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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application Number: 17/717,640 filed on 4/11/22 has a total of 22 claims pending for examination; there are 3 independent claims and 19 dependent claims, all of which are examined below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609.
Drawings
The drawing(s) have been reviewed by the examiner and are found comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.81 to 1.85.
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.
Claim(s) 14, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application No. 1,018,877 to Chickering (hereinafter Chickering).
With regards to claim 14, Chickering teaches a ladder system cooperable with a surface [figs 1-7], the ladder system comprising:
a ladder [figs 1, 2, 5, 6 ladder element] including a plurality of rungs [figs 1, 2, 5, 6 horizontal rung elements shown between the vertical ladder stiles] extending between a pair of side rails [figs 1, 2, 5, 6 vertical stile elements shown at ends of horizontal rung elements]; and
a securing bracket [figs 1-7 elements 1-7] connected to one of the plurality of rungs [figs 1, 2, 5, 6 element 3 as shown], the securing bracket [figs 1-7 elements 1-7] including a pair of grips [figs 1-7 elements 1] that are configured to engage a wall mount engagement portion [examiner notes that it has been held that the recitation that an element is configured to perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. It does not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense. In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. – In this case, the two hooks are capable of performing the limitation],
wherein the securing bracket [figs 1-7 elements 1-7] comprises a flat mounting portion [figs 1-7 elements 4 – lines 45-50 - made from stamped or cut heavy sheet metal and shown as flat in the figures] secured to an underside of the one of the plurality of rungs [figs 1-7 elements 4 secure to an underside of one of the plurality of rungs], and wherein the grips [figs 1-7 elements 1] are spaced apart [figs 1-7 elements 1 as shown] corresponding to openings in the wall mount engagement portion [as noted above, figs 1-7 element 1 are spaced apart and are capable of performing the limitation].
With regards to claim 16, Chickering teaches a ladder system according to claim 14, wherein the grips [figs 1-7 elements 1] are monolithic with the flat mounting portion [figs 1-7 elements 4 – lines 45-50 - made from stamped or cut heavy sheet metal and shown as flat in the figures] and extend from the one of the plurality of rungs rearward toward the surface [figs 1-7 elements 1 are shown extending from one of the plurality of rungs rearward towards an element not shown but which has a surface as all elements do].
With regards to claim 17, Chickering teaches a ladder system according to claim 14, wherein the one of the plurality of rungs to which the securing bracket is connected is at an intermediate position of the ladder relative to others of the plurality of rungs [lines 25-26 – the ladder hook may be attached at any point of the ladder].
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by AU 2015215915 A1 to Nagle (hereinafter Nagle).
With regards to claim 14, Nagle teaches a ladder system cooperable with a surface [figs 1-3], the ladder system comprising:
a ladder [fig 3 ladder element 36] including a plurality of rungs [fig 3 elements 38] extending between a pair of side rails [fig 3 elements 40]; and
a securing bracket [figs 1-3 element 2] connected to one of the plurality of rungs [fig 3 top element 38 as shown], the securing bracket [figs 1-3 element 2] including a pair of grips [figs 1-3 element 6 has a notch/cutout element 12 that creates hooks] that are configured to engage a wall mount engagement portion [examiner notes that it has been held that the recitation that an element is configured to perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. It does not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense. In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. – In this case, the two hooks are capable of performing the limitation],
wherein the securing bracket [figs 1-3 element 2] comprises a flat mounting portion [figs 1-3 elements 8, 14 – page 4 lines 20-32 - made cut sheet metal and shown as flat in the figures] secured to an underside of the one of the plurality of rungs [fig 3 element 8, 14 secure an underside of one of the plurality of rungs], and wherein the grips [figs 1-3 element 6 has a notch/cutout element 12 that creates hooks] are spaced apart [figs 1-3 element 6 has a notch/cutout element 12 that creates hooks spaced apart as shown] corresponding to openings in the wall mount engagement portion [as noted above, fig 1-3 element 6 has a notch/cutout element 12 that creates hooks spaced apart as shown and are capable of performing the limitation].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 are allowable over the prior art of record.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to claims 1-13, the Examiner finds Applicant’s arguments submitted in the Remarks pages 6-9 and filed 9/22/25 persuasive, as such, said Applicant’s arguments are deemed as the reasons for allowable subject matter.
Claims 18-22 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to claim 18, the prior art of record alone or in combination fails to teach or fairly suggest a wall mount securable to the surface, wherein the engagement portion comprises a bar, the wall mount including a central bumper portion with a lateral channel therethrough, the bar extending through the lateral channel, and first and second end caps connected to opposite ends of the bar, wherein the bar is sized such that the first and second end caps are spaced from the central bumper portion, and wherein the grips are spaced apart such that the grips respectively engage the bar between the first end cap and the central bumper portion and between the second end cap and the central bumper portion, in combination with the other limitations found in the claim.
With regards to claim 19, the prior art of record alone or in combination fails to teach or fairly suggest a wall mount securable to the surface, the wall mount being formed of a one-piece injection molded material and including a back section and the openings between the wall mount engagement portion and the back section.
With regards to claim 20, the prior art of record alone or in combination fails to teach or fairly suggest a wall mount securable to the surface, the wall mount including the openings that are configured to receive the pair of grips.
With regards to claim 21-22, due to their dependence from claim 20, the include allowable subject matter for at least the same reasons.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks pages 6--9, filed 9/22/25, with respect to 1 and 6-13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1 and 6-13 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 14-17 and 19-22 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4152. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5pm.
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, Daniel P Cahn can be reached on (571)270-5616. 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.
DEM
/DAVID E MARTINEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634