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 .
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 1-20 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.
With regards to claim 1, the preamble sets forth the method is directed towards “making a rood equipment support” however, upon completion of the method one of ordinary skill in the art obtains an extruded material having “a platform…a pair of sidewalls…a top wall…and a pair of strut extensions” The claim does not clearly recite that the listed structure makes up the “roof equipment support.”
There appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the interior cavity” in line 6. The claim states “an interior cavity” in line 9, it is unclear if this limitation is intending to set forth a second interior cavity or if it is intending to refer to the same interior cavity set forth in line 6.
With regards to claim 2, the claim states “wherein extrusion forms an elongated support”, this renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear if the elongated support is an additional structure to the structure set forth in claim 1 and if it is the mechanical relationship between the elongated support and the structure of claim 1, or if the limitation is intending to set forth that the elongated support is comprised of the structure set forth in claim 1. For examination purposes the limitation is being interpreted as the elongated support is comprised of the structure recited in claim 1.
With regards to claim 6, there appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the width of the top wall” found in line 1.
With regards to claim 9, the preamble sets forth the method is directed towards “making a rood equipment support” however, upon completion of the method one of ordinary skill in the art obtains an extruded material having “a platform…a pair of sidewalls…a top wall…and a pair of strut extensions” The claim does not clearly recite that the listed structure makes up the “roof equipment support”.
There appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the interior cavity” in line 6. The claim states “an interior cavity” in line 9, it is unclear if this limitation is intending to set forth a second interior cavity or if it is intending to refer to the same interior cavity set forth in line 6.
With regards to claim 11, the claim states “wherein the roof equipment support further comprises…” this renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear when the roof equipment support has been formed. It is noted that in claim 9 the extrusion forms specific structures but fails to connect the formed structures and the roof equipment support. Additionally, the claim is directed to a method therefore it is unclear if the at least one support wall is formed by the extrusion step of claim 9 or if it is being formed by a separate step, in which case what would that step be. Clarification and/or correction is required.
With regards to claim 14, there appears to be insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the width of the top wall” found in line 1.
With regards to claim 15, the preamble sets forth the method is directed towards “making a rood equipment support” however, upon completion of the method one of ordinary skill in the art obtains an extruded material having “a platform…a pair of sidewalls…a top wall…and a pair of strut extensions” The claim does not clearly recite that the listed structure makes up the “roof equipment support”.
With regards to claim 19, the claim states “further comprising at least one support wall extending from the sidewalls”, this renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear if the at least one support wall is formed by the extrusion step of claim 15 or if it is being formed by a separate step, in which case what would that step be. Clarification and/or correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 9-10, 14-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anselmo (US 9,431,802).
In reference to claim 1, Anselmo discloses a method of making a roof equipment support comprising
preparing a material for extrusion,
extruding the material through a die [see col. 5 lines 5-8], wherein the extrusion forms:
a platform (28) having a length and a width,
a pair of sidewalls [see figure below] 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 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 an interior cavity that extends the length of the platform from a first end to a second end, and wherein the cavity is open at both the first end and the second end, and
a pair of strut extensions (16) extending from the top wall, wherein each of the strut extensions comprises a hook (32) 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 roof equipment support is contact along an entirety of the length of the platform.
PNG
media_image1.png
322
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 2, the extrusion forms an elongated support, and the method further comprises cutting the elongated support to generate a plurality of roof equipment supports having the same cross sectional profile.
In reference to claim 3, the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are unitary, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 4, a cross-section of the interior cavity has a trapezoidal shape, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 6, the width of the top wall is less than the width of the platform, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 9, Anselmo discloses a method of making a roof equipment support comprising
preparing a material for extrusion,
extruding the material through a die [see col. 5 lines 5-8], wherein the extrusion forms:
a platform (28) having a length and a width,
a pair of sidewalls [see figure 3 above] 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 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 an interior cavity that extends the length of the platform from a first end to a second end,
a pair of strut extensions (16) extending from the top wall, wherein the pair strut extensions and the top wall define a channel [see figure 3], and
wherein a cross-sectional profile of the roof equipment support is contact along an entirety of the length of the platform.
In reference to claim 10, the platform, the pair of sidewalls, the top wall, and the pair of strut extensions are unitary, as seen in figure 3.
in reference to claim 14, a width of the top wall is less than the width of the platform, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 15, Anselmo discloses a method of making a roof equipment support comprising
preparing a material for extrusion,
extruding the material through a die [see col. 5 lines 5-8], wherein the extrusion forms:
a platform (28) configured to be coupled to a roof [see col. 8 lines 16-17],
a pair of sidewalls [see figure 3 above] extending from the platform, wherein the pair of sidewalls define an interior cavity that is open at at least one end,
a top wall [see figure 3 above] 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 (conduit 3),
a pair of strut extensions (16) extending from the top wall, wherein each of the strut extensions comprises a hook (32) at a distal end that includes a substantially 180 degree bend, wherein the pair of strut extensions and the top wall define a channel that extends at least a portion the length of the roof equipment support [see figure 3] and, wherein a cross-sectional profile of the roof equipment support is contact along an entirety of the length of the platform.
In reference to claim 16, a cross-section of the interior cavity has a substantially trapezoidal shape, as seen in figure 3.
In reference to claim 18, a width of the top wall is less than the width of the platform, as seen in figure 3.
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.
1. Claim(s) 5, 13 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anselmo in view of Gretz (US 9,726,303).
In reference to claims 5, 13 and 17, Anselmo discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein the width of the platform is greater than a spacing between the pair of sidewalls proximate the platform.
However, Gretz teaches of a roof equipment support where the platform (26) extends beyond the width of the sidewalls for the purpose of providing additional stability [see col. 4 lines 5-8; figure 1].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the width of the platform of Anselmo to be greater than a spacing between the sidewalls, as taught by Gretz, in order to provide additional stability.
2. Claim(s) 7-8, 11-12 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anselmo in view of Sorkin (US 6,684,594).
In reference to claims 7, 11 and 19, Anselmo discloses the invention substantially as claimed except for wherein at support wall is formed in the interior cavity and extends between the top wall and the platform.
However, Sorkin teaches of a roof equipment support comprising of a platform, a pair of sidewalls extending from the platform, a top wall extending between the sidewalls and a support wall extending between the platform and the top wall for the purpose of providing added rigidity to the support [see col. 5 lines 2-5; figure 2].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support structure of Anselmo to include a support wall, as taught by Sorkin, in order to provide additional rigidity to the support structure.
In reference to claims 8, 12 and 20, Sorkin further teaches that support wall defines a pipe rest portion that is curved with a concavity in an upwards direction relative to the platform [see figure 2].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Debra Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)272-1904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm EST.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached on (571) 270-1477. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Debra M Sullivan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights