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 .
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 zip ties (cl. 5) and the cap (cl. 14) 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.
The Examiner notes that:
amending claim 5 to recite that slots are --configured to receive a flexible plastic cable tie-- and,
amending claim 14 to recite that couplings are --configured to be closed by a cap-- or the like
would obviate the drawing objections.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 - 9, 11 - 15, and 17 - 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 2-9, 11-15, and 17-19, the first word (“A”) should be deleted and replaced with --The--.
In claim 13, the second comma behind “13,” should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 9 is 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.
Regarding claim 9, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the forward ridge” in line 3. Claim 1, on which this claim depends, does not set forth “a forward ridge.” It appears that this claim may be intended to depend from claim 8 which does set forth “a forward ridge.” Appropriate correction is required.
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) 10 - 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Josam Closet Carrier (NPL document 1 on the IDS dated 4/2/25, hereinafter Josam) in view of Young (US 2,945,240).
Regarding claim, a closet carrier assembly for a wall-mounted toilet assembly, the closet carrier assembly comprising: a nipple connector defining: an inlet configured to couple to a waste pipe of the wall- mounted toilet; and an outlet in fluid communication with the inlet; and a frame assembly including: a first frame; a second frame spaced apart from the first frame (left and right frames), wherein each frame comprises: a proximal post configured to couple to the nipple connector and terminating in a proximal foot configured stand on floor, a distal post terminating in a distal foot configured to stand on floor; and a top portion connecting the proximal and distal posts. See annotated figure below.
Josam does not explicitly show a waste pipe chase conduit having: a first portion configured to couple to the outlet of the nipple connector; and a second portion in fluid with the first portion and extending at an angle from the first portion. Attention is turned to Young which teaches a similar carrier for a wall mounted closet carrier (20) having proximal (19) and distal posts (20) and a waste chase pipe (13) with a first portion configured to couple to a nipple connector (at 49)(fig. 5) and a second portion in fluid communication with the first portion extending at an angle from the first portion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided an angled waste chase in the device of Josam since that is a common means of connecting a wall mounted toilet to downstream fixtures or the blackwater pipe. Under the proposed modification, the second portion of the waste chase conduit passes through the opening illustrated in Josam such that the proximal post stands on a proximal side of the second portion of the waste pipe chase conduit and the distal post stands on a distal side of the second portion of the waste pipe chase conduit.
Regarding claim 11, Josam as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, but does not show a cross brace as claimed. Attention is again turned to Young which teaches a cross brace (25) extending between the top portions for providing structural support (see fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided a cross brace to ensure that the frame pieces are the proper distance apart and to define an additional mount for the toilet. Under the propose modification, the brace forms a pathway for passage of a vertical vent pipe connected to the conduit in so far as there is nothing blocking the space between the frames and the brace. See annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image1.png
559
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
378
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
433
628
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
546
486
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 - 8 and 16 - 19 are allowed.
Claim 9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 12 - 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.
Conclusion
All pertinent prior art has been made of record in the parent application 18/409,157 and on the IDSs submitted with this application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN L DEERY whose telephone number is (571)270-1928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur, 7:30am - 4:30pm; Fri 8:00am-12:00pm.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/ERIN DEERY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights