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 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Roff et al. (202/0391067).
As to claim 1, Roff et al. disclose a modular tower slide system having all of the claimed subject matter.
The “module members formed in a polyhedral shape” is met by the polyhedral shaped 102 shown in figure 1.
A “connection unit configured to connect the module members with respect to a floor to form a tower body” is shown in figure 5 and described in [0042]; and
A “plurality of slide members selectively connected to connection holes selectively formed in the module members that form the tower body and configured to perform vertical sliding movement” is met by the inclined tubes 204 which would function as a slide and/or slide 2000 shown in figure 20. Figure 17 shows the connection holes form in the modules.
Regarding claim 2, Roff et at. Further teach that the module member includes a module frame forming each side of the module member, and module walls attached to and detached from the module frame to form each surface. (This is shown in figure 5 and met by edge pieces 504 and joint pieces 506.
In consideration of claim 3, Roff et al. further show that a start member assembled into the connection hole formed in the module wall of the module member so that a user starts to the slide member; and an arrival member assembled into the connection hole SO that a user arrives from the slide member to an inside of the module member.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roff et al. (202/0391067
2) in view of Finnegan et al. (2018/0137700).
As to claim 4, Roff et al do not specify the use detection sensors respectively provided in the detect a departure status and an arrival status of a user a control unit configured to performs operational control on detection data detected through the detection sensors to display and control a usage status of each of the slide members.
In a slide amusement system, Finnegan et al. teach the use of multiple sensor and lights to control the usage and function of the slide. This enhances user safety by ensuring rides do not hit other riders.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the system of Finnegan et al. with the system of Roff et al. because it would enhance user safety.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 2-26-2025 and 6-9-2026 have been considered.
Related Prior Art
Van Wagenen (6,099,411) disclose a similar modular play system that slides and inclined tubes.
Huffman et al (11,338,163) show in figure 1 a modular slide tower.
.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN J FLYNN whose telephone number is (571)272-1915. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30-4 M-F.
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.
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.
/NATHAN J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights