DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 09/02/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 12-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. However, applicant has elected Species 1 shown in Figure 1. However, elected Claims 5 and the subsequent claims 6-10 that depend from Claim 5, are directed to a species where at least one of the arms is mechanically seperable. These limitations are directed to nonelected Species IV (Figure 9C) and Species V (Figure 10A), where either one or both arms are slidably/mechanically separated from the main body element. As these are nonelected Species, claims 5-10 are withdrawn by the examiner. Thus, claims 5-10 and 12-15 are withdrawn from consideration. Applicants’ election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/02/2026.
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 1-4 and 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.
In re Claim 1, the arms are required to extend in opposing directions. The examiner notes that the figures all show the arms extending in the same direction, downward. The claim language requiring them to extend in opposing directions seems contradicted by this common downward direction. This language is therefore confusing, which renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The examiner will assume that extending in opposing directions means that the legs extend away from opposing sides of the central portion and therefore opposing directions.
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)(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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2) as being anticipated by Kilgore et al. (U.S. 8,544,229).
In re Claim 1, Kilgore teaches a main body element comprising: a central portion (42) generally in the configuration of a rectangular prism having a major plane; and a first longitudinal portion (18) adjacent a first side of said central portion and comprising an extension of said central portion above said major plane; and a second longitudinal portion (18) adjacent a second side of said central portion and comprising an extension of said central portion above said major plane; a pair of arms (16) disposed on opposing sides of said main body element and extending generally colinearly therefrom in opposing directions, a major axis of each of said arms generally perpendicular to said major plane; and a gripping element (20) disposed at a distal end of each of said arms, said gripping elements each comprising one or more puncturing spikes. (Figures 1-9)
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) 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilgore et al. (U.S. 8,544,229) in view of Kreidt (U.S. 6,101,780).
In re Claims 2 and 3, Kilgore has been previously discussed but does not teach first and second flexible tabs cut out of said main body element such that said first and second tabs are not connected to said main body element on three sides, said first and second tabs bending downwards from said major plane in a direction opposite said first longitudinal portion and said second longitudinal portion.
Kreidt teaches a clip/bracket (10) that has both fastener holes (21,112,113 and multiple flexible tabs (50) that secure panels/boards(25) to supports (26). These tabs are cutouts from the bracket and are not connected to said main body element on three sides(the front and two sides) and bend downward. (Figures 1-9)
It would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filings date of the inventions to modify the deck clip central portion with the first and second tabs taught by Kreidt. These tabs strengthened the connection between the clip and the deck boards. In the combination, the tabs bend downward from said major plane in a direction opposite said first longitudinal portion and said second longitudinal portion.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilgore et al. (U.S. 8,544,229) in view of Zanelli (U.S. 20090019805).
In re Claim 11, Kilgore has been previously discussed but does not specifically teach a plurality of said deck clip of claim 1 arranged linearly.
Zanelli teaches a plurality of dick clips (204) arranged linearly to secure deck boards (206) to joists (202). (Figures 1)
It would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kilgore with deck clip arrangement disclosed by Zanelli. This would allow a deck to be constructed where multiple deck boards are secured along the considerable extent of their lengths to underlying supports.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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 prior art of record fails to teach or adequately suggest a deck clip with the combination of characteristics specified in the independent claim. Of particular note are the requirement that each of said arms is about the same size and has a width that increases at said distal end prior to the gripping element. There is no cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the prior art to obtain the applicant's invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM G BARLOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1158. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am-4:00 pm EST.
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.
/ADAM G BARLOW/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633
