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 .
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1 and 12, drawn to “An assembly” and “An umbrella hub” respectively, classified in A45B25.
II. Claim 27, drawn to “A battery pack”, classified in H01M50.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the combination claims 1 and 12 do not require a channel formed by the inner periphery or a recessed area disposed between an end of the channel and a projection. The subcombination has separate utility such as being usable onto a pole or post of a lighting fixture, an outdoor bug trapping post, a road-sign post as none limiting examples of similar narrow vertical uprights where the battery pack can be used with; where it need not have to be used on an umbrella. Note the umbrella pole and umbrella hub only recited in intended use form in claim 27
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
The invention requires a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). In this case, see the different class/subclass picture provided above as examples of a burdensome search created without restriction.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with attorney Andrew Douglas on 08/17/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of group I, claims 1 and 12. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 27-32 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Note that the limitation “umbrella hub” while mentioned in the specification several times, it is never given a separate reference numeral that can be found in the drawings. Similarly, while the upper surface of the battery pack is assigned a reference numeral, however the upper surface of the hub body is not referred to in the specification with a reference numeral that can be found in the drawings.
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 Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 line 7 re-establishes the limitation “an umbrella hub”; this appears to be the same umbrella hub established in claim 1 line 2 from which claim 8 depends.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 2, 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luo, WO, (2021/237948) provided in IDS; (utilizing US PUB 2023/0189947 for reference for reviewing ease).
In regards to claim 1 Luo discloses:
An assembly (assembly in figs. 1, 2), comprising:
an umbrella hub (3; note that unnumbered portion engaging the links is considered part of the hub) comprising:
a hub body (3, 31 and unnumbered portion above 3; as shown in fig. 2) configured to be disposed about an umbrella pole (1; fig. 1), the hub body comprising an upper surface (see annotated drawings below; note that unnumbered portion engaging the links is considered part of the hub) and a lower surface (see annotated drawings below; note that unnumbered portion engaging the links is considered part of the hub); and
a support portion (31 as shown in fig. 3) disposed at the lower surface of the hub body; (as shown in figs. 2 & 3) and a battery pack (6; fig. 2, 7, 8) comprising:
a housing (62; fig. 7) comprising a first portion (611) and a second portion (621);
an outer periphery (outer layer 613) and an inner periphery (internal surfaces facing central holes through which pole 1 passes) each defined in part by the first portion and the second portion (as shown in figs. 7, 8);
a projection (forming groove 60; see annotated drawings of fig. 8 below) extending from the inner periphery (as shown in fig. 7 and reproduced portion of fig. 8 below), the projection configured to rest on the support portion (31) of the umbrella hub to couple the battery pack to the umbrella hub (as described in paragraph [0029]; “the annular groove 60 corresponding to the connecting interface 32; when the connecting ring 31 is positioned inside the annular groove 60 of the housing 6a, the housing 6a is connected to the bottom of the lower nest 3” and as shown in assembled configuration in fig. 1); and
a battery cell (63) disposed in the housing (as shown in fig. 7) and configured to supply or receive power through an electrical connection (as described in paragraph [0029]; “battery 63 can also be charged by external power”).
PNG
media_image1.png
282
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
388
595
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2 Luo discloses the battery pack comprises a first electrical contact (67) disposed on the inner periphery (figs. 6, 8) and the umbrella hub comprises a downwardly extending surface (see annotated drawings below) connecting the support portion and the hub body (figs. 2, 3), the downwardly extending surface comprising a second electrical contact (32) configured to align with the first electrical contact (as described in paragraph [0029]; “the housing 6a has a conductive interface 67 at the annular groove 60 corresponding to the connecting interface 32; when the connecting ring 31 is positioned inside the annular groove 60 of the housing 6a, the housing 6a is connected to the bottom of the lower nest 3, and the connecting interface 32 is connected to the conductive interface 67”).
PNG
media_image3.png
322
590
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 5 Luo discloses the support portion (31) extends generally perpendicular to the downwardly extending surface (as shown in annotated drawings of fig. 3 above).
In regards to claim 8 Luo discloses the battery pack further comprises:
a channel (central opening receiving pole 1) formed by the inner periphery (fig. 8), the channel configured to be disposed about the umbrella pole (as shown in assembled configuration figs. 1, 2); and
a recessed area (annular groove 60 as shown in fig. 8) disposed between an end of the channel (upper end) and the projection (lip forming groove 60) extending from the inner periphery (fig. 8), the projection enclosing a portion of the recessed area (bend over above the groove 60), the recessed area configured to receive the support portion of an umbrella hub to couple the battery pack to the umbrella hub (as described in paragraph [0029]; “the annular groove 60 corresponding to the connecting interface 32; when the connecting ring 31 is positioned inside the annular groove 60 of the housing 6a, the housing 6a is connected to the bottom of the lower nest 3” and as shown in assembled configuration in fig. 1).
Claims 12-14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luo, WO, (2021/237948) provided in IDS; (utilizing US PUB 2023/0189947 for reference for reviewing ease).
In regards to claim 12 Luo discloses:
An umbrella hub (3; note that unnumbered portion engaging the links is considered part of the hub), comprising:
a hub body (3, 31 and unnumbered portion above 3; as shown in fig. 2) configured to be disposed about an umbrella pole (1; fig. 1) and for connection of umbrella structural members (4) thereto (as shown in fig. 1, 2), the hub body comprising an upper surface (see annotated drawings below; note that unnumbered portion engaging the links is considered part of the hub) and a lower surface (see annotated drawings below; note that unnumbered portion engaging the links is considered part of the hub);
a downwardly extending surface (see annotated drawings below) extending from the lower surface of the hub body (as shown in reproduced fig. 2 below); and
a support portion (31) extending generally perpendicular to the downwardly extending surface (as shown in reproduced fig. 2 below), the support portion configured to secure a battery pack (6) to the umbrella hub (as shown in figs. 1, 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
270
551
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
282
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 13 Luo discloses the downwardly extending surface comprises one or more electrical contacts (32; fig. 3) configured to electrically couple with the battery pack (as described in paragraph [0029]; “the housing 6a has a conductive interface 67 at the annular groove 60 corresponding to the connecting interface 32; when the connecting ring 31 is positioned inside the annular groove 60 of the housing 6a, the housing 6a is connected to the bottom of the lower nest 3, and the connecting interface 32 is connected to the conductive interface 67”).
In regards to claim 14 Luo discloses the support portion (31) comprises one or more electrical contacts (32; fig. 3) configured to electrically couple with the battery pack (as described in paragraph [0029]; “the housing 6a has a conductive interface 67 at the annular groove 60 corresponding to the connecting interface 32; when the connecting ring 31 is positioned inside the annular groove 60 of the housing 6a, the housing 6a is connected to the bottom of the lower nest 3, and the connecting interface 32 is connected to the conductive interface 67”).
In regards to claim 18 Luo discloses the downwardly extending surface has a first diameter (diameter of stem pointed to in annotated drawings of fig. 3 below as the downwardly extending surface) that is less than a second diameter of the support portion (diameter of 31).
PNG
media_image4.png
270
551
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 19 Luo discloses the support portion is disposed at an end (bottom end) of the downwardly extending surface (as shown in reproduced fig. 3 above).
In regards to claim 20 Luo discloses the support portion encircles the umbrella pole (31 encircles pole 1 in assembled configuration figs. 1, 2).
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.
Claims 3, 4, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo as applied to claims 2 and 12 respectively above, and further in view of Ma, US (2015/0237977).
In regards to claims 3, 4, 15 and 16 Luo does not disclose the umbrella hub comprises a first clocking feature and the battery pack comprises a second clocking feature.
Ma teaches a first clocking feature (recess 264; fig. 8) and a second clocking feature (protrusion 268; fig. 8), the first clocking feature and the second clocking feature configured to align (as described in paragraph [0044] “the securement device includes a locking protrusion 268 distinct from the protrusions 228. The securement device includes a second recess 264 configured to mate with the protrusion 268”).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize clocking features taught by Ma onto the umbrella hub and battery pack of Luo for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e., to provide for an easy alignment mechanism to avoid misaligning interfaces 32 and 67. A person of ordinary skill int eh art would find that teaching the slots onto the bottom of the umbrella hub and the protrusions onto the battery pack would function in the same manner as in reference Ma; fig. 8. Subsequently Luo as modified by Ma above teaches the first clocking feature (of Ma) and the second clocking feature (of Ma) configured to align the first electrical contact (67 of Luo) and the second electrical contact (32 of Luo).
In regards to claim 4 Luo as modified by Ma above teaches the first clocking feature is a recess (264) in the lower surface of the hub body (in the same manner as in Ma; fig. 8) and the second clocking feature is a protrusion (268) extending from an upper surface of the battery pack (in the same manner as in Ma; fig. 8), the recess and the protrusion configured to align the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact.
In regards to claim 15 Luo as modified by Ma above teaches a first clocking feature (recess 264; fig. 8; Ma) configured to align with a second clocking feature (protrusion 268; fig. 8; Ma) of the battery pack.
In regards to claim 16 Luo as modified by Ma above teaches the first clocking feature (recess 264; fig. 8; Ma) comprises a recess (fig. 8; Ma) in the lower surface of the hub body, the recess configured to align with the second clocking feature (protrusion 268; fig. 8; Ma) of the battery pack.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to PTO-892 form for list of cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIREF M MEKHAEIL whose telephone number is (571)270-5334. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7 Mon-Fri.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/S.M.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights