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.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/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.
The term “good airtightness” in claims 1-9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “good airtightness” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "outer side of the inflatable bracket" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "bottom end" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "outer side of the outer cloth" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "outer side of the bonding layer" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-2, 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ensign (US Pat. 10,801,231 B1) in view of Cronk (US Pub. 2015/0315808 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ensign discloses an automatic inflatable tent with good airtightness, comprising a tent assembly (Fig. 1, tent 10), wherein the tent assembly comprises an inflatable bracket (Col. 1, lines 40-41: “The principles of the present invention provide for a tent, comprising first an inflatable frame covered by a tent cover”), an outer cloth (See id. Fig. 1, tent cover 20), a transparent window (Fig. 1, window 22), a floor mat (Fig. 2, mattress 12), and a zipper curtain (Fig. 1, zipper 24), the outer cloth is fixed on the outer side of the inflatable bracket (See Figs. 1-2), the transparent window is fixed at one end of the inflatable bracket (See Fig. 1), the floor mat is fixed at the bottom end of the inflatable bracket (See Fig. 2), and the zipper curtain is arranged on one side of the inflatable bracket away from the transparent window (See Fig. 1);
a waterproof structure is arranged on the outer side of the outer cloth, fixing structures are uniformly fixed on both sides of the bottom of the waterproof structure (Col. 5, lines 29-32: “Other features commonly associated with tents 10, including, but not limited to: a rain fly, mosquito netting, anchoring tie-down and stakes, and the like, are intended to also fall under the overall scope of the invention”).
However, Ensign fails to disclose as taught by Cronk, similarly drawn to an inflatable tubular shelter, the fixing structures each comprise connecting blocks, connecting ropes, and fastening nails (Pg. 3, [0026], lines 22-25: “Ground anchors A such as stakes or the like are inserted into the ground G and are each connected directly or by a tether to a respective foot 14 to prevent movement of the arch subframes 10 at their points of contact with the ground G”), the connecting blocks are uniformly fixed on both sides of the bottom of the waterproof structure (Fig. 2, anchors A are located at each corner of the tent), each of the connecting ropes is fixed on one side of each of the connecting blocks, and the fastening nails are fixed at the bottom ends of the connecting ropes (See Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the automatic inflatable tent of Ensign to include the ground fastening means of Cronk to better secure the tent to the ground.
Regarding claim 2, Ensign in view of Cronk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Ensign, wherein air cavities are formed in the inflatable bracket (The frame is described as being inflatable which implies that it comprises air cavities).
Regarding claim 7, Ensign in view of Cronk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Cronk, wherein the connecting blocks are symmetrically distributed on both sides of the waterproof structure (Fig. 2, the ground anchors A are symmetrically placed around the tent).
Regarding claim 8, Ensign in view of Cronk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Cronk, wherein the fastening nails are symmetrically arranged on both sides of the outer cloth (See id).
Regarding claim 9, Ensign in view of Cronk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Cronk, wherein a main view section of the bottom of each of the fastening nails is in a cone-shaped design (Ground stakes such as those used in camping are known in the art to be cylindrical and have a pointed tip).
Claim(s) 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ensign (US Pat. 10,801,231 B1) in view of Cronk (US Pub. 2015/0315808 A1), and further in view of Hinz (US Pub. 2010/0059095 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Ensign in view of Cronk discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Hinz, similarly drawn to a tent comprising a rainfly, wherein the waterproof structure comprises a bonding layer, a first protective layer, and a waterproof layer, and the bonding layer is fixed on the outer side of the outer cloth (Pg. 2, [0021]: “If desired, if a laminate rainfly is utilized, a urethane coating with added white pigments may be positioned in between the first and second layers of the fabric. The white pigments may be, for example, titanium dioxide. This coating adds to the reflection and/or absorbing characteristics of the rainfly”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the automatic inflatable tent of Ensign in view of Cronk to include the layered waterproof structure of Hinz for improved protection from the elements.
Regarding claim 4, Ensign in view of Cronk and Hinz discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Hinz, wherein the first protective layer is fixed on the outer side of the bonding layer, and the waterproof layer is fixed on the outer side of the first protective layer (See id. Paragraph [0021] describes a rainfly comprising three layers including a first layer, urethane coating, and second layer corresponding to the waterproof layer, first protective layer, and bonding layer of the instant application).
Regarding claim 5, Ensign in view of Cronk and Hinz discloses the claimed except for wherein the first protective layer is a polyester fiber layer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct a layer out of polyester as it is a cheap, tear-resistant fabric, 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. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Regarding claim 6, Ensign in view of Cronk and Hinz discloses the claimed except for wherein the waterproof layer is a nylon layer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct a waterproof layer out of nylon as it is a material known for its water-resistant properties, 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. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY HOOPER MUDD whose telephone number is (571)272-5941. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Joshua Michener can be reached at 5712721467. 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.
/HENRY HOOPER MUDD/Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
