DETAILED ACTION
In response to remarks filed on 4 August 2026
Status of Claims
Claims 21-38 are pending;
Claims 1-20 are cancelled;
Claims 21-38 are new;
Claims 21-38 are rejected herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 4 August 2026 have been fully considered and they are not persuasive. Moving or sliding in “a direction parallel to the top surface” is broad as a top surface have different directions such as width direction, length direction and height/thickness direction which can be horizontal, vertical or diagonal. Additionally, the term “top surface” itself is broad. The claim does not provide specific information nor a point of reference that assists in how to interpret this direction. Therefore, the references still read on the claims based on the above remarks.
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.
Claims 21, 28, 29, 35 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roberts (U.S. Patent Application No. 2001/0052206).
As to Claim 21, Roberts discloses a pier, comprising:
A first section (10), comprising:
A front member (Front surface of 10);
A first connecting rod (Upper 18) extending from the front member; and
A second connecting (Lower 18) rod extending from the front member; and
A second section (14), comprising:
A frame structure having a top surface (Upper surface of 14);
A first receiving rod (Upper 48) mounted to the frame structure and slidingly engaging the first connecting rod (Upper 18) to allow movement of the first connecting rod in a direction parallel to the top surface (Parallel to the horizontal direction coincident with the width dimension of the upper surface of 14) responsive to dynamic forces applied to one of the first section (10) or the second section (14); and a second receiving rod (Lower 48) mounted to the frame structure and slidingly engaging the second connecting rod (Lower 18) to allow movement of the second connecting rod in a direction parallel to the top surface (Parallel to the horizontal direction coincident with the width dimension of the upper surface of 14) responsive to the dynamic forces.
As to Claim 28, Roberts discloses a pier, comprising:
A frame section (36) having a top surface (Upper surface of 36);
A support structure (28) perpendicular to and supporting the frame section (36); and
An adjustable end section (10, 14) connecting the frame section to a shoreline anchor (40) that allows for sliding movement (via 18, 48) of the frame section relative to the shoreline in a direction parallel to the top surface (Parallel to the horizontal direction coincident with the length dimension of the upper surface of 36) responsive to dynamic forces applied to one of the frame section (36) or the shoreline anchor.
As to Claim 29, Roberts discloses the invention of Claim 28 (Refer to Claim 28 discussion). Roberts also discloses wherein the adjustable end section comprises a first section (10) configured to connect to the shoreline anchor (40) and comprising a first connecting rod (Upper 18) parallel to the top surface (Parallel to the direction coincident with the length dimension of the upper surface of 36); and a second connecting rod (Upper 18) parallel to the top surface (Parallel to the direction coincident with the length dimension of the upper surface of 36); and a second section (14) attached to the frame section (36) and comprising a first receiving rod (Upper 48) to slidingly engage the first connecting rod (Upper 18) to facilitate the sliding movement; and a second receiving rod (Lower 18) to slidingly engage the second connecting rod (Lower 48) to facilitate the sliding movement.
As to Claim 35, Roberts discloses a method of assembling a pier, comprising:
Installing a support structure (Lower 28) in a body of water;
Attaching a frame section (36) to the support structure (Lower 28);
Connecting (via 24) an adjustable end section (10, 14) to the frame section (36), wherein the adjustable end section comprises:
A first section (10) comprising connecting rods (Upper 18, Middle 18, Lower 18) and configured to attach to the frame section (36); and
A second section (14) comprising receiving rods (Upper 48, Middle 48, Lower 48) and configured to attach to a shoreline anchor (40); and
Aligning the first section (10) with the second section (14) by inserting the connecting rods (Upper 18, Middle 18, Lower 18) of the first section into the receiving rods (Upper 48, Middle 48, Lower 48) of the second section; and
Securing the first section (10) to a shoreline anchor (40), wherein:
The connecting rods (Upper 18, Middle 18, Lower 18) slidingly engage the receiving rods (Upper 48, Middle 48, Lower 48) to allow the adjustable end section (10, 14) to move relative to the frame section (36) in a direction parallel to a top surface of the frame section (Parallel to the horizontal direction coincident with the length dimension of the upper surface of 36) responsive to dynamic forces applied to one of the frame section (36) or the shoreline anchor.
As to Claim 36, Roberts discloses the invention of Claim 35 (Refer to Claim 35 discussion). Roberts also discloses comprising adjusting the alignment of the first section (10) and the second section (14) by sliding the connecting rods (Upper 18, Middle 18, Lower 18) within the receiving rods (Upper 48, Middle 48, Lower 48) to achieve a desired length and positioning relative to the shoreline anchor.
Claims 21-25, 28-31 and 33-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Macomber (U.S. Patent No. 3,747,354).
As to Claim 21, Macomber discloses a pier, comprising:
A first section (46), comprising:
A front member (46);
A first connecting rod (Left 47) extending from the front member; and
A second connecting rod (Right 47) extending from the front member (46); and
A second section (57), comprising:
A frame structure (46) having a top surface (61);
A first receiving rod (Left 49) mounted to the frame structure (46) and slidingly engaging the first connecting rod (Left 47) to allow movement of the first connecting rod (Left 47) in a direction parallel to the top surface (Vertical direction coincident and parallel to the vertical diameter dimension of top surface 61) responsive to dynamic forces applied to one of the first section or the second section (46); and
A second receiving rod (Right 49) mounted to the frame structure (46) and slidingly engaging the second connecting rod (Right 47) to allow movement of the second connecting rod (Right 47) in a direction parallel to the top surface (Vertical direction coincident and parallel to the vertical diameter dimension of top surface 61) responsive to the dynamic forces.
As to Claim 22, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 21 (Refer to Claim 21 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the first section (46) comprises a first side; and a first plurality of adjustment slots (Right slots receiving right 53) on the first side to accommodate movement of the frame structure.
As to Claim 23, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 22 (Refer to Claim 22 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein: the first section comprises a second side; and a second plurality of adjustment slots (Left slots receiving left 53on the first side to accommodate movement of the frame structure.
As to Claim 24, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 21 (Refer to Claim 21 discussion). Macomber also discloses comprising a fascia board (36) connected to the first section (46) and configured to collapse under a pressure threshold.
As to Claim 25, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 24 (Refer to Claim 24 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the fascia board comprise at least one of high-density polyethylene (HDPE), composite materials, or wood (36).
As to Claim 28, Macomber discloses a pier, comprising:
A frame section (11) having a top surface (34);
A support structure (37) perpendicular to and supporting the frame section (11); and
An adjustable end section (46, 57) connecting the frame section (11) to a shoreline anchor (55) that allows for sliding movement of the frame section (11) relative to the shoreline in a direction parallel to the top surface (Vertical direction coincident and parallel to the vertical height dimension of top surface 34) responsive to dynamic forces applied to one of the frame section (11) or the shoreline anchor.
As to Claim 29, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 28 (Refer to Claim 28 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the adjustable end section comprises a first section (46) configured to connect to the shoreline anchor and comprising a first connecting rod (Left 47) parallel to the top surface (Vertical direction coincident and parallel to the vertical height dimension of top surface 34); and a second connecting rod (Right 47) parallel to the top surface (Vertical direction coincident and parallel to the vertical height dimension of top surface 34); and a second section (57) attached to the frame section and comprising a first receiving rod (Left 49) to slidingly engage the first connecting rod to facilitate the sliding movement; and a second receiving rod (Right 49) to slidingly engage the second connecting rod to facilitate the sliding movement.
As to Claim 30, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 29 (Refer to Claim 29 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the adjustable end section (46, 57) comprises a first plurality of adjustment slots (Left slots receiving left 53) on a first side of the first section (46) configured to accommodate movement of the first section.
As to Claim 31, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 30 (Refer to Claim 30 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the adjustable end section comprises a second plurality of adjustment slots (Right slots receiving right 53) on a second side of the first section (46) configured to accommodate movement of the first section.
As to Claim 33, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 28 (Refer to Claim 28 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the adjustable end section (46, 57) comprises a fascia board (36) configured to collapse under a pressure threshold.
As to Claim 34, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 33 (Refer to Claim 33 discussion). Macomber also discloses wherein the fascia board comprises at least one of high-density polyethylene (HDPE), composite materials, or wood (36).
As to Claim 35, Macomber discloses a method of assembling a pier, comprising:
Installing a support structure (80) in a body of water;
Attaching (via 85, 86) a frame section (11) to the support structure (80);
Connecting (via 48) an adjustable end section (46, 57) to the frame section (11), wherein the adjustable end section comprises:
A first section (57) comprising connecting rods (Left 49, Right 49) and configured to attach to the frame section; and
A second section (46) comprising receiving rods (Left 47, Right 47) and configured to attach to a shoreline anchor; and
Aligning the first section with the second section by inserting the connecting rods (Left 49, Right 49) of the first section (57) into the receiving rods (Left 47, Right 47) of the second section (46); and
Securing the first section (57) to a shoreline anchor (55), wherein:
The connecting rods (Left 49, Right 49) slidingly engage the receiving rods (Left 47, Right 47) to allow the adjustable end section to move relative to the frame section (11) in a direction parallel (Vertical direction coincident and parallel to the vertical height dimension of top surface 34) to a top surface (34) of the frame section (11) responsive to dynamic forces applied to one of the frame section (11) or the shoreline anchor.
As to Claim 36, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 35 (Refer to Claim 35 discussion). Macomber also discloses comprising adjusting the alignment of the first section (57) and the second section (46) by sliding the connecting rods (Left 49, Right 49) within the receiving rods (Left 47, Right 47) to achieve a desired length and positioning relative to the shoreline anchor.
As to Claim 37, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 35 (Refer to Claim 35 discussion). Macomber also discloses comprising installing fascia boards (24, 36) on the adjustable end section, the fascia boards configured to collapse under a predetermined pressure threshold.
As to Claim 38, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 35 (Refer to Claim 35 discussion). Macomber also discloses comprising providing a plurality of adjustment slots (Openings of 61 and 62 to receive 54) on each side of the first section (57) to align and position the first section relative to the second section, allowing for adjustments to accommodate changes in shoreline or water level.
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 26, 27 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macomber (U.S. Patent No. 3,747,354) alone.
As to Claim 26 and Claim 27, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 21 (Refer to Claim 21 discussion). Although Macomber is silent about wherein the first section (46) and the second section (57) comprise corrosion-resistant material comprising at least one of stainless steel, aluminum, and composite materials, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to construct the first section and the second section from corrosion-resistant materials comprising at least one of stainless steel, aluminum, and composite materials, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
As to Claim 32, Macomber discloses the invention of Claim 29 (Refer to Claim 29 discussion). Although Macomber is silent about wherein the first section (46) and the second section (57) are constructed from corrosion-resistant materials selected from the group consisting of stainless steel, aluminum, and composite materials, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to construct the first section and the second section from corrosion-resistant materials selected from the group consisting of stainless steel, aluminum, and composite materials, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM 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, AMBER ANDERSON can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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.
/EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
