DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action for US Application 19/009,938 for a Self-Registering, -Squaring, and -Supporting Mount Apparatus and Method.
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 § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0268793 to Partridge et al. in view of US 2004/0237443 to Haley et al. Regarding claim 1, Partridge et al. discloses an apparatus adapted to mount lightning protection equipment to a structure to be protected. The apparatus (see figures 1-8) comprises a base plate (12), having a first edge extending longitudinally in a straight line, and a contact surface (at 14) extending away from the first edge in a direction corresponding to at least a first right angle orthogonal to a longitudinal direction of the edge. There is a fastener (16) secured to extend from an outer surface opposite the contact surface, and capable of securing a component of a lightning protection system to the base plate.
Partridge et al. does not disclose a lip extending rigidly from the base plate at a second right angle orthogonal to the first right angle and to the longitudinal direction of the first edge. Haley et al. provides a teaching for rigidly extending a horizontal extension or lip (23) at a right angle to a base plate (24) to secure the base plate on the junction of a horizontal surface and a vertical surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided a horizontal lip or extension that extends rigidly from the base plate of Partridge et al. at a right angle to secure the base plate to the junction of a horizontal surface and a vertical surface as taught by Haley et al.
Regarding claim 2, Partridge et al. discloses an adhesive (14… see paragraph 0118) capable of application to a contact surface and securing the contact surface to the structure (see paragraph 0118). Regarding claims 3 and 4, the claims contain limitations to the structure, but the structure is not positively recited in the claims, and therefore the limitations have no patentable significance. Regarding claim 5, Partridge et al. discloses a bracket (34) selectively securable to the base plate by the fastener.
Regarding claim 6, Partridge et al. in view of Haley et al. does not specifically disclose the adhesive as having mechanical properties insufficient to support the weight of the apparatus at a time of installation of the base plate and adhesive on the structure. However, the amount of adhesive relative to the weight of the apparatus to be supported is a design choice that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention.
Regarding claim 7, the base plate of the resultant structure would be fitted against the adhesive on the vertical surface, and the lip would register the base vertically and orient the base plate in rotation about a horizontal axis thereof by squaring the base plate with respect to the second edge.
Regarding claim 8, the base plate of the resultant structure would have mass and weight supported by the lip resting on the horizontal surface upon installation, and the adhesive as having a strength that holds the base plate against the vertical surface. Partridge et al. does not disclose the adhesive as having mechanical properties that increase with time after installation. However, the specific type of adhesive is a matter of design choice that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention using routine optimization for the proper adhesive strength to hold the base plate to the surface.
Regarding claim 9, the claim limits the component, but the component is not positively recited in the claims, and therefore the limitations have no patentable significance. Regarding claim 10, Partridge et al. discloses an array of base plates (12) installed on the structure, interconnected by a cable (56… see figure 21).
Regarding claim 11, Partridge et al. discloses a method comprising: providing an apparatus (see figures 1-8) adapted mount components of a lightning protection system to a structure (54) to be protected, the apparatus comprising a base plate (12) having a first edge extending longitudinally in a straight line, and a contact surface (at 14) extending away therefrom at a first right angle, and a fastener (16) secured to an outer surface opposite the contact surface; and applying an adhesive (14… see paragraph 0118) between the contact surface and a vertical surface (35).
Partridge et al. does not disclose the steps of: providing a lip extending rigidly from the base plate at a second right angle, orthogonal to the first right angle; selecting a second edge on a structure to be protected, the second edge constituting a junction of a horizontal surface and a vertical surface of the structure; registering the base plate by urging the lip toward the horizontal surface and the contact surface toward the horizonal surface; and squaring the base plate by urging the entire lip and the entire first edge toward the horizontal surface and second edge, respectively.
Haley et al. provides a teaching for rigidly extending a horizontal extension or lip (23) at a right angle to a base plate (24) to secure the base plate on the junction of a horizontal surface and a vertical surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided a horizontal lip or extension that extends rigidly from the base plate of Partridge et al. at a right angle to secure the base plate to the junction of a horizontal surface and a vertical surface as taught by Haley et al. The resultant structure would include the steps of: selecting a second edge on a structure to be protected, the second edge constituting a junction of a horizontal surface and a vertical surface of the structure; registering the base plate by urging the lip toward the horizontal surface and the contact surface toward the horizonal surface; and squaring the base plate by urging the entire lip and the entire first edge toward the horizontal surface and second edge, respectively.
Regarding claim 12, Partridge et al. in view of Haley et al. does not specifically disclose the adhesive as having mechanical properties incapable of being a sole securement supporting the base plate on the structure immediately upon installation in a vertical orientation. However, the amount of adhesive relative to the weight of the apparatus to be supported is a design choice that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention.
Regarding claim 13, Partridge et al. does not disclose the adhesive as having mechanical properties that increase over time after installation. However, the specific type of adhesive is a matter of design choice that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention using routine optimization for the proper adhesive strength to hold the base plate to the surface.
Regarding claim 14, the resultant structure of the combination would comprise a protective layer forming the second edge, the horizontal surface, and the vertical surface.
Regarding claim 15, Partridge et al. discloses the fastener (16) permanently secured to the base plate and capable of securing the component (34) to the base plate. Partridge et al. in view of Hayes et al. does not specifically disclose installing additional base plates while waiting for the adhesive to increase in mechanical strength, but the timing of when the base plates (see figure 21) are installed is a design preference that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, the resultant structure would require the steps of: fitting the base plate against the adhesive on the vertical surface; and registering and orienting the baseplate in translation and rotation, respectively, but urging the lip downward against the horizontal surface. Regarding claim 17, Partridge et al. discloses securing a cable (56) acting as a lightning conductor by the fastener (see figure 21).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2022/0396948 to Hatzinikolas
US 2004/0237443 to Haley
US 5094622 to Auclair
US 2016/0268793 to Partridge
US 2014/0130332 to Partridge
US 2015/0188299 to Partridge
US 2021/0057899 to Partridge
US 2015/0014015 to Partridge
US 2019/0229514 to Partridge
US 2017/0187176 to Partridge
The above prior art discloses various brackets secured to surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN M MARSH whose telephone number is (571)272-6819. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9 am-7:30 pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
STEVEN M. MARSH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/STEVEN M MARSH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632