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 .
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.
Claims 1-6 are 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. Claim 1 recites “each of biasing members” which renders the claims indefinite. It is unclear if there is a single or multiple biasing members, and what relationship it or they have to the movable rollers. It is unclear if the applicant intends to recite “each of a plurality of biasing members” or “each biasing member” or some other structure. Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2018-44343 (Ono ’43).
Regarding Claim 1, Ono ’43 teaches a slider device (5) that is mounted in such a manner as to be freely movable along an extending direction of a handrail (3a/3b/3c) and can hold a lifeline (“guide with a lifeline”), the slider device comprising: a slider main body (15) that can move in the extending direction of the handrail while holding the handrail; and a plurality of pairs of rollers (22a/22b) that are provided on the slider main body in a plurality of places apart from each other in the extending direction of the handrail, grasp side surfaces of the handrail, and can travel on the side surfaces of the handrail, wherein one of the rollers facing each other across the handrail is a fixed roller (22a) fixed to the slider main body and another of the rollers facing each other across the handrail is a movable roller (22b) supported in such a manner as to be able to get farther or closer with respect to the handrail, and each of the movable rollers is biased toward the handrail by each of biasing members (26) and is independently movable away from and toward the handrail (each movable roller can be moved in and out – see Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 2, Ono ’43 teaches handrail apparatus comprising: a plurality of vertical props (1a/1b/1c) attached to an attachment target member (W) and standing; a handrail holding member (2) provided on each of the vertical props; a handrail (3a/3b/3c) held by the handrail holding members and stretched between adjacent ones of the vertical props; and the slider device according to claim 1, the slider device being mounted in such a manner as to be freely movable along the extending direction of the handrail.
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.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono ’43 as applied to Claim 2 above in view of JP07-314428 (Komatsu). Ono ’43 teaches that the handrail holding member has: a socket (2a) that is coupled to the vertical prop and into which the handrail can be inserted (see Fig. 6b); a wedge (6) that is inserted into the socket and can grasp the handrail together with the socket (see Fig. 6a); and a retaining mechanism coupling the wedge to the socket in a freely slidable manner and pressing the wedge against the socket, and the retaining mechanism has: a long hole (6c) formed in the wedge along an insertion direction of the wedge; and a bolt shaft (8) protruding inward from the socket and inserted into the long hole. Ono ’43 is silent on the details of the bolt shaft. Komatsu teaches a retaining mechanism including a bolt shaft (7) protruding through a hole (5a/6a), a coil spring (14) mounted on an outer periphery of the bolt shaft; and a nut (10) screwed to an end portion of the bolt shaft and applying a compressive load to the coil spring, and further comprising a spacer (8) in a cylindrical shape that is mounted between the outer periphery of the bolt shaft and an inside of the coil spring and regulates movement in a tightening direction of the nut. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ono ’43 by using a retaining mechanism as taught by Komatsu in order to provide a more secure and adjustable retaining mechanism for the device.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono ’43 as applied to Claim 2 above in view of JP 2020007785 (Ono ’85). Ono ’43 teaches that the handrail has: a plurality of bar members (3a/3b/3c) held by the handrail holding members (4a) and a handrail coupling member (4a) coupling end portions facing each other of adjacent ones of the bar members, and the handrail coupling member has: a cylindrical body into which the bar member can be inserted. Ono ’43 is silent on the use of insertion holes or biased stop pins. Ono ’85 teaches a handrail apparatus including a handrail having a plurality of bar members (3a/3b) held by the handrail holding members and each provided with insertion holes (3c) in both end portions; and a handrail coupling member (4) coupling end portions facing each other of adjacent ones of the bar members, and the handrail coupling member has: a cylindrical body (5) into which the bar member can be inserted (see Fig. 3); a pair of opening holes (5c) provided in the cylindrical body along an axial direction; stop pins (7A) inserted into the opening holes in such a manner as to freely exit or enter; and spring members (8) biasing the stop pins in insertion directions, and couples end portions of adjacent ones of the bar members by a process in which the end portions of the adjacent bar members are inserted into the cylindrical body from both sides and the stop pins are inserted into the insertion holes of the bar members and the opening holes of the cylindrical body in a state where the insertion holes and the opening holes are made to face each other. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ono ’43 by using a handrail as taught by Ono ’85 in order to provide a more easily assembled handrail for the device.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono ’43 as applied to Claim 2 above in view of JP 2018-87450 (Ono ’50). Ono ’43 teaches a fixing tool (B) that fixes the vertical prop to the attachment target member, but is silent on the details thereof. Ono ’50 teaches a handrail apparatus comprising a fixing tool (Fig. 7) that fixes a vertical prop (1) to an attachment target member (HA), wherein the fixing tool has: a main body portion (3) that has a support piece (3A) and a fixed grasping piece (3B) arranged facing each other with a predetermined gap and a coupling piece (3/5A) coupling one end of the support piece and one end of the fixed grasping piece and to which the vertical prop is fixed; a movable grasping piece (4) that is placed between the support piece and the fixed grasping piece and can grasp the attachment target member together with the fixed grasping piece; and an operating unit that has an outer cylinder (8) fixed to the support piece and a movable shaft (10) that is inserted into the outer cylinder in such a manner as to be movable in an axial direction while being blocked from rotation against the outer cylinder and to a terminal end of which the movable grasping piece is coupled, and that causes the movable shaft to exit or enter the outer cylinder to move the movable grasping piece farther or closer with respect to the fixed grasping piece, and the movable grasping piece has: a flat plate (6A) portion in a single plate shape joined to the terminal end of the movable shaft; and bent portions (7, see Fig. 11) formed by bending a pair of side end portions of the flat plate portion facing each other in the extending direction of the handrail toward the fixed grasping piece. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ono ’43 by using a fixing tool as taught by Ono ’50 in order to provide a secure attachment means for the handrail.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/30/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., that each movable roller has an independent biasing member) are not clearly recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm.
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 Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
NOAH C. HAWK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/Noah Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636