DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a first Office Action Non-Final rejection on the merits. Claims 1-10 as originally filed are pending and have been considered below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “clamping parts at opposite ends” of claim 1 and the “clamping parts … at opposite sides” of claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 5, and 7, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, at line 2, the recitation “and there are a plurality of hanging holes” renders the claim indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired, in particular since it is unclear as to what constitutes "there". In addition, the recitation " a plurality of hanging holes" renders the claim indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis or creates ambiguity as to whether it is referring to the same previously recited limitation “hanging holes”.
Regarding claim 5, at line 1, the recitation "the fixing holes" renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 7, at lines 2-3, the recitation “strips are located at a same side of the main body” renders the claim indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired, in particular since it is unclear as to what “same side” is being referred to.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 7, and 10, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gilbert (U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0092697).
Regarding claim 1, Gilbert teaches a reinforcing structure of a toolshed (abstract), comprising a framework (figure 9), wherein the framework comprises a main body (108) and clamping parts (102) provided at opposite ends of the main body (figure 14), the clamping parts are arranged to protrude from the main body to be embedded in wall panels located at two sides of the main body respectively (figure 14), and the main body and each of the wall panels are detachably connected with each other (it is understood that the main body and each of the wall panels are capable of being detachably connected with each other; figures 9-14).
Regarding claim 2, Gilbert teaches the main body and each of the wall panels are detachably connected with each other through a connecting part (148), and the connecting part is formed by protruding the main body to a side of a respective clamping part (figure 14C).
Regarding claim 6, Gilbert teaches the main body is detachably attached to one wall panel or the main body is detachably attached to joints of two adjacent wall panels (figure 14).
Regarding claim 7, Gilbert teaches the clamping part comprises a strip (at 102) fixedly connected with the main body (figure 14), strips are located at a same side of the main body, and the strip is clamped with the wall panel (figure 14).
Regarding claim 8, Gilbert teaches a lower end of the framework is connected with a folding strip (at 138), and the folding strip is detachably connected with a floor (figure 10).
Regarding claim 10, Gilbert teaches an upper end of the framework is connected with a mounting bracket (288), and the mounting bracket is connected with a wall top (figure 16).
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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 8, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilbert (U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0092697).
Regarding claim 8, Gilbert does not specifically disclose the folding strip and the clamping part are respectively located at opposite sides of the main body. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the folding strip and the clamping part are respectively located at opposite sides of the main body, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention in a manner which does not alter its operation involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim(s) 3-5, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilbert (U.S. Pub. No. 2025/0092697) in view of McKimmy et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20120000142).
Regarding claim 3, Gilbert does not specifically disclose the connecting part is defined with fixing holes.
McKimmy et al. teaches a shed assembly (abstract) wherein the connecting part is defined with fixing holes (238).
Therefore, from the teaching of McKimmy et al., 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 shed of Gilbert such that the connecting part is defined with fixing holes, as taught by McKimmy et al., in order to provide a more secure connection between panels for a more stable assembly.
Regarding claim 4, Gilbert does not specifically disclose the main body is provided with hanging holes capable of hanging, and there are a plurality of hanging holes provided to penetrate through the main body, and the plurality of hanging holes are arranged in rows.
McKimmy et al. teaches a shed assembly (abstract) the main body is provided with hanging holes (262) capable of hanging, and there are a plurality of hanging holes provided to penetrate through the main body (figure 17), and the plurality of hanging holes are arranged in rows (figure 17).
Therefore, from the teaching of McKimmy et al., 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 shed of Gilbert such that the main body is provided with hanging holes capable of hanging, and there are a plurality of hanging holes provided to penetrate through the main body, and the plurality of hanging holes are arranged in rows, as taught by McKimmy et al., in order to easily add components such as shelving, baskets, slat wall storage.
Regarding claim 5, McKimmy et al. in the combination discloses the fixing holes are arranged among the plurality of hanging holes at intervals (figure 17).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited patents listed on the included form PTO-892 further show the state of the art with respect to shed structures in general.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR HIJAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5790. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-6 EST Monday-Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F HIJAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights