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 Objections
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
Misnumbered claim 39 has been renumbered 38
Misnumbered claim 40 has been renumbered 39
Misnumbered claim 41 has been renumbered 40
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 (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 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 22-23, 27-28, and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Yu (US 20140009894 A1)
Regarding claim 22, Yu teaches a modular energy system comprising:
a first module (233 third communication module) comprising:
a first panel (231 front side) comprising a first edge (not numbered, right edge of 231 shown in Fig 4);
and a first connector (235 fourth connector) attached to the first panel (Fig 5),
the first connector comprising a first protruding portion (236 second fixer) extending past the first edge (Fig 5);
and a second module (223 second communication module) coupled to the first module (Fig 4),
the second module comprising:
a second panel (221 front side) comprising a second edge (not numbered, right edge of 221 shown in Fig 4);
and a second connector (227 third connector) attached to the second panel (Fig 4),
the second connector comprising:
a second aligning portion (226 first fixer) aligned with the second edge (Fig 5);
and a second cavity (recess in 226 first fixer, Fig 5) defined on the second aligning portion and receiving the first protruding portion (Fig 5).
Regarding claim 23, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 22, wherein
the first module and the second module are physically (Fig 5)
and electrically (connected via fourth connector 235, Fig 4, ¶35) connected with each other.
Regarding claim 27, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 22 further comprising:
the second module (223 second communication module) further comprising:
the second panel further comprising a fourth edge (not numbered, left edge of 221 shown in Fig 4) opposite the second edge (not numbered, right edge of 221 shown in Fig 4);
and a fourth connector (225 second connector) attached to the second panel (Fig 5),
the fourth connector comprising a fourth protruding portion (portion of 235 extending past 221) extending past the fourth edge (Fig 4);
and a third module (213 first communication module) coupled to the second module opposite the first module (Fig 5),
the third module comprising:
a third panel (212 rear side) comprising a third edge (not numbered, right edge of 213 shown in Fig 4) adjacent the fourth edge (Fig 5);
and a third connector (215 connector) attached to the third panel (Fig 5), the third connector comprising:
a third aligning portion (lower end of 215 connector in Fig 5) aligned with the third edge (Fig 4);
and a third cavity (recess in 215 connector, Fig 5) defined on the third aligning portion and receiving the fourth protruding portion (Fig 5).
Regarding claim 28, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 27, wherein
the second module and the third module are physically (Fig 5)
and electrically (connected via second connector 225, Fig 4, ¶35) connected with each other.
Regarding claim 33, Yu teaches a modular energy system comprising:
a first module (230 third communication module) comprising:
a first panel (231 front side) comprising a first edge (not numbered, right edge of 231 shown in Fig 4);
and a first connector (235 fourth connector) attached to the first panel (Fig 5),
the first connector comprising a first protruding portion (236 second fixer) extending past the first edge (Fig 5);
and a second module (223 second communication module) coupled to the first module (Fig 4),
the second module comprising:
a second panel (221 front side) comprising a second edge (not numbered, right edge of 221 shown in Fig 4);
and a second connector (227 third connector) attached to the second panel (Fig 4),
the second connector comprising:
a second aligning portion (226 first fixer) aligned with the second edge (Fig 5);
and a second cavity (recess in 226 fist fixer, Fig 5) defined on the second aligning portion and receiving the first protruding portion (Fig 5)
a fourth connector (225 second connector) attached to the second panel (Fig 4),
the fourth connector comprising a fourth protruding portion (portion of 235 extending past 221) extending past the fourth edge (Fig 4);
and a third module (213 first communication module) coupled to the second module opposite the first module (Fig 5),
the third module comprising:
a third panel (212 rear side) comprising a third edge (not numbered, right edge of 213 shown in Fig 4) adjacent the fourth edge (Fig 5);
and a third connector (215 connector) attached to the third panel (Fig 5), the third connector comprising:
a third aligning portion (lower end of 215 connector in Fig 5) aligned with the third edge (Fig 4);
and a third cavity (recess in 215 connector, Fig 5) defined on the third aligning portion and receiving the fourth protruding portion (Fig 5).
Regarding claim 34, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 33, wherein
the first module and the second module are physically (Fig 5)
and electrically (connected via fourth connector 235, Fig 4, ¶35) connected with each other,
and the second module and the third module are physically (Fig 5)
and electrically (connected via second connector 225, Fig 4, ¶35) connected with each other.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 24 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Komenda et. al (US 20020081881 A1) hereafter referred to as Komenda
Regarding claim 24, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 22, wherein
the first module (230 third communication module) with a first connector (235 fourth connector) attached to the first panel (231 front side).
Yu fails to teach the first connector further comprises: a first hole; a first support member attached to and extending away from the first panel and slidably receivable into the first hole/
However, Komenda teaches
a first hole (712 guide hole)
a first support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the first hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Regarding claim 31, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 27, wherein
the second module (223 second communication module) has a fourth connector (225 second connector).
Yu fails to teach a fourth hole; and a fourth support member attached to and extending away from the second panel and slidably receivable into the fourth hole.
However, Komenda teaches
a fourth hole (712 guide hole)
a fourth support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the first hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Claims 25-26, 30, 3,2 35-37, and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Komenda and further in view of Kluge et. al (US 6179136 B1), hereafter referred to as Kluge.
Regarding claim 25, Yu in view of Komenda teach the modular energy system of Claim 24.
Yu in view of Komenda fail to teach a first support ledge attached to the first panel and offset from the first support member; and a first support rib resting against the first support ledge and extending towards the first connector in a configuration defined by the first connector attached to the first panel.
However, Kluge teaches
A first support ledge (lower 60 mounting ears) attached to the first panel (24 wall)
and offset from the first support member (higher 60 mounting ear);
and a first support rib (22 bracket) resting against the first support ledge (Fig 7)
and extending towards the first connector (Fig 7) in a configuration defined by the first connector attached to the first panel (Fig 7);
Yu and Kluge are both in the industry of support structures for modules therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu and Komenda to include the support structure of Kluge in order to support the devices on a vertical structure in a modular way (Kluge, Abstract)
Regarding claim 26, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 22, wherein
the second module (223 second communication module)
with a second connector (227 third connector) is attached to the second panel (221 front side).
Yu fails to teach a second hole; and a second support member attached to and extending away from the second panel and slidably receivable into the second hole.
However, Komenda teaches
a second hole (712 guide hole)
a second support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the first hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Regarding claim 30, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 27,
wherein the third module third module (213 first communication module) has a third connector (215 connector)
Yu fails to teach a third hole; and a third support member attached to and extending away from the third panel and slidably receivable into the third hole.
However, Komenda teaches
a third hole (712 guide hole)
a third support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the third hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Regarding claim 32, Yu in view of Komenda teach the modular energy system of Claim 31, wherein
the second module (223 second communication module) with a fourth connector (225 second connector)
Yu in view of Komenda fail to teach
a fourth support ledge attached to the second panel and offset from the fourth support member; and a fourth support rib resting against the fourth support ledge and extending towards the fourth connector in a configuration defined by the fourth connector attached to the second panel.
However, Kluge teaches
a fourth support ledge (lower 60 mounting ears) attached to the second panel (24 wall)
and offset from the fourth support member (higher 60 mounting ear);
and a fourth support rib (22 bracket) resting against the fourth support ledge (Fig 2)
and extending towards the fourth connector (Fig 2) in a configuration defined by the first connector attached to the fourth panel (Fig 2);
Yu, Komenda, and Kluge are all in the industry of support structures for modules therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu and Komenda to include the support structure of Kluge in order to support the devices on a vertical structure in a modular way (Kluge, Abstract)
Regarding claim 35, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 33, wherein
the first module (230 third communication module) with a first connector (235 fourth connector) attached to the first panel (231 front side).
Yu fails to teach the first connector further comprises: a first hole; a first support member attached to and extending away from the first panel and slidably receivable into the first hole/
However, Komenda teaches
a first hole (712 guide hole)
a first support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the first hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Yu in view of Komenda fail to teach a first support ledge attached to the first panel and offset from the first support member; and a first support rib resting against the first support ledge and extending towards the first connector in a configuration defined by the first connector attached to the first panel.
However, Kluge teaches
a support ledge (lower 60 mounting ears) attached to the panel (24 wall)
and offset from the first support member (higher 60 mounting ear);
and a first support rib (22 bracket) resting against the first support ledge (Fig 2)
and extending towards the first connector (Fig 2) in a configuration defined by the first connector attached to the first panel (Fig 2);
Yu, Komenda, and Kluge are all in the industry of support structures for modules therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu and Komenda to include the support structure of Kluge in order to support the devices on a vertical structure in a modular way (Kluge, Abstract)
Regarding claim 36, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 33, wherein
the second module (223 second communication module) with a second connector (227 third connector) is attached to the second panel (221 front side) and a fourth connector (225 second connector)
Yu in view of Komenda fail to teach a second hole; and a second support member attached to and extending away from the second panel and slidably receivable into the second hole and a fourth hole; a fourth support member attached to and extending away from the second panel and slidably receivable into the fourth hole.
However, Komenda teaches
a second hole (712 guide hole)
a second support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the first hole (Fig 7, ¶49), and
a fourth hole (712 guide hole)
a fourth support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the first hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Yu in view of Komenda fail to teach a fourth support ledge attached to the second panel and offset from the fourth support member; and a fourth support rib resting against the fourth support ledge and extending towards the fourth connector in a configuration defined by the fourth connector attached to the second panel.
However, Kluge teaches
a fourth support ledge (lower 60 mounting ears) attached to the second panel (24 wall)
and offset from the fourth support member (higher 60 mounting ear);
and a fourth support rib (22 bracket) resting against the fourth support ledge (Fig 2)
and extending towards the fourth connector (Fig 2) in a configuration defined by the first connector attached to the fourth panel (Fig 2);
Yu, Komenda, and Kluge are all in the industry of support structures for modules therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu and Komenda to include the support structure of Kluge in order to support the devices on a vertical structure in a modular way (Kluge, Abstract)
Regarding claim 37, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 33,
wherein the third module third module (213 first communication module) has a third connector (215 connector)
Yu fails to teach a third hole; and a third support member attached to and extending away from the third panel and slidably receivable into the third hole.
However, Komenda teaches
a third hole (712 guide hole)
a third support member (702 guide pin)
attached to and extending away from the first panel (Fig 7)
and slidably receivable into the third hole (Fig 7, ¶49).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Regarding claim 39 (previously claim 40), Yu teaches modular energy system comprising:
a plurality of modules (210, 220, 230 communication modules) each comprising:
a panel (231 front side) comprising two edges opposite each other (right and left edge of 231 shown in Fig 4).
Yu fails to teach two connectors attached to the panel, the two connectors each comprising a hole into which slidably receivable a corresponding support member among the two support members,
one of the two connectors comprising a protruding portion extending past one of the two edges.
However, Komenda teaches
two connectors (700 connector) attached to the panel (¶46),
the two connectors each comprising a hole (712 guide hole)
into which slidably receivable a corresponding support member among the two support members (Fig 7, ¶49),
one of the two connectors comprising a protruding portion (702 guide pin) extending past one of the two edges (Fig 7).
Yu and Komenda are both in the industry of mounting connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the guide pine and hole configuration of Komenda in order to provide the connective force necessary to seat the connectors with each other as well as allowing connector and ensure the module is in a more appropriate position to connect with connector (Komenda ¶49)
Yu in view of Komenda fail to teach two support members attached to and extending away from the panel and adjacent the two edges respectively; a support ledge attached to the panel and located in between the two support members; a support rib resting against the support ledge and extending towards the one of the two modules in a configuration defined by the one of the two modules attached to the panel the other of the two connectors comprising an aligning portion aligned with the other of the two edges and a cavity defined on the aligning portion.
However, Kluge teaches
two support members (702 and 703 guide pins)
attached to and extending away from the panel and adjacent the two edges respectively (Fig 7);
a support ledge (lower 60 mounting ears) attached to the panel (24 wall) and located in between the two support members (Fig 7)
a support rib (22 bracket)
resting against the support ledge (Fig 7)
and extending towards the one of the two modules (Fig 7) in a configuration defined by the one of the two modules attached to the panel the other of the two connectors comprising an aligning portion (714 mounting palate) aligned with the other of the two edges and a cavity defined on the aligning portion (Fig 7).
Yu, Komenda, and Kluge are all in the industry of support structures for modules therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu and Komenda to include the support structure of Kluge in order to support the devices on a vertical structure in a modular way (Kluge, Abstract)
Regarding claim 40 (previously claim 41), Yu in view of Komenda and further in view of Kluge teaches the modular energy system of Claim 39,
wherein two adjacent modules (233 third communication module and 223 second communication module) among the plurality of modules are stackable with each other (Fig 4 and 5)
by a corresponding cavity (recess in 226 first fixer) of one of the two adjacent modules
receiving a corresponding protruding portion of the other of the two adjacent modules (Fig 5).
Claims 29 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Dayley (US 20030007321 A1)
Regarding claim 29, Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 27.
Yu fails to teach the first module, the second module, and the third module are in different sizes.
However, Dayley teaches the first module (10 module, see annotated Fig 2), the second module 10 module, see annotated Fig 2), and the third module (10 module, see annotated Fig 2) are in different sizes (see annotated Fig 2, ¶41).
PNG
media_image1.png
433
455
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Dayley and Yu are both in the industry of modular connection devices therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the different modules of Dayley in order to allow flexibility for the modular devices coupled together (Dayley ¶41,¶4)
Regarding claim 38 (previously claim 39), Yu teaches the modular energy system of Claim 33.
Yu fails to teach the first module, the second module, and the third module are in different sizes.
However, Dayley teaches the first module (10 module, see annotated Fig 2), the second module 10 module, see annotated Fig 2), and the third module (10 module, see annotated Fig 2) are in different sizes (see annotated Fig 2, ¶41).
PNG
media_image1.png
433
455
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Dayley and Yu are both in the industry of modular connection devices therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Yu to include the different modules of Dayley in order to allow flexibility for the modular devices coupled together (Dayley ¶41,¶4)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELISA SASSERATH whose telephone number is (703)756-5847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303) 297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights