DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 23 is 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.
In regards to claim 23, “each channel” in line 1 lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears claim 23 should depend on claim 22. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 4, 6, 7 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katz et al. (US Pat. No. 10,343,274 B2) in view of Hanlon (US Pat. No. 10,864,625 B2).
In regards to claim 1, Katz teaches a foldable support system comprising: a first foldable support structure (1) comprising: a first housing (2); a first leg (9a) pivotally coupled to a first end of the first housing; a second leg (9c) pivotally coupled to a second end of the first housing opposite the first end, the first leg and the second leg configured to collectively support the first housing; a first coupling element (12) coupled to the first housing; and a first female coupler (11a, 10a, 10b) coupled to the first housing, the first female coupler capable of coupling to a first surface of a stackable storage unit (e.g.; by inserting a portion of the unit into 11a); and a second foldable support structure (1’, Fig. 29) comprising: a second housing (2); a first leg (9a) pivotally coupled to a first end of the second housing; a second leg (9c) pivotally coupled to a second end of the second housing opposite the first end, the first leg and the second leg configured to collectively support the second housing; a second coupling element (35, Fig. 29) coupled to the second housing, the second coupling element configured to detachably engage with the first coupling element of the first foldable support structure; and a second female coupler (11a, 10a, 10b) coupled to the second housing, the second female coupler capable of coupling to the first surface of a stackable storage unit (e.g.; by inserting a portion of the unit into 11a).
Katz does not teach the support system configured such that the second female coupler is configured to couple to the first surface of the stackable storage unit simultaneously with the second coupling element being engaged with the first coupling element.
Hanlon teaches a foldable support system wherein the first and second housings (102A, 102B, Fig. 6A) are configured with the first and second coupling elements (140, 142, Fig. 5A, 5B) couplable end-to-end such that the first and second housings form an extended upper support surface as illustrated in Fig. 6A, which is capable of simultaneously supporting a first surface of stackable storage unit.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Katz’s support system such that the second female coupler is configured to couple to the first surface of the stackable storage unit simultaneously with the second coupling element being engaged with the first coupling element (e.g.; by allowing end-to-end coupling). The motivation would be for the purpose of allowing the upper support surface to be securely extended by utilizing adjacent housings as illustrated in Fig. 6A of Hanlon, therefore allowing a more versatile configuration of the first and second housings.
In regards to claim 4, modified Katz teaches the first female coupler comprising two ribs (Katz: 10a, 10b) extending above and offset from a recessed portion (Katz: 11a) of the first female coupler, and the second female coupler comprising two ribs (Katz: 10a, 10b) extending above and offset from a recessed portion (Katz: 11a) of the second female coupler.
In regards to claim 6, in modifying Katz, Hanlon’s configuration would allow Katz’s first female coupler (Katz: 11a, 10a, 10b) and the second female coupler (Katz: 11a, 10a, 10b) to be capable of simultaneously coupling to the first surface of the stackable storage unit when the first coupling element and the second coupling element are engaged with each other (e.g.; by the end-to-end coupling of the housing configured with an extended upper surface of the two housings).
In regards to claim 7, in modifying Katz, Hanlon teaches the first foldable support structure comprising a third coupling element (Hanlon: 140A, Fig. 6A) coupled to the first housing, and the second foldable support structure comprising a fourth coupling element (Hanlon: 142B) coupled to the second housing, the fourth coupling element configured to detachably engage with the third coupling element of the first foldable support structure.
In regards to claim 21, in modifying Katz, Hanlon’s configuration would allow Katz’s second female coupler (Katz: 11a, 10a, 10b) to be capable of coupling to the first surface of a stackable storage unit simultaneously with the first female coupler (Katz: 11a, 10a, 10b) being coupled to the first surface of the stackable storage unit (e.g.; by the end-to-end coupling of the housing configured with an extended upper surface of the two housings).
PNG
media_image1.png
391
413
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 22, modified Katz teaches each rib of the two ribs of the first female coupler defines a channel (C; see annotation above) extending directly between the respective rib and the recessed portion of the first female coupler.
In regards to claim 23, modified Katz’s channels are each capable of receiving a tongue of a first male coupler of the stackable storage unit (e.g.; by insertion within the channel).
Claims 2, 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katz et al. (US Pat. No. 10,343,274 B2) in view of Hanlon (US Pat. No. 10,864,625 B2) and Lo et al. (US Pat. No. 7,308,858 B2).
In regards to claims 2 and 3, Katz, modified by Hanlon, does not teach the first foldable support structure comprising a first wheel coupled to the second end of the first housing (claim 2); and the second foldable support structure comprising a second wheel coupled to the second end of the second housing (claim 3).
Lo teaches a foldable support structure comprising a wheel (23) coupled to an end of a housing (20).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to further modify Katz’s first and second foldable support structures to each comprise a wheel coupled to the second end of the house (claims 2 and 3). The motivation would be for the purpose of moving the support structures on a floor by means of the wheels as taught by Lo (Col 3, Lines 16-18).
In regards to claim 5, Katz, modified by Hanlon, teaches each of the two ribs (e.g.; ribs of 10b, Fig. 2 of Katz) of the first female coupler extend from a rear wall of the first female coupler along an axis parallel to a longitudinal axis of the first housing, and wherein each of the two ribs of the second female coupler (e.g.; ribs of 10b, Fig. 2 of Katz) extend from a rear wall of the second female coupler along an axis parallel to a longitudinal axis of the second housing (see Fig. 2 and 3 of Katz).
Katz does not teach the first foldable support structure comprising a first wheel coupled to the second end of the first housing, and the second foldable support structure comprising a second wheel coupled to the second end of the second housing.
Lo teaches a foldable support structure comprising a wheel (23) coupled to an end of a housing (20).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to further modify Katz’s system to have the first foldable support structure comprising a first wheel coupled to the second end of the first housing, and the second foldable support structure comprising a second wheel coupled to the second end of the second housing. The motivation would be for the purpose of moving the support structures on a floor by means of the wheels as taught by Lo (Col 3, Lines 16-18).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Examiner no relies on the teachings of Katz in view of Hanlon and Lo as discussed with respect to the claims 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 STANTON L KRYCINSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-5:00PM ET.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571)272-8227. 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.
/Stanton L Krycinski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights