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.
Claims 1-15 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a U-shaped cross section formed by extending two side wings to the same side on the basis of a tubular member” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear to the examiner if the two side wings extend to the same side of the tubular member or extend in the same direction to two sides of the tubular member. For the purpose of this Office Action the examiner will assume the two side wings extend in the same direction to two sides of the tubular member.
Claims 2-15 are rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (2026/0060390) in view of Arndt (2026/0114563).
Tung discloses:
Claim 1 as best understood by the examiner: A Roman umbrella, comprising a fixed rod (Fig. 2; 10), a diagonal rod (Fig. 2; 31), and a pull rod (Fig. 4; 321 left), wherein the lower end of the pull rod is hinged in a middle of the diagonal rod (Fig. 5; via the left segment of 32 and the bolt passing through 323), the Roman umbrella further comprises a clamping seat (Fig. 3; see detail) with a U-shaped cross section formed by extending two side wings (Fig. 3; the left and right portions that connect to 32) to the same side on the basis of a tubular member, upper end of the pull rod is hinged to the clamping seat (Fig. 3; at the fastener – see detail), and the fixed rod is clamped between the two side wings (Fig. 3; via compression from the fastener - see detail) of the clamping seat, fits and abuts against an inner side of the clamping seat (Fig. 3; 10 abuts against inner sides of the clamping seat on the 3 sides that wrap around it), and then is fixedly connected with the clamping seat through a fastener (Fig. 3; via compression from the fastener - see detail).
Tung fails to disclose two pull rods.
However, Arndt discloses two pull rods (Fig. 6; 107 left and right).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to increase the number of pull rods to be two, as taught by Arndt, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would add rigidity and prevent twisting.
PNG
media_image1.png
681
478
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 1, wherein the inner side of the clamping seat has a protruding planar abutment surface (Fig. 3; the inner face of the clamping seat adjacent the outer wall of 10 – see detail), the fixed rod has a flat support wall (Fig. 3; the outer wall of 10 – see detail), and the abutment surface fits and abuts against the support wall (Fig. 3; the inner face of the clamping seat abuts the outer wall of 10 – see detail).
Claim 3: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 2, wherein the inner side of the clamping seat has arc-shaped limiting surfaces (Fig. 3; see detail) located on two sides of the abutment surface (Fig. 3; the inner face of the clamping seat adjacent the outer wall of 10 – see detail), the fixed rod (Fig. 3; 10) has limiting portions disposed in a vertical direction and located on two sides of the support wall (Fig. 3; see detail), the two limiting portions (Fig. 3; see detail) are spaced apart, and outer side walls of the two limiting portions fit and abut against the two limiting surfaces in a one-to-one correspondence manner (Fig. 3; the outer walls of the limiting portions fit and abut against the limiting surfaces in a one to one ratio - see detail).
PNG
media_image2.png
681
478
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 4: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 3, wherein outer ends of the two limiting portions are disposed close to each other (Fig. 3; see detail).
Claim 5: Tung and Arndt disclose the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 2, wherein the clamping seat (Tung - Fig. 3; see detail) comprises a hollow tubular installation portion (Tung - Fig. 3; see detail), the installation portion internally has a plurality of plate-shaped reinforcing walls parallel to each other (Tung - Fig. 3; see detail), the upper ends of the at least two pull rods (Arndt - Fig. 6; 107 left and right) are hinged to the installation portion (Tung - Fig. 3; via the fastener once combined with Arndt - see detail), and the reinforcing walls (Tung - Fig. 3; see detail) are all disposed parallel to the at least two pull rods (Arndt - Fig. 6; 107 left and right).
PNG
media_image3.png
683
478
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 10: Tung and Arndt disclose the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of left and right sides of the fixed rod (Tung - Fig. 2; 10) is provided with the clamping seat (Tung - Fig. 3; see detail), the diagonal rod (Tung - Fig. 4; via 30), and the at least two pull rods (Arndt - Fig. 6; 107 left and right).
Claims 6-9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tung (2026/0060390) in view of Arndt (2026/0114563) and further in view of HE (CN 220937055).
Claim 6: Tung and Arndt disclose the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein a first needle roller bearing is disposed between each of the at least two pull rods and the installation portion.
However, HE discloses a needle bearing (Fig. 9; 7, Para. [n0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the umbrella of Tung to include the needle bearing, as taught by HE, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow the diagonal rods to pivot smoothly.
Claim 7: Tung and Arndt disclose the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 6, wherein a connecting sleeve (Tung - Fig. 4; 32) is clamped in the middle of the diagonal rod (Tung - Fig. 2 depicts 32 clamped in the middle of 31), the at least two pull rods (Arndt - Fig. 6; 107 left and right) are provided, in a quantity of two, the two of the at least two pull rods are respectively located on two sides of the connecting sleeve (Arndt - Fig. 6; 107 left and right once combined with Tung) and hinged to the diagonal rod through another fastener (Tung - Fig. 4; via 311/323, Para. [0031]), but fails to disclose counter bores are formed in two side walls of the connecting sleeve, each of the counter bores is internally provided with a second needle roller bearing, as well as a first support gasket and a second support gasket which are located on two sides of the second needle roller bearing, and the first support gasket in each of the counter bores abuts against a side wall of corresponding one of the at least two pull rods.
However, HE discloses counter bores (Fig. 4; 41) formed in two side walls of the connecting sleeve (Fig. 4; 41 are depicted in 42 top and bottom), each of the counter bores is internally provided with a second needle roller bearing (Fig. 4; 73), as well as a first support gasket (Fig. 4; 71) and a second support gasket (Fig. 4; 72) which are located on two sides of the second needle roller bearing (Fig. 4; 71 and 72 are depicted on either side of 73), and the first support gasket (Fig. 4; 71) in each of the counter bores abuts against a side wall of corresponding one of the at least two pull rods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connecting sleeve of Tung to include the needle bearing, as taught by HE, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow the pull rods to pivot smoothly.
Thus, Tung, Arndt and HE disclose the counter bores, of HE, are formed in two side walls of the connecting sleeve, of Tung, each of the counter bores is internally provided with a second needle roller bearing, of HE, as well as a first support gasket and a second support gasket which are located on two sides of the second needle roller bearing, of HE, and the first support gasket in each of the counter bores abuts against a side wall of corresponding one of the at least two pull rods, of Arndt.
Claim 8: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 7, wherein the connecting sleeve is in a U shape (Fig. 4; see detail), and the connecting sleeve (Fig. 4; 32) is clamped upward (Fig. 4; at 32) in the middle of the diagonal rod (Fig. 4; 31).
PNG
media_image4.png
510
641
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 9: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 7, wherein a handle shell (Fig. 3; 300) is slidably connected to the fixed rod (Fig. 3; Para. [0020]), a lower end of the diagonal rod (Fig. 3; 31) is hinged to the handle shell (Fig. 3; 31 is depicted as hinged on 300, Para. [0020]) but fails to disclose a hinge bolt and a nut, installation counterbores are formed in two side walls of the handle shell, each of the installation counterbores is internally provided with a third needle roller bearing and third support gaskets located on two sides of the third needle roller bearing, and the each third needle roller bearing and the corresponding third support gaskets are compressed in corresponding one of the installation counterbores through the hinge bolt and the nut.
However, HE discloses a hinge bolt and a nut (Fig. 5; 5/6), installation counterbores are formed in two side walls of the handle shell (Fig. 5; at 91a), each of the installation counterbores is internally provided with a third needle roller bearing (Fig. 5; 7) and third support gaskets located on two sides of the third needle roller bearing (Fig. 4; 7 is depicted as comprising 71 and 72 which are located on either side of 73), and the each third needle roller bearing and the corresponding third support gaskets are compressed in corresponding one of the installation counterbores through the hinge bolt and the nut (Fig. 5; at 5 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connecting handle shell of Tung to include the counter bore and needle bearing structure, as taught by HE, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow the diagonal rod to pivot one the handle smoothly.
Claim 11: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 1, wherein an upper umbrella disc (Fig. 6; 212) is connected to an upper end of the diagonal rod (Fig. 8; 31), a connecting rod (Fig. 2; see detail) is further connected to the middle of the diagonal rod (Fig. 8; 31), a lower umbrella disc (Fig. 6; 213) is connected to a lower end of the connecting rod (Fig. 2; see detail), an upper end of the lower umbrella disc has an insertion rod (Fig. 12; 24), an insertion sleeve (Fig. 12; 211) is fixed to a lower end of the upper umbrella disc (Fig. 8; 211 is depicted as fixed to a lower end of 212), and the insertion rod is capable of being inserted into the inner hole of the insertion sleeve (Fig. 12; Para. [0036]).
While Tung fails to disclose the insertion rod and insertion sleeve having a polygonal cross section, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to change the shape of the insertion rod and insertion sleeve to aid in seating the insertion sleeve on the insertion rod and help prevent twisting, since it has been held that changes in shape have no patentable significance absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant. See MPEP 2144.04(IV) (B) – Changes in Shape.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the insertion rod and insertion sleeve of Tung to include a polygonal cross section, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would aid in seating the insertion sleeve on the insertion rod and help prevent twisting.
PNG
media_image5.png
568
665
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 12: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 11, wherein edges of the insertion rod are all disposed slantly outward from top to bottom (once modified per the rejection of claim 11, the pointed edges of the polygonal cross section would be disposed slantly outward from top to bottom.
Claim 13: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 11, wherein an upper end of the insertion sleeve has an annular limiting stop edge (Fig. 12; 218), and an upper end of the insertion rod is capable of abutting against the limiting stop edge (Fig. 12; 24 is capable of abutting against 218).
Claim 14: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 11, wherein a roughly H-shaped connecting seat (Fig. 4; see detail) is connected between the diagonal rod (Fig. 4; 31) and the connecting rod (Fig. 2; see detail), the connecting seat comprises a connecting block (Fig. 4; see detail), two upper connecting plates (Fig. 4; see detail) formed by protruding upwards at an upper end of the connecting block, and two lower connecting plates (Fig. 4; see detail) formed by protruding downwards at a lower end of the connecting block, the diagonal rod is embedded between the two upper connecting plates (Fig. 4; 31) and fixedly connected with the upper connecting plates (Fig. 4; via the fastener at the connecting block), and the connecting rod (Fig. 2; see detail – Fig. 4 shows this section as 321 lower) is embedded between the two lower connecting plates and hinged to the lower connecting plates (Fig. 4; via the fastener at the connecting block).
PNG
media_image6.png
510
641
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 15: Tung discloses the Roman umbrella as claimed in claim 14, wherein a Y-shaped installation seat (Fig. 10; see detail) is fixed to the upper end of the diagonal rod (Fig. 10; 31), the upper umbrella disc (Fig. 10; 212) has a downwardly-disposed connecting tube (Fig. 10; 212), and the connecting tube (Fig. 10; 211) is embedded between two fork arms (Fig. 10; via the arms of 214) of the installation seat and hinged to the fork arms (Fig. 10; via the fastener between the installation seat and 214).
PNG
media_image7.png
753
534
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kathleen M. McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-9139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (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.
/Kathleen M. McFarland/Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Kathleen M. McFarland
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
