DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the amendment and / or remarks filed on July 28, 2026. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22 & 23.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 28, 2026 has been entered.
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) 14, 15, 16 & 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Canadian Patent Number CA 2 575 128 A1) to Lepage in view of (AU 2021203269 A1) to Cartwright, and (U.S. Patent Number 2,304,705) to Pate.
Regarding claim 14, Lepage discloses the lift belt (See Figure 10) for supporting loads carried by the user, the lift belt (See Figure 10) comprising:
the tray (1) having vertical and horizontal attachment points (i.e. Left & Right (10)) & (i.e. Left & Right (7) in Figure 10) for securing the tray (1) to the user, the tray (1) comprising:
the body (3) including an upper end and the lower end (See Figures 1, 3, 5 & 10); and
the shelf (2) attached to the body (3), wherein the body (3) and the shelf (2) meet to define an angle between 60 and 120 degrees (See Figures 1, 3, 5 & 10):
the removable container (11) having opposing features (i.e. Left & Right Recess Vertical Sides Walls of (13) in Figure 12) configured to matingly engage the complimentary mating feature of the tray (1) upon insertion of the tray (1) into the opposing features (i.e. Left & Right Recess Vertical Sides of (13) in Figure 12) (See Figure 12).
However, Lepage lacks and does not explicitly disclose the shelf attached to the body at the upper end of the body; and the gripping surface.
Cartwright teaches the shelf (101) attached to the body (106) at the upper end (105) of the body (106); and the shelf (101) having an upper surface (104) that includes the gripping surface (i.e. Friction Enhancing Surface) (See Page 5, lines 26 & 27) (See Figures 1 & 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make attaching to the body at the upper end of the body; and the shelf having an upper surface that includes the gripping surface as taught by Cartwright with the lift belt of Lepage in order to prevent slippage and excess movement.
However, Lepage does not explicitly disclose a lock configured to selectively secure the removable container to the top surface of the shelf, wherein the lock is a spring latch disposed on a bottom surface of the shelf.
Pate teaches a lock (45 & 46) configured to selectively secure the removable container to the top surface of the shelf, wherein the lock (45 & 46) is a spring latch (See Figure 4) disposed on a bottom surface (11) of the shelf (10) (See Figures 3 & 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make a lock configured to selectively secure the removable container to the top surface of the shelf, wherein the lock is a spring latch disposed on a bottom surface of the shelf as taught by Pate with the lift belt of Lepage in order to secure and hold and prevent excess movement.
Regarding claim 15, Lepage discloses the harness (10 & 7) connectable to the tray (1) in two locations (i.e. Left & Right Strap Locations of (10) at Top Portion of (1) in Figure 10) configured to vertically support loads disposed on the shelf (2) and two locations (i.e. Left & Right Side Strap Locations of (7) at Sides of (1) in Figure 10) configured to horizontally secure the tray (1) to the user (See Figure 10).
Furthermore, Lepage as modified by Cartwright discloses the harness (202, 203 & 205) connectable to the tray (100) in two locations (i.e. Left & Right (112) in Figure 2) configured to vertically support loads disposed on the shelf (101) and two locations (i.e. Left & Right (108 & 109) in Figure 7) configured to horizontally secure the tray (100) to the user (See Figure 7).
Regarding claim 16, Lepage discloses the body (3) extends from the shelf (2) the length greater than the length that the shelf (2) extends from the body (3).
Regarding claim 23, Lepage as modified by Pate discloses wherein the spring latch (i.e. via (46) in Figure 4) rotates to engage the mating or complimentary feature (i.e. via Sockets (49) in Figure 4) in one of the container or tray (10) (See Figures 1 & 4).
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Canadian Patent Number CA 2 575 128 A1) to Lepage, (AU 2021203269 A1) to Cartwright and (U.S. Patent Number 2,304,705) to Pate as applied to Claim 14 above, and further in view of (U.S. Patent Number 4,319,704) to Rosen.
Regarding claim 19, Lepage discloses wherein the body and the shelf (2) meet to define an angle.
However, Lepage as modified by above lacks and does not explicitly disclose an angle greater than 90 degrees.
Rosen teaches wherein the body (23) and the shelf (20) meet to define an angle greater than 90 degrees (See Column 2, lines 26 – 28) (See Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention as effectively filed to make an angle greater than 90 degrees as taught by Rosen with the lift belt of Lepage because the motivation only requires a simple substitution of one known, equivalent lift belt shelf configuration for another to obtain predictable results.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Canadian Patent Number CA 2 575 128 A1) to Lepage, (AU 2021203269 A1) to Cartwright and (U.S. Patent Number 2,304,705) to Pate as applied to Claim 14 above, and further in view of (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2009 / 0179055 A1) to Estrellado.
Regarding claim 20, Lepage as modified by Cartwright discloses wherein the body (106) has an inner surface (i.e. Inner Surface of (106) in Figure 1) on an opposing side of the body (106) as an outer surface (i.e. Outer Surface of (106) in Figure 5) of the body (106).
However, Lepage as modified by above does not explicitly disclose the inner surface is concave.
Estrellado teaches wherein the body (110) has an inner surface (i.e. Inner Surface of (110) in Figures 1 & 2) on an opposing side of the body (110) as an outer surface of the body (110), and the inner surface (i.e. Inner Surface of (110) in Figures 1 & 2) is concave (See Figures 1 & 2) for the purpose of matching the curve shape of the hip area of the user (See Paragraph 0034).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make the inner surface concave as taught by Estrellado with the lift belt of Lepage in order to match the shape of the hip area of the user (See Paragraph 0034).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22 & 23 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections.
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 LESTER L VANTERPOOL whose telephone number is (571)272-8028. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathan J. Newhouse can be reached on 571-272-4544. 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.
/L.L.V/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights