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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 16 objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding Claim 1, line 7, “or” should be inserted between “vertical channel,” and “extending between” to be consistent with the rest of the claim. Regarding Claim 16, line 14, “said base rail, and said top rail” should be inserted after “vertical channel,” to be consistent with the rest of the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Both claims will be examined as having these changes.
Additionally in claim 16, the section “affixing a first end of a top rail proximate to a lower end of said first vertical channel; affixing a second end of said top rail proximate to a lower end of said second vertical channel” should have “lower end” changed in both of these sections to “upper end” and will be examined as such.
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 2 and 9 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 2 recites the limitation "a first end bracket" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It should be corrected to “the first end bracket” and will be examined as such.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "said first horizontal member" and “said second horizontal member” in lines 2 and 4 respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to change the limitations to either “a first” and “a second” horizontal member or changing to the top and bottom rails.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The only difference between what is in claims 1 and 10 vs claims 2 and 12 (respectively) is stating that “said spacer is a spacer unit” which does not impart any additional structure or function and thus does not further limit the claim from which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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)(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) 1, 3, 5, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Palmegiani, et. al. (USPN 11598116).
Regarding Claim 1, Palmegiani discloses A fence frame comprising: a first vertical channel (26 on the left post); a second vertical channel (26 on the right post); a top rail (top most rail); a bottom rail (bottom most rail); a first member extending between one of said first vertical channel and said second vertical channel, or extending between said top rail and said bottom rail (rail just below the top most rail extending between the two vertical channels); a second member extending between one of said first vertical channel and said second vertical channel, or extending between said top rail and said bottom rail (rail just above the bottom most rail extending between the two vertical channels); a first spacer (60) in said first vertical channel or said top rail for spacing apart said first member and said second member; a second spacer (60; Fig. 7) in said second vertical channel or said bottom rail for spacing apart said first member and said second member (See annotated figure on the next page showing claimed elements).
Regarding Claim 3, Palmegiani discloses said first spacer is a first spacer unit (60 in the left channel); and said second spacer is a second spacer unit (60 in the right channel).
Regarding Claim 5, Palmegiani discloses said first spacer comprises a first spacer unit (60)) and a first stackable unit (46 attached to the end of the rails and stacked on top of the spacer 60, further it should be noted that multiple spacers 60 can be stacked on top of each other); and said second spacer comprises a second spacer unit and a second stackable unit (46 attached to the end of the rails and stacked on top of the spacer 60, further it should be noted that multiple spacers 60 can be stacked on top of each other).
Regarding Claim 9, Palmegiani discloses said first horizontal member defines a first end, a second end, an upper portion, and a lower portion; said second horizontal member defines a first end, a second end, an upper portion, and a lower portion; wherein said first end of said first horizontal member is received in said first vertical channel; wherein said second end of said first horizontal member is received in said second vertical channel; wherein said first end of said second horizontal member is received in said first vertical channel; wherein said second end of said second horizontal member is received in said second vertical channel (Fig. 1 & 7 wherein the ends of the top, bottom, first member and second member have their ends in the two channels in the two posts) .
[AltContent: textbox (First and second members)][AltContent: textbox (1st channel)][AltContent: textbox (Bottom rail)][AltContent: textbox (2nd channel)][AltContent: textbox (Top Rail)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
662
426
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 10-12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Springborn (USPN 11286687).
Regarding Claim 10, Springborn discloses A fence and spacer combination comprising: a fence frame (100, 102, 106, 116, 130, & 140; a first panel (132’) supported by said fence frame, said first panel having a spacer engaging surface (bottom surface of the panel); a second panel (134’) supported by said fence frame, said second panel having a second spacer engaging surface (top surface of the panel); a spacer (128) defining a first receptacle (112) for securely receiving said first spacer engaging surface of said first panel, said spacer defining a second receptacle (114) for securely receiving said second spacer engaging surface of said second panel.
Regarding Claim 11, Springborn discloses said fence frame defines a vertical channel (cavities in 116 and 130); wherein said spacer is received in said vertical channel (end of 128 is received through 156 and thus the end is in the channel).
Regarding Claim 12, Springborn discloses said spacer is a spacer unit (128), said spacer unit defining said first receptacle for securely receiving said first space engaging surface of said first panel (112), said spacer unit defining said second receptacle for securely receiving said second spacer engaging surface of said second panel (114).
Regarding Claim 14, Springborn discloses said spacer is a spacer unit, said spacer unit having a front member having an first end (290), a second end (256), an inside surface and an outside surface (Fig. 2J and 3B), a rear member having a first end (288), a second end (254), an inside surface and an outside surface (Fig. 2J and 3B), a first member connecting said front member and said rear member (282), and a second member connecting said front member and said rear member (248); wherein said front member and said rear member extend above said first member for defining a first receptacle (space 280); wherein said front member and said rear member extend below said second member for defining a second receptacle (space 246); said spacer unit defining said first receptacle for securely receiving said first spacer engaging surface of said first panel, said spacer unit defining said second receptacle for securely receiving said second spacer engaging surface of said second panel (see fig. 2J and 3B).
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Richison et al. (US PG Pub 2015/0041743).
Regarding Claim 16, Richison discloses A method of constructing a fence panel comprising: erecting a first vertical channel (19) and a second vertical channel (30); affixing a first end of a base rail (54) proximate to a lower end of said first vertical channel (Fig. 1); affixing a second end of said base rail proximate to a lower end of said second vertical channel (Fig. 1); affixing a first end of a top rail (42) proximate to a upper end of said first vertical channel (Fig. 1); affixing a second end of said top rail proximate to a upper end of said second vertical channel (Fig. 1); locating a first panel (one of 66) within at least two of said first vertical channel, said second vertical channel, said base rail, and said top rail (Fig. 6); locating a second panel (a second of 66) within at least two of said first vertical channel, said second vertical channel, said base rail, and said top rail (Fig. 6), and positioning said second panel adjacent to said first panel (Fig. 1 and 6 wherein all panels 66 are lined up next to each other); locating a spacer (74) within one of said first vertical channel and said base rail (Fig. 6 & 11 where the bottom of the spacer is in the base rail) and locating said spacer within one of said second vertical channel and said top rail for spacing apart said first panel and said second panel (Fig. 6 & 11 where the bottom of the spacer is in the top rail).
Regarding Claim 17, Richison discloses said step of erecting comprises: setting a first upright (12) and a second upright (16) in a vertical orientation, said first upright having a first panel facing side, said second upright having a second panel facing side; affixing a first end bracket (19) to said first panel facing side of said first upright, said first end bracket defining a first channel; affixing a second end bracket (30) to said second panel facing side of said second upright, said second end bracket defining a second channel.
Regarding Claim 18, Richison discloses said spacer defines an upper receptacle (left side of one of 74) for receiving said second panel (wherein one of 66 can be placed in the channel) and defines a lower receptacle for receiving one of said first panel and a protrusion of a stackable unit (the other side of the spacer can receive a first panel).
Regarding Claim 19, Richison discloses said spacer is a first spacer unit (one of 74) and a first stackable unit (another of 74), said spacer defining a receptacle for receiving one of said first panel and said second panel (one side of the panel is placed in the channel of one of 74); said first stackable unit defining a receptacle for receiving one of said first panel and said second panel (wherein another of 74 is placed on the other side of one of the panels and can receive another side of said panel). It should be noted that “stackable unit” does not define any specific structure but merely is a unit that can be used in conjunction with the other parts, i.e. stacked together with any other part and as such multiple spacers read on “a first spacer” and “a first stackable unit”.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmegiani, et. al. (USPN 11598116) in view of Yeh (US PG Pub 2019/0284833).
Regarding Claim 2, Palmegiani discloses the invention as claimed above. However, Palmegiani does not disclose a first upright defining an inwardly facing side; a first end bracket affixed to said inwardly facing side of said first upright, wherein said first vertical channel is defined by a first end bracket. Yeh teaches a fence system (Fig. 1) having an upright (120; Para [0022] & [0023] a hollow rod like frame filled with concrete) that has an inwardly facing side (facing towards the panels of the fence) that has a bracket with a channel affixed thereto (Fig. 5 wherein the bracket 1 is placed over the upright, i.e. affixed) so as to reinforce the strength of the bracket and allow the bracket be affixed to the ground.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the bracket of Palmegiani with an upright inside it, as taught by Yeh, so as to reinforce the strength of the bracket and to allow the bracket to be affixed to the ground.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Springborn (USPN 11286687) in view of Edgman (USPN 5702090).
Regarding Claim 13, Springborn discloses a stackable unit (146) attached to a receptacle on the spacer unit (Fig. 2J and 2K) but does not specifically disclose it having a protrusion wherein said protrusion is sized to matingly engage with a receptacle on said spacer unit. Edgman teaches attaching a stackable unit (13) to a receptacle (16) via protrusions (162 & 164) so as to allow the stackable unit to be removed and replaced in case of damage.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use protrusions to attach the spacer unit of Springborn to a receptacle, as taught by Edgman, so as to allow the stackable unit to be removed and replaced in case of damage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6-7, and 15 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.
Claim 4 is allowable because none of the prior art discloses or suggests the claimed invention of a fence with two spacers placed opposite each other wherein the spacer has the overall shape stated in claim 4. Claims 6-7 are allowable based on their dependency.
Claim 15 is allowable because none of the prior art discloses or suggests the claimed invention of a fence system with a spacer unit that can engage two panels and a stackable unit with the overall shape stated in claim 15 that has a protrusion that matingly engages with a receptacle on the spacer unit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMBER R ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5281. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
