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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 8, 2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed November 8, 2024 are accepted.
Abstract
The Abstract filed November 8, 2024 is accepted.
Specification
The specification filed November 8, 2024 has been entered.
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 – 14 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 recite the term “substantially” which is considered indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be fully ascertained. The phrase “substantially” lacks an objective criterion for determining when the limitation is satisfied.
Claims 2 – 14 are rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
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.
Claims 1 – 8 and 12 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valentine (US 1,559,386) in view of Koerner (US 937,816).
With respect to claim 1, Valentine discloses a device (See Figure 1) for a frame comprising an adjustable frame (10) comprising a plurality of elongate members (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19); and a plurality of hinges (See annotated Figure 1 below) connected to the plurality of elongate members (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19), wherein each elongate member (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19) of the plurality of elongate members is connected at a first end to a first hinge of the plurality of hinges and at a second end to a second hinge of the plurality of hinges (See Figure 1) such that the adjustable frame is substantially a continuous structure (See Figure 1), wherein each elongate member (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19) of the plurality of elongate members is telescopic (See elongate members 12, 16, 19), and wherein the device further comprises a locking unit (13, 17, 20) configured to lock the adjustable frame in a locked configuration, the locking unit (13, 17, 20) comprising an elongate member locking mechanism (i.e. set screw), configured to lock each elongate member of the plurality of elongate members in any position between a telescopically unextended configuration and a maximum telescopically extended configuration (See page 1 of the specification, lines 60 – 90).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
698
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Valentine does not disclose a hinge locking mechanism as recited in claim 1.
Regarding the hinge locking mechanism, Koerner discloses a plurality of elongated members (A, A’, B, B’, C, C’, E, J, K) that are connected to teach other by a plurality of hinges (L, M) configured to lock each hinge of the plurality of hinges in any position between a minimum position and a maximum position in order to be capable of various unsymmetrical adjustments that can be locked in position (See page 1 of the specification, lines 10 – 19). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Valentine by providing a hinge locking mechanism, as taught by Koerner, in order to be capable of various unsymmetrical adjustments that can be locked in position (See page 1 of the specification, lines 10 – 19).
Referring to claim 2, the combination of Valentine and Koerner teaches a device wherein the adjustable frame is a quadrilateral (Figure 1 of Valentine) comprising a first longitudinal member (11) opposing a second longitudinal member (15) and a first lateral member (10) opposing a second lateral member (10).
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Valentine and Koerner shows a device wherein the first longitudinal member (11) and second longitudinal member (15) are substantially identical and wherein the first lateral member (10) and second lateral member (10) are substantially identical.
PNG
media_image2.png
402
698
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Valentine and Koerner discloses a device wherein the first longitudinal member (11) and second longitudinal member (15) are at least double the length of the first lateral member (10) and second lateral member (10; i.e. when telescopic members 12, 16 and 19 are fully extended).
With regards to claim 5, the combination of Valentine and Koerner sets forth a device wherein the plurality of elongate members (10, 11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19) are substantially straight (See Figure 1 of Valentine).
Referring to claim 6, the combination of Valentine and Koerner teaches a device wherein the elongate member locking mechanism (13, 17, 20) is configured to lock each elongate member of the plurality of elongate members in substantially every position between an unextended configuration and a telescopically extended configuration (See Figures 1 and 3 of Valentine).
PNG
media_image2.png
402
698
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
234
416
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 7, the combination of Valentine and Koerner shows a device wherein the elongate member locking mechanism (13, 17, 20) is configured to lock each elongate member of the plurality of elongate members in a plurality of discrete locked configurations (See Figure 3 of Valentine).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Valentine and Koerner discloses a device wherein the hinge locking mechanism (lock nuts M as modified by Koerner above) is configured to independently lock each hinge of the plurality of hinges in a locked configuration (See Figure 1 of Koerner).
PNG
media_image4.png
790
398
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 12, the combination of Valentine and Koerner sets forth a device wherein the plurality of elongate members (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19) are independently telescopic (See Figure 1 of Valentine).
Referring to claim 13, the combination of Valentine and Koerner teaches a device wherein each elongate member (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19) of the plurality of elongate members comprises an external member (11, 15, 18) and an internal member (12, 16, 19), at least a portion of the internal member located within the external member, the internal member configured to extend from the external member when the elongate member is in a telescopically extended configuration (See Figure 3 of Valentine).
PNG
media_image3.png
234
416
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 14, the combination of Valentine and Koerner shows a device wherein each elongate member (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19) of the plurality of elongate members has a rectangular cross section (See Figure 1 of Valentine).
PNG
media_image2.png
402
698
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 15, the method for replicating the perimeter of a frame comprising the steps of providing a device comprising an adjustable frame (10) having a plurality of elongate members (11, 12, 15, 16 18, 19), and a plurality of hinges (as annotated in Figure o1 of Valentine) connected to the plurality of elongate members; abutting the perimeter replication device to a perimeter to be replicated; adjusting the adjustable frame to replicate the perimeter (Figure 3 of Valentine); and locking a locking unit (13, 17, 20) of the perimeter replication device will be achieved by the regular operation of the combination disclosed by Valentine and Koerner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 – 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.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 9 - 11 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a device wherein the adjustable frame further comprises a spacer unit located on a perimeter opposing face of the adjustable frame; wherein the spacer unit comprises a plurality of spacer members located on the plurality of hinges in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are considered relevant but fail to teach the combination as claimed:
Barber (US 11,293,741) discloses a tool for sizing a workspace comprising a first, second and third elongated members that hinge with respect to each other. The tool also includes locking units selectively securable relative to each other. Barber fails to teach the telescopic members as claimed.
Perdue (US 7,469,485) discloses an apparatus for replicating comprising a plurality of elongated members that hinge with respect to each other, wherein the apparatus comprises locking units for permitting adjustments in lengths and angular relationships of the elongated members, but fails the telescopic elongated members as claimed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2244. The examiner can normally be reached Mon -Thu, 8:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Laura E Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
September 17, 2026
/YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights