Office Action 2: Notice of Allowance (2025-05-29)

CLAIMS:
Amendments to the claims

Claims 1-9 (canceled).28

Claim 10 (currently amended): An anti-ponding foldable canopy tent comprising:a tent frame assembly;
a ceiling assembly mounted on the tent frame assembly, wherein the ceiling assembly comprises a central lock mechanism and a plurality of foldable arm mechanisms annularly distributed about a periphery of the central lock mechanism; and
a tarpaulin disposed on the ceiling assembly, wherein the ceiling assembly further comprises a plurality of elastic rod mechanisms annularly distributed about the periphery of the central lock mechanism, wherein a first end of each of the elastic rod mechanisms is rotatably connected to the central lock mechanism, and a second end of the each of the elastic rod mechanisms is connected to the tarpaulin for tensioning the tarpaulin , wherein \[\[the\]\] each of the elastic rod mechanisms comprises a vertex angle elastic rod and a supporting elastic rod, wherein a first end of the vertex angle elastic rod is rotatably connected to a top fixed disc of the central lock mechanism, and a second end of the vertex angle elastic rod is connected to the tarpaulin for tensioning the tarpaulin, and wherein a first end of the supporting elastic rod is rotatably connected to a lower fixed disc of the central lock mechanism, and a second end of the supporting elastic rod is rotatably connected to the vertex angle elastic rod.

Claim 11 (previously presented): The anti-ponding foldable canopy tent according to claim 10, wherein the vertex angle elastic rod is fixed with a support, and wherein the supporting elastic rod is rotatably connected to the support.

Claim 12 (previously presented): The anti-p onding foldable canopy tent according to claim 11, wherein the support comprises a support mounting part and a support hinging part, wherein the support mounting part is fixed to the vertex angle elastic rod, and wherein the support hinging part is hinged to the supporting elastic rod.

Claim 13 (previously presented): The anti-ponding foldable canopy tent according to claim 10, wherein one or more of the vertex angle elastic rod and the supporting elastic rod are made of one of a glass fiber and a carbon fiber.

Claim 14 (currently amended): The anti-ponding foldable canopy tent according to claim \[\[9\]\] 10, wherein a distal end of each of the foldable arm mechanisms is connected to a supporting leg of the tent frame assembly.

Claim 15 (currently amended): The anti-ponding foldable canopy tent according to claim \[\[9\]\] 10, wherein number of the foldable arm mechanisms is same as number of the elastic rod mechanisms, and wherein the foldable arm mechanisms and the elastic rod mechanisms are arranged in a staggering mode.

Claim 16 (previously presented): The anti-ponding foldable canopy tent according to claim 15, wherein the number of the foldable arm mechanisms and the elastic rod mechanisms is four.

Claim 17 (currently amended): The anti-ponding foldable canopy tent according to claim \[\[9\]\] 10, wherein a projection of the tarpaulin on a horizontal plane is rectangular.

OFFICE ACTION:
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 5/06/25.  Claims 10-17 are pending. Claims 1-9 have been canceled. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The substitute specification filed 5/06/25 has been entered.
The replacement drawing sheets are approved.
Claims 10-17 are allowed.
The arguments filed 5/06/25 never specifically address where the connection between the second ends of the elastic rod mechanisms and the tarpaulin are show. However, the objection is section 5 of the office action mailed 4/14/25 is withdrawn as one skilled in the art would recognize a connection to the tarp at the second ends from Fig. 1.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 2/08/23. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.  The arguments filed 5/06/25 indicate that the copy has been filed but it still has not been received.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: Remarks
The Present Invention and the Pending Claims
Claims 10-17 are currently pending. Reconsideration and allowance of the pending claims is respectfully requested.
Summary of the Office Action
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13 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.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 2/08/23. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Objection to the drawings
The drawings are objected to because: a. the view numbers must be larger than all of the reference numbers (#& CFR
(u)({2)); and
b. As the substitute specification filed 7/24/23 has not yet been entered (See below) the drawings are replete with reference numbers not found in the specification (receipt of a no new matter statement will allow entry of the substitute specification). 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.
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 connection between the second ends of the elastic rod mechanisms and the tarpaulin (cl. 1] must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Objection to the specification
The substitute specification filed 7/24/23 has NOT been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) and (c) because: it was not accompanied by a no new matter statement as required by 37 CFR 1.125(b}. The no new matter statement in the remarks filed 7/24/23 fails to address the substitute specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification filed 7/10/23:
c. uses refence number 3 for both the tarpaulin and elastic rod mechanism; d. Uses reference number 1 and 2 for the tent frame assembly; e. Uses refence number 2 for both the tent frame assembly and the ceiling assembly; and f. Fails to clearly distinguish between the lateral folding arm mechanism and the fold arm mechanisms annularly distributed about a periphery of the central lock mechanism. Appropriate correction is required. Each of the above objections appear to be overcome by the substitute specification filed 7/24/23 which will be entered upon receipt of the required no new matter statement ("The substitution specification filed 7/24/23 contains no new matter').
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1 ends with an erroneous "the" ("the each" should just read as "each"). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC Q 103
Claims 9 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2003/0183266 to Suh in view of U.S. Patent 2,518,167 to Mintz.
Amendments to the claims
Claims 10, 14, 15, and 17 are currently amended; claims 11-13, and 16 remain as previously presented; claims 1-8 were previously canceled; claim 9 is now canceled. Applicant respectfully submits that the claim amendments do not add new subject matter.
The office action states: "Claims 10-13 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."
Applicant appreciates identification of claims 10-13 as allowable by the examiner, subject to rewriting the claims in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As suggested in the office action, applicant has amended the claim 10 by including all the limitations of its base claim 9 in claim 10. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests allowance of amended claim 10.
Amended claims 11-17 are dependent on allowable amended claim 10. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests allowance of amended claims 11-17.
The office action further states: "Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 6/24/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55."
In response to the above objection, applicant has filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests that the above objection be reconsidered and withdrawn.
The office action further states: "The drawings are objected to because: a. the view numbers must be larger than all of the reference numbers (#& CFR
(u)({2)); and
b. As the substitute specification filed 7/24/23 has not yet been entered (See below) the drawings are replete with reference numbers not found in the specification (receipt of a no new matter statement will allow entry of the substitute specification).
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. 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 connection between the second ends of the elastic rod mechanisms and the tarpaulin (cl. 1] must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered."
In response to the above objection, applicant is herewith submitting replacement drawings as specified in the office action. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests that the above objection to the drawings be reconsidered and withdrawn.
The office action further states: "The substitute specification filed 7/24/23 has NOT been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) and (c) because: it was not accompanied by a no new matter statement as required by 37 CFR 1.125(b}. The no new matter statement in the remarks filed 7/24/23 fails to address the substitute specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification
filed 7/10/23:
c. uses refence number 3 for both the tarpaulin and elastic rod mechanism; d. Uses reference number 1 and 2 for the tent frame assembly;
e. Uses refence number 2 for both the tent frame assembly and the ceiling assembly; and
f. Fails to clearly distinguish between the lateral folding arm mechanism and the fold arm mechanisms annularly distributed about a periphery of the central lock mechanism.
Appropriate correction is required. Each of the above objections appear to be overcome by the substitute specification filed 7/24/23 which will be entered upon receipt of the required no new matter statement ("The substitution specification filed 7/24/23 contains no new matter')."
In response to the above objection, applicant has submitted a proper statement of no new subject matter as specified in the office action. Furthermore, applicant has re- submitted the substitute specification that overcomes the part number duplication referenced above. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests that the above objection to the disclosure be reconsidered and withdrawn. Furthermore, applicant respectfully requests that the substitute specification and replacement drawings be reconsidered and entered into the records.
The office action further states: "Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1 ends with an erroneous "the" ("the each" should just read as "each"). Appropriate correction is required."
In response to the above objection, applicant has amended the claims as suggested in the office action. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests that the above objection to the claims be reconsidered and withdrawn.
The office action further states: "Claims 9 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2003/0183266 to Suh in view of U.S. Patent 2,518,167 to Mintz."
In response to the above rejection, applicant has canceled claim 9. Therefore, the rejection of claim 9 is moot. Furthermore, applicant has amended claims 14-17, and made claims 14-17 dependent on allowable amended claim 10. Therefore, applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claims 14-17 under 35 U.S. C. 103 be reconsidered and withdrawn.
Conclusion