chen; press rod 20 located inside hole 15); and a first engaging slope is provided on the limiting component (Chen; front inclined plane 142), and a second engaging slope is provided on the unlocking button (Chen; inclined plane 201), with the first engaging slope being configured to cooperate with the movement of the second engaging slope (Chen; 201 and 142 are joined together).
Regarding claim 7, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 6, wherein the movable rotation-limiting assembly further comprises a first reset mechanism (Chen; spring 13); and the first reset mechanism is between the limiting component and a bottom wall of the first movable groove (Chen; spring 13 is located between urging block 14 and the bottom of inner hole 12).
Regarding claim 8, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 7, wherein the movable rotation-limiting assembly further comprises a second reset mechanism (Chen; spring 21); and the unlocking button comprises a pressing part (Chen; exposed end of press rod 20), and the second reset mechanism is arranged within the second movable groove (Chen; spring 21 is located with hole 15), and is provided between the pressing part and a side wall of the second movable groove (Chen; spring 21 is located between press rod 20 and the side wall of the second movable groove 22).
Regarding claim 9, The tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 6, wherein two sides of the limiting component are respectively in contact with two side walls of the first movable groove (Chen; urging block 14 touches the walls of inner hole 12, to the extent the urging block is cylindrical and does not have two side walls, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the inner hole 12 of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient, in this case in a prism shape . A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.)
Regarding claim 10, Jones as modified teaches the tripod with an adjustable angle according to claim 6, wherein the limiting component is provided with a movable hole (Chen; urging block 14 has slot 141); the unlocking button comprises an unlocking part which penetrates the movable hole (Chen; press rod 20 slides into slot 141 and allows the mechanism to unlock) ; a notch (Chen; the open area located on the press rod 20 created between the front inclined plane 201 and the straight section 202, arrow 1 pointing to it on Fig. 2 below) is provided on the unlocking part, pressing against a side wall of the movable hole (Chen; pressed against the side walls of slot 141); and the first engaging slope is set on a side wall of the movable hole (Chen; inclined plane 142 is within slot 141), while the second engaging slope is set on the notch (Chen; front inclined plane 201 is located on the notch, in so much as second engaging slope is set on the notch, so it is in Fig. 2 of Chen seen below)
PNG
media_image1.png
783
662
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM DONALD JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-9214. The examiner can normally be reached M, T, Th, F between 7:30 AM and 5:30 PM.
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 5712728227. 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.
/W.D.J./ Examiner, Art Unit 3631
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631