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, 3-6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over German publication no. DE 202021004013 U1 cited in applicant’s IDS (herein referred to as D1) in view of Jensen et al (US Pub. No. 20250313409 with filing date of April 28, 2023).
Regarding claim 1, D1 discloses a stacking column for a stored good, comprising a pawl (P), wherein the pawl (P) has a first side flange (2.1, figure 1) and a second side flange (2.2) bent at one end, wherein each of the side flanges (2.1 and 2.2) has a first bolt passage (3.1) and a second bolt passage (3.2, figures 1 and 7), wherein the pawl (P) has a top side (4, figure 1) and a bottom side (side opposite 4),wherein the pawl (P) has a support body (6) at another end.
However, D1 does not disclose to the material of the support body as a foam body.
Jensen teaches in a stacking column (1) having pawls (6 or 18, figure 1) wherein the pawl has bent side flanges and has a foam body on the pawl (19, see paragraph [0066]); wherein Jensen discloses “Here, the supporting devices 19 are made of one piece of a flexible material like foam rubber, e.g., polyurethane foam. In this embodiment, the supporting device 19 in the frame or mounting device 18, respectively, automatically adapts to the geometry of the building element 2 placed thereon.”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the support body material of D1 such that it is made of foam as foam is known to automatically adapt to the geometry of a heavy item placed thereon as taught to be desirable by Jensen.
Regarding claim 3, D1 and Jensen combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 1, wherein Jensen teaches the foam body (19) has an anti-slip surface (20).
Regarding claim 4, D1 and Jensen combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 1 except for wherein the foam body consists of memory foam. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have made the foam of memory foam material as such material is old and well-known in the art of foam material.
Regarding claim 5, D1 and Jensen combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 1, wherein D1 discloses the two side flanges (2.1 and 2.2, figure 1) are bent at a right angle to the top side (4) and/or the bottom side of the pawl (P).
Regarding claim 6, D1 and Jensen combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 1, wherein D1 discloses the pawl (P) has a recess (9.1 and 9.2, figure 7) in the area of the foam body (6-8) for holding the foam body (6-8) on the pawl (P).
PNG
media_image1.png
458
933
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, D1 and Jensen discloses the stacking column according to claim 1, wherein D1 discloses the foam body (6) has a continuous or interrupted chamfer (M, SEE EXAMINER’S MARKUP ABOVE) over a length, wherein the chamfer (M) is arranged on the side facing away from the pawl (1) and directed toward the bottom side (M is sloped downward toward the bottom side).
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over German publication no. DE 202021004013 U1 (herein referred to as D1) in view of FOAM Jensen et al (US Pub. No. 20250313409) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Flener et al (US No. 20120055841).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, D1 and Jensen combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 1 except for wherein the foam body is injection-molded onto the pawl. Injection molding foam body onto end of a plate is old and well-known in the art of injection molding. Flener demonstrates edge encapsulated panels (1) using high damping foam via injection molding (see paragraph [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have formed the foam at the end of the pawl of D1 and Jensen combined such that the foam encapsulated the edge of the pawl via injection molding as such method is old and well-known in the art as demonstrated by Flener.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over German publication no. DE 202021004013 U1 (herein referred to as D1) in view of Jensen et al (US Pub. No. 20250313409 with filing date of April 28, 2023) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hashimoto et al (US 20170291336).
Regarding claim 7, D1 and Jensen combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 1, wherein D1 discloses a strip (K, SEE EXAMINER’S MARKUP BELOW) is bent down within the support body (7 and 8) at the other end of the pawl (1).
PNG
media_image2.png
468
863
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, D1 and Jensen combined does not disclose wherein the strip is bent up within the foam body at the other end of the pawl.
Applicant’s bent up strips is in the pawl is in lieu of the recesses which aid in the flow of material during injection molding manufacturing process.
Hashimoto teaches in paragraph [0010] “even if a molding body includes a bent portion arranged on its side edge and bending toward its back surface, and a flange continuous with the bent portion and including wide and narrow portions, that is the flange has a complex and irregularly shape, it can reduce a disturbed flow of molten resin at the side edge during injection molding. This allows the design surface of the molding body to have aesthetic appearance in the synthetic resin molding including the molding body.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the strip of D1 and Jensen combined such that the strips are bent up to aid in injection molding process of the foam body to provide aesthetic appearance to the molding body as taught to be desirable by Hashimoto.
` Regarding claim 8, D1, Jensen, and Hashimoto combined discloses the stacking column according to claim 7 as discussed above except wherein two strips are bent up within the foam body at the other end of the pawl, wherein a middle part continues in its full length between the two strips. As discuss in Hashimoto, flange with complex and irregular shape can reduce a disturbed flow of molten resin at the side edge during injection molding. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the strip at the edge of the pawl of D1 and Jensen combined such that there are two strips extending up with a middle part to produce an irregular edge since
flange with complex and irregular shape can reduce a disturbed flow of molten resin at the side edge during injection molding as taught to be desirable by Hashimoto.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art of record further demonstrate injection molding process or stacking columns of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ko (Korie) H Chan whose telephone number is (571)272-6816. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Friday, 8:00 - 5:00 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Liu can be reached on 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 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.
/Ko H Chan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631 khc