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 .
Status of Claims
The present application is said to be a CON of Application No. 18/234,170. Claims 1-21 presented via Preliminary Amendment are pending and subject to examination in this Office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted to date are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the Examiner, except for several citations that were struck through for various reasons. In this regard, please note the Examiner’s comments provided thereon.
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.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 10 (last limitation), the term “the end” is recited twice. Is this term intended to refer back to the previously recited first ends, or to a different end? Clarification is requested.
Accordingly, the pending claims will be interpreted as best understood.
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 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.
Claims 1, 4-10 and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by CN 104 612 250 A.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 10, as best understood, CN '250 describes a modular frame assembly comprising:
a first modular frame coupled to a second modular frame with a locating pin assembly (Fig. 4) sandwiched between the first modular frame and the second modular frame, the first modular frame having a first-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member and a first-modular-frame-first-beam coupled at a first end of the first-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member, and the second modular frame having a second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member and a second-modular-frame-first-beam coupled at a first end of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (Fig. 8),
wherein the locating pin assembly comprises: a first gusset plate (86) positioned between the first modular frame and the second modular frame, the first gusset plate having a first gusset plate aperture and a second gusset plate aperture (see the apertures of 86 in Fig. 4), the first gusset plate aperture adapted for receiving a first fastening means for engaging a first-modular-frame-first-beam-first-aperture for coupling the first-modular-frame-first-beam to the first gusset plate, and the second gusset plate aperture adapted for receiving a second fastening means for engaging a second-modular-frame-first-beam-first-aperture for coupling the second-modular-frame-first-beam to the first gusset plate; and
a pin (87) engaging the first gusset plate, the first modular frame and the second modular frame, the pin having a flat quadrilateral plate-shaped section (the middle part of 87) coupled to an inverted V-shaped section (top of 87), the flat quadrilateral plate-shaped section engaging the end of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (see e.g., Figs. 3-8), and the inverted V-shaped section engaging the end of the first-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (see e.g., Figs. 3-8).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, further comprising a stop (protrusions on 87; Fig. 4) coupled to the plate-shaped section.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, wherein the stop is positioned proximate to a first end of the plate-shaped section, the first end of the plate-shaped section being coupled to the inverted V-shaped section (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, wherein the stop is a planar stop plate, the planar stop plate sized to sit at the first end of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member, and the planar stop plate having a thickness equal to the thickness of the gusset plate; and the gusset plate having a cutout for receiving and aligning with one or more edges of the planar stop plate (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, wherein the one or more edges of the planar stop plate longitudinally align with one or more edges of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, wherein the stop is a ledge, the ledge sized to sit at the first end of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member, and the ledge plate having a thickness equal to the thickness of the gusset plate; and the gusset plate having a cutout for receiving and aligning with one or more edges of the ledge (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, wherein the plate-shaped section having a first orifice and a second orifice, the first orifice formed intermediate a second end of the plate-shaped section and the stop, the first orifice being proximate to the stop and adapted for receiving a third fastening means, and the second orifice formed proximate to the second end of the plate-shaped section and adapted for receiving a fourth fastening means, wherein the third fastening means engages a second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member-first-opening and the first orifice, and the fourth fastening means engages a second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member-second-opening and the second orifice to affix the plate-shaped section to the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 19, CN '250 describes a system of modular frame units for forming a modular building, comprising a first modular frame coupled to a second modular frame with a locating pin assembly sandwiched between the first modular frame and the second modular frame, wherein the locating pin assembly is as defined in claim 1 (see rejection of claims 1 and 10 set forth above).
Regarding claim 20, CN '250 describes a method of coupling modular frame units for forming a modular building, comprising coupling a first modular frame to a second modular frame with a locating pin assembly sandwiched between the first modular frame and the second modular frame, wherein the locating pin assembly is as defined in claim 1 (see rejection of claims 1 and 10 set forth above).
Regarding claim 21, CN '250 describes a hoistable modular frame unit, comprising a locating pin assembly coupled to a first modular frame, wherein the locating pin assembly is as defined in claim 1 (see rejection of claims 1 and 10 set forth above).
Claims 1-3 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by EP 2 818 429 A1.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 10, as best understood, EP '429 describes a modular frame assembly comprising:
a first modular frame coupled to a second modular frame (Figs. 3A and 3B) with a locating pin assembly (Fig. 3C) sandwiched between the first modular frame and the second modular frame, the first modular frame having a first-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member and a first-modular-frame-first-beam coupled at a first end of the first-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member, and the second modular frame having a second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member and a second-modular-frame-first-beam coupled at a first end of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (Fig. 8),
wherein the locating pin assembly comprises: a first gusset plate (12) positioned between the first modular frame and the second modular frame, the first gusset plate having a first gusset plate aperture and a second gusset plate aperture (see the apertures on each side of 16), the first gusset plate aperture adapted for receiving a first fastening means for engaging a first-modular-frame-first-beam-first-aperture for coupling the first-modular-frame-first-beam to the first gusset plate, and the second gusset plate aperture adapted for receiving a second fastening means for engaging a second-modular-frame-first-beam-first-aperture for coupling the second-modular-frame-first-beam to the first gusset plate; and
a pin (15) engaging the first gusset plate, the first modular frame and the second modular frame, the pin having a flat quadrilateral plate-shaped section (18) coupled to an inverted V-shaped section (19; Fig. 3C), the flat quadrilateral plate-shaped section engaging the end of the second-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member, and the inverted V-shaped section adapted for engaging the end of the first-modular-frame-first-hollow-tubular-member (Figs. 3A-3D).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, wherein the inverted V-shaped section has a hoisting aperture (15; Fig. 5A).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, wherein the hoisting aperture is formed proximate to the apex of the inverted V-shaped section (Fig. 5A).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Please be advised that a web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as unpatentable over claims 1-12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,163,327.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the structural elements recited in the rejected claims are present in the noted claims of the '327 patent or they are obvious variants thereof.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure: Refer to the attached Form PTO-892.
This is a CON of applicant’s earlier Application No. 18/234,170. All claims are drawn to the same invention claimed in the earlier application and could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the earlier application. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action in this case. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no, however, event will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Authorization for Email Communication – In the event Applicant wishes to communicate with the Examiner via electronic mail, written authorization should be provided in Applicant’s next response. See MPEP § 502.03. The following is a sample authorization form which may be used by Applicant:
Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, we hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with any authorized representative concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail. We understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY MINTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7327. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 0730 - 1630 EDT.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached on 571-270-3238. 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.
/RODNEY MINTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights