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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following features must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
Claim 19: carrying tower (6000) mounted on the external frame part (1000); and mor broadly- where the carrying tower, hammering pile driving system and tower wall concrete pouring system are in relation to the other claimed components of the building system.
Note that the drawings only ever show 6000- 9000 on their own, and never in combination with the entire system like that in figure 1 where parts 0000-5000 are shown in combination.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 19-36 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 claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
While applicant’s amendments addressed some previously outstanding issues, a number of instances of indefinite and unclear claim language remains. The following are some non-limiting examples of indefinite claim language:
Claim 19, line 28 claims “a top transfer part”, and then in lines 30-31 separately claim “a mobile trolley” and “gantry crane structures”, suggesting the top transfer part, mobile trolley and gantry crane structures are not all part of the same structure. However, via the disclosure it is understood that the mobile trolley 5002 and gantry structures formed by a plurality of fifth standard sections 5003 are part of the top transfer part 5000. If this is correct, the top transfer part should be claimed as “comprising” a mobile trolley and gantry crane structures…,rather than claiming the top transfer part, trolley and gantry crane as three separate parts.
Additionally with respect to claim 19, line 31, it is unclear how many gantry crane structures are being claimed. Claim 19, line 31 refers to “each of two groups of gantry crane structures formed by a plurality of fifth standard sections being provided on the mobile trolley”. Clarification is needed on how many gantries are being claimed.
Claim 20, lines 12-14, it is unclear how one of the vertical columns (understood to be a vertical standard section column) can be composed “of the plurality of second standard sections”, when lines 8-10 of claim 20 describes the columns being formed of a third section (1003) passing through a middle of each second section (1002). Similar claim language appears in claims 29 and should also be addressed.
The claim language of claim 20 line 18 recites that “the whole external frame part is attached to the building”, rendering the claim generally indefinite and unclear. Via the disclosure it appears that only the four vertical columns adjacent the building are attached to the building, and that the other two (of the six claimed, claim 20, lines 3-7) are not attached to the building. Clarification is required as to if the applicant is considering indirect attachments, via intermediate connecting components.
With respect to claim 21 it is not clear if the “internal aisle” is the same as or in addition to the middle passage way or the access aisle, as no “internal aisle” is named in the specification or drawings.
With respect to method claim 28, line 4 the limitation “when a surface of a building is transported and constructed” renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear what surface the applicant is referring to, and what transportation and construction is being referenced, as no building surface, building transportation or building construction is claimed in claim 19. The “transportation” in claim 19 is with respect to the movement of the elevators on the elevator part of the platform similarly, the reference to “construction” in claim 19 is with respect to the platform elevators being “construction elevators” and the platform being a “constructional aerial building platform”, and for use in a “construction area”. No transportation or construction of a building is set forth.
With respect to claim 28 lines 6-9, claim appears to be mixing claim language of the three layer two- concentric square shaped enclosure baffle (of 4000) and the lifting platform (of 2000). It is not clear which part the applicant intends to refer to.
Again, the claims are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors, resulting in an extensive amount of indefinite and unclear claim limitations. The above examples are non-limiting examples. Applicant is required to thoroughly review all of claims 19-36 and make sure they conform with US practice.
While no prior art is applied at this time, this is a direct result of the numerous instances of indefinite and unclear claim limitations throughout the claims. A determination of allowability will be made after review and examination of amendments filed to address the above issues, as well as those not explicitly listed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner recognizes applicant’s attempt to clarify the claim language, however, while the amendments addressed some previously outstanding issues, a number of instances of indefinite and unclear claim language remains.
It was also made note of in the interview that while the amendments to claim 19 were helpful in clearing up a lot of the translational issues, all of the claim language and specification needed to be considered due to the amount of indefinite and/or unclear claim language.
For at least these reasons, the claims remain rejected as advanced above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE whose telephone number is (571)272-6289. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM-4:00PM.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
COLLEEN M. CHAVCHAVADZE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3634
/COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights