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 .
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.
Claims 22 and 27 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 22 recites “wherein the mounting portion includes a rear surface profiled to engage a structure” however, Claim 21 already recites a rear surface. Therefore, it is unclear whether the rear surface of Claim 22 is the same or different than the rear surface of Claim 21. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 27 recites the limitation “the one or more second mount holes” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. Applicant should amend the claim to recite “one or more second mounting holes.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21-23 and 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 11,181,225 to Kawaguchi et al. (Kawaguchi).
PNG
media_image1.png
643
471
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
566
471
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket comprising: a base (See Annotated Fig. A) including a mounting portion (See Annotated Fig. A) having an upper end portion (See Annotated Fig. A) and a lower end portion (See Annotated Fig. A), the mounting portion having a rear surface (See Annotated Fig. A) and an opposite front surface (See Annotated Fig. A), the mounting portion defining one or more first mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. A) at the upper end portion sized to receive a fastener for mounting the base to a structure, the one or more first mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. A) extending upwardly (See Annotated Fig. A) at an oblique angle through the mounting portion from the front surface to the rear surface; and a support arm (See Annotated Fig. A) supported by the base and extending from the lower end portion of the mounting portion.
Regarding Claim 22: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket of claim 21 wherein the mounting portion includes a rear surface (See Annotated Fig. A) profiled to engage a structure, the one or more first mounting holes extending upwardly in a range of about 30-70 degrees (See Col. 10, lines 23-26) relative to the rear surface.
Regarding Claim 23: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket of claim 21 wherein the one or more first mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. A) of the mounting portion includes two first mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. B) spaced laterally from one another.
Regarding Claim 25: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket of claim 21 wherein the mounting portion includes one or more second mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. A) sized to receive a fastener for mounting the base to a structure, the one or more second mounting holes extending through the mounting portion at a different angle (See Annotated Fig. A) than the one or more first mounting holes.
Regarding Claim 26: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket of claim 25 wherein the one or more second mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. A) extend downwardly (See Annotated Fig. A) at an oblique angle through the mounting portion.
Regarding Claim 27: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket of claim 25 wherein at least one of the one or more second mount holes (See Annotated Fig. A) is laterally spaced (See Annotated Fig. B) at least in part from at least one of the one or more first mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. B).
Regarding Claim 28: Kawaguchi discloses a bracket of claim 25 wherein at least one of the one or more second mount holes (See Annotated Fig. B) is aligned (See Annotated Fig. B) at least in part with at least one of the one or more first mounting holes (See Annotated Fig. B).
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.
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) 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawaguchi.
Regarding method Claims 32-35: In view of the structure disclosed by Kawaguchi, the method of mounting the bracket would have been obvious and implicitly taught, since it is the normal and logical manner in which the device could be mounted. If a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be obvious to a person of ordinary skill and/or implicitly taught by the prior art reference at a time before the effective date of the claimed invention. When the prior art device is arguably the same as the claimed invention it can be assumed the device will implicitly perform the claimed process.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24, 29-31 and 36-39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
None of the cited prior art, considered alone or in combination, discloses or teaches protrusions extending from the mounting portion where the mounting holes extend through the protrusion; a supporting portion extending from the lower end portion and having an upper surface contacting the support arm.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the references used in this rejection and those cited in the PTO-892, the following references are very relevant to the claimed invention: US 2011/0085874, 5346169, 10648537, 12398741.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERET C MCNICHOLS whose telephone number is (571)270-7363. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00 - 5:00 (Eastern).
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.
ERET C. MCNICHOLS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/ERET C MCNICHOLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights