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 .
The following correspondence is a non-final Office Action for application # 19091340, entitled: METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ANCHORING WITHIN A CHANNEL, filed on 03/26/2025. Claims 1-18 are pending.
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.
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) 1-18 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Austin et al. (U.S. Pat. 5924260) in view of Everett (U.S. Pat. 4684094).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 9, Austin teaches an anchor 300 for anchoring within a channel 90, comprising: a first anchor portion 314 having a first base 312 including a first aperture 118; a second anchor portion 314 having a second base 312 including a second aperture 118 (as seen in Fig. 10); a connecting member 380 interconnecting the first anchor portion 314 and the second anchor portion 314 (as shown in Fig. 10), the first and second anchor portions 314 being independently rotatable about the connecting member 380 between an anchor position (shown in Fig. 9) and an installation position (shown in Fig. 10), the first aperture 118 and the second aperture 118 being aligned in the anchor position, the installation position having a narrower width than the anchor position relative to a longitudinal axis of the connecting member 380 (as seen in Figs. 9 & 10); and a securing member 80 configured and arranged to extend through the first aperture 118 and the second aperture 118 in the anchor position thereby securing the first and second anchor portions 314 in the anchor position (as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 9, Austin is discussed above, and teaches the anchor. However, Austin fails to teach where the first and second anchor portions 314 are slidable along the connecting member 380. Everett teaches an anchor 10 comprising a first anchor portion 18, a second anchor portion 24, and a connecting member 30, where the first and second anchor portions 18,24 are slidable along the connecting member 30.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the first and second anchor portions of Austin with the sliding connecting member of Everett, in order to provide an adjustable bracket assembly which can be used with a variety of differently spaced slots [channels] provided in support members, as taught to be desirable by Everett (see discussion in col. 1, lines 29-32).
With regards to claims 4 and 10, Everett teaches the anchor, where the first anchor portion 18 includes a first connecting portion 22 extending inwardly and a first engaging portion 20 extending outwardly, and the second anchor portion 24 includes a second connecting portion 28 extending inwardly and a second engaging portion 26 extending outwardly, the connecting member 30 extending through the first and second connecting portions 22,28 (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claims 5 and 11 Everett teaches the anchor, where the connecting member 30 has a first end and a second end, the first connecting portion 22 being positioned proximate the first end and the second connecting portion 28 being positioned proximate the second end in the anchor position, and the first and second connecting portions 22,28 being positioned proximate one another in the installation position.
Regarding claims 6 and 12, Everett teaches the anchor, where the connecting member 30 is a rod (as seen in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, Austin teaches the anchor 300, where the first and second anchor portions 314 are identical (as seen in Figs. 2 and 10).
Regarding claims 8 and 14, Everett teaches the anchor, where each of the engaging portions 20,26 includes at least one gusset 20a,26a.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the gussets of Everett with the anchor portions of Austin, in order to enable the anchor portions to be secured to support rail members of varying wall thicknesses, as taught to be desirable by Everett (see discussion in col. 2, lines 29-33).
Concerning method claims 15-18, in view of the structure disclosed by Austin et al. and Everett above, the method of operating the device would have been obvious, since Austin and Everett’s anchor provides the same structure as the device described in the specification. The Examiner submits that it can be assumed that the device of Austin and Everett is capable of performing the claimed process.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the reference to Austin et al. and Everett above, the Examiner submits the Notice of References Cited (PTO-892). U.S. Pats. 11229811 to Milbright, 8276714 to Broyles, and 2765139 to White teach anchors for suspending objects from channels.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D MCDUFFIE whose telephone number is (571)272-3832. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM-4:30PM.
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.
/Michael McDuffie/Examiner, Art Unit 3632 12-Jun-26
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights