DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/12/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communications filed on 12/12/2025.
The Examiner notes claims 1-8, 11-22 are currently pending and have been examined; claims 14-20 have been withdrawn due to the Response to Election/Restriction, see below.
Of the elected claims 1-8, 11-13, & 21-22; claim(s) 1 & 21 is/are currently amended; all other claims are original or previously presented. Please see the Response to Amendments and Response to Arguments sections below for more details.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species A (Figures 1-2), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/11/2025.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1-2, 5-6, & 11-13: "track structure." Wherein the instant application the track structure is interpreted per the applicant's disclosure in ¶28-¶30 & Figures 1-9 to be two outer tracks separated by an inner channel.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
And/or
(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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Conner et al. (US 6398175), hereinafter Conner.
Regarding claim 1. (Each claim status is listed above in the Status of Claims section) Conner discloses a carrying device [10], comprising:
a stand having a track structure and configured to allow an object to be detachably assembled thereon, wherein a longitudinal direction of the track structure defines a straight direction [Fig 2-3; the stand is formed by 12 and the track comprising two outer rails surrounding an inner channel which 14 rests on; the track has a longitudinal direction that defines a straight direction];
an upper clamp connected to the stand [Fig 1-4; 36];
a lower clamp [14 & 23 of 20 form a lower clamp] assembled to the track structure and facing toward the upper clamp along the straight direction [Fig 1-4], wherein the lower clamp is movable along the track structure relative to the upper clamp [Fig 1-4; Col4:line14-15], and the upper clamp and the lower clamp jointly define a receiving space therebetween [Fig 1-6];
a manipulation mechanism assembled to the stand and interlinked with the lower clamp [Fig 1-6; 16 is a manipulation mechanism], wherein the manipulation mechanism is configured to drive the lower clamp to move along the track structure [Col4:line14-15]; and
a supporting column assembled to the lower clamp [Fig 1-6; 22 is a supporting column], wherein the supporting column is movable relative to the lower clamp [Fig 1-6; 22 is rotatable relative to 14], so that the carrying device is adjustable to be in a first clamping mode [Fig 4-6; when 22 is in the receiving space it is in the first clamping mode] or a second clamping mode [Fig 1-3; when 22 is rotated around and out of the receiving space it is in the second clamping mode];
wherein, when the carrying device is in the first clamping mode, the supporting column is located in the receiving space [Fig 4-6], a free end portion of the supporting column faces toward the upper clamp [Fig 4-6; and free end portion of 22 faces 36], the manipulation mechanism is configured to drive the lower clamp and the supporting column to move together along the straight direction [Fig 4-6; Col4:line14-15], and the free end portion and the upper clamp are configured to jointly clamp a plate part of a first structure along the straight direction [Fig 4-6; 22 and 36 can jointly clamp a plate part of a first structure], and the lower clamp is free of contact with the first structure [Fig 9 shows one possible clamping of a structure where the lower clamp (i.e. any part of 14 or 20 other than 22) does not contact the structure].
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Richardson (US 20180104787), hereinafter Richardson.
Regarding claim 1. (Each claim status is listed above in the Status of Claims section) Richardson discloses a carrying device, comprising:
a stand having a track structure and configured to allow an object to be detachably assembled thereon, wherein a longitudinal direction of the track structure defines a straight direction [Fig 1; the stand is formed by 14-15 and the track comprising two outer rails surrounding an inner channel which houses 12; the track has a longitudinal direction that defines a straight direction];
an upper clamp connected to the stand [Fig 1-4; 14 & 15 form the upper clamp];
a lower clamp assembled to the track structure and facing toward the upper clamp along the straight direction [Fig 1-4; 13 & 15 form the lower clamp facing the upper clamp and is assembled to the track structure], wherein the lower clamp is movable along the track structure relative to the upper clamp [Fig 1-4; ¶38; 13 & 15 move by actuating 12], and the upper clamp and the lower clamp jointly define a receiving space therebetween [Fig 1-4];
a manipulation mechanism assembled to the stand and interlinked with the lower clamp [Fig 1-4; ¶38; 12 is a manipulation mechanism], wherein the manipulation mechanism is configured to drive the lower clamp to move along the track structure [¶38]; and
a supporting column assembled to the lower clamp [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 2-5; ¶38; 101-104 form a supporting column (portion 101 in particular is a column portion); it is assembled to the vise (10) via 105 & 107; and as the disclosure in the specification does not limit the location to the fixed jaw (¶38 state 100 can be secured to any vice to which it can fit), 105 & 107 can be secured to 13 via the holes at the end of 13, see Figure 1 of this action], wherein the supporting column is movable relative to the lower clamp [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 7 & 10-11; ¶38; the figures show that the support column is moveable relative to 13 & 15; the figures show that the support column is attached to 14 & 15 but that is not limiting per the specification], so that the carrying device is adjustable to be in a first clamping mode or a second clamping mode [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 16; 100 is located in the first clamping mode in Fig 16 and the second clamping mode would be when it is rotated out of the receiving space];
wherein, when the carrying device is in the first clamping mode, the supporting column is located in the receiving space [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 16; 103 of the support column is located inside the receiving space and is in the first clamping mode], a free end portion of the supporting column faces toward the upper clamp [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 2-4 & 16; 102 & 103 form a free end of the supporting column and a surface portion of 103 faces the upper clamp], the manipulation mechanism is configured to drive the lower clamp and the supporting column to move together along the straight direction [Figure 1 of this action; ¶38; as described above the supporting column can be attached to any vice that corresponds to the mounting structure of 105 & 107; therefore the supporting column can be attached to 13 & 15 and would move together with them when 12 is actuated along the straight direction], and the free end portion and the upper clamp are configured to jointly clamp a plate part of a first structure along the straight direction [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 2-4 & 16; when 100 is in the first clamping mode (Fig 16) and attached to 13, 12 drives 13 & 15 which would clamp a structure between part 103 of 100 and the upper clamp (14 & 15)], and the lower clamp is free of contact with the first structure [Figure 1 of this action; as described above the supporting column can be attached to any vice that corresponds to the mounting structure of 105 & 107; therefore the supporting column can be attached to 13 & 15 and when clamping a structure the lower clamp is free of contact with the first structure].
PNG
media_image1.png
384
487
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Modified and Annotated Fig 4 of Richardson
Regarding claim 2. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 1, wherein, when the carrying device is in the first clamping mode [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 16], the supporting column and the track structure are spaced apart from each other, so that a space between the supporting column and the track structure is configured to allow an extension part of the first structure, which extends curvedly from the plate part, to be disposed therein [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 2-4 & 16; a plate structure with a curvedly extending extension part can pass underneath 103 while clamped].
Regarding claim 3. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 1, wherein, when the carrying device is in the second clamping mode, the supporting column is located outside of the receiving space, the receiving space is configured to receive a second structure being plate-shaped, and the manipulation mechanism is configured to drive the lower clamp to move, so that the lower clamp and the upper clamp are capable of jointly clamping the second structure [Fig 1-4; ¶38; when the support column is rotated such that 103 is out of the receiving space a plate structure can be clamped between 13 & 14].
Regarding claim 4. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 3, wherein a thickness of the plate part of the first structure capable of being clamped by the carrying device in the first clamping mode is less than a thickness of the second structure capable of being clamped by the carrying device in the second clamping mode [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 1-4 & 16; the receiving space with 103 inside of it is reduced in size by the dimensions of 103 as compared to the receiving space without 103 inside of it; therefore the plate thickness capable of being clamped in the first mode is less than a plate thickness capable of being clamped in the second mode].
Regarding claim 5. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 1, wherein the supporting column has an assembling end portion arranged away from the free end portion [Figure 1 of this action & Fig 2-6; 104 is an assembly end portion of the support column and are arranged away from the free end (i.e. 102 & 103)], and wherein the assembling end portion is pivotally connected to the lower clamp along a shaft direction perpendicular to the track structure, so that the supporting column is rotatable relative to the lower clamp [Fig 7; 104 is pivotably connected to 105 which is considered part the lower clamp along a shaft direction (i.e. the longitudinal axis formed by the round shaft of 105) and is rotatable relative to 13 & 15].
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson in view of Walters et al. (US 5895184), hereinafter Walters.
Regarding claim 6. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 5, wherein the lower clamp includes a lower seat [Fig 2; the portion of 13 that is not 15 extending into the inner channel housing 12 is the lower seat; this would include parts 105 & 107 as they are connected to 13 but are not 15 that clamps the plate structure] …, and the lower seat is assembled to the track structure and is interlinked with the manipulation mechanism [Fig 2; ¶38], and wherein, when the supporting column is located in the receiving space by being rotated relative to the lower clamp [Fig 16], …
Richardson is silent in regards to a retainer that is assembled to the lower seat or when the supporting column is located in the receiving space by being rotated relative to the lower clamp, the retainer is configured to be inserted into the assembling end portion of the supporting column so as to enable the carrying device to be in the first clamping mode.
However Walters discloses a similar clamp with an attached support column [Fig 1], the clamp includes a retainer [50] that is assembled to the lower seat [Fig 1-2; 30 is considered part of the lower seat] and when the supporting column is located in the receiving space by being rotated relative to the lower clamp [Fig 1; Col4:line15-19; 40 rotates relative to the clamp], the retainer is configured to be inserted into the assembling end portion of the supporting column so as to enable the carrying device to be in the first clamping mode [Fig 1-2; 50 is inserted into 40 preventing it from rotating around 30 and be in the first clamping mode (Fig 1)].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the assembly end and lower seat as disclosed by Richardson to have a retainer that is assembled to the lower seat and when the supporting column is located in the receiving space by being rotated relative to the lower clamp, the retainer is configured to be inserted into the assembling end portion of the supporting column so as to enable the carrying device to be in the first clamping mode as taught by Walters as an alternative structure to prevent the support column from rotating during clamping.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson.
Regarding claim 8. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 1, wherein the lower clamp is movable in a direction away from the upper clamp through the manipulation mechanism so as to enable the lower clamp to be spaced apart from the upper clamp by a maximum distance [Fig 16; ¶38; 13 can be moved a maximum distance away from 14 via 12], but may not explicitly disclose and wherein, when the carrying device is in the first clamping mode and the lower clamp is spaced apart from the upper clamp by the maximum distance, a distance between the free end portion and the upper clamp is 40% to 50% of the maximum distance.
However it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause support column as disclosed by Richardson to be of a length such that when the carrying device is in the first clamping mode and the lower clamp is spaced apart from the upper clamp by the maximum distance, a distance between the free end portion and the upper clamp is 40% to 50% of the maximum distance since it has been held that "where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimension would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device" MPEP 2144.04-IV-A. In the instant case, the support column of Richardson would not operate differently with the claimed length and since the Applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the distance between the free end and the upper clamp range can be 40% to 50% (Instant Specification ¶50)
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson in view of JOHANNES BRASSE (DE 422944), hereinafter Brasse.
Regarding claim 11. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 1, wherein the upper clamp includes an upper seat [14] and an upper antiskid pad [15] that is assembled to the upper seat [Fig 1-4; 15 is an antiskid pad assembled to 14], but is silent in regards to …, and the upper antiskid pad faces toward the lower clamp [Fig 1-4].
Richardson may not explicitly disclose wherein the upper seat is pivotally connected to the stand along a shaft direction perpendicular to the track structure
However Brasse teaches a carrying device wherein the upper seat [Fig 1; A is the upper seat] is pivotally connected to the stand [Fig 1; the 3 on the left side of the figure is the stand] along a shaft direction perpendicular to the track structure [Fig 3; A can pivot along a direction perpendicular to the structure between both 3’s].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the upper seat as disclosed by Richardson to have the upper seat be pivotally connected to the stand along a shaft direction perpendicular to the track structure as taught by Brasse for the purpose of having auxiliary jaws that are interchangeable quickly being attached to the vice but rotatably movable into and out of a work position [Brasse: ¶2 of the translation].
Regarding claim 12. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 11, wherein the lower clamp includes a lower seat and a lower antiskid pad that is assembled to the lower seat [Richardson: Fig 1-4; the lower clamp includes 13 and 15 that is assembled to 13], and wherein the lower seat is assembled to the track structure and is interlinked with the manipulation mechanism, and the lower antiskid pad faces toward the upper antiskid pad [Fig 1-4].
Regarding claim 13. Richardson discloses the carrying device according to claim 12, wherein the manipulation mechanism includes a screw rod and a manipulation rod that is connected to the screw rod, and wherein the screw rod passes through the stand and is screwed to the lower seat, and the manipulation rod is configured to rotate the screw rod so as to allow the lower seat to move along the track structure [Fig 1-4 & 16; ¶38; 12 is a screw shaft that has a manipulation rod at the end that is connected to the screw shaft; 12 passes through the stand].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21-22 is in condition for allowance.
Claims 7 is 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.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 102 & 103 Rejection
Applicant's arguments, see Pages 11-14, filed 12/12/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant claims that Richardson does not disclose the free end portion of the supporting column and the upper column jointly clamp a plate part of a first structure along the straight direction, and the lower clamp is free of contact with the first structure.However in the claim 1 rejection it is pointed out that Richardson discloses in ¶38 that the supporting column can be attached to other than what is shown and can be moved to attach to the lower clamp (13 & 15). It is noted that the Applicant claims that only part 103 of Richardson is the supporting column but the rejection states that 101-104 form the supporting column. The Examiner has further created a modified and annotated figure of Fig 4 of Richardson to clarify the possible arrangement of the support column (101-104 or Richardson) and the lower clamp that is being interpreted in the rejection of claim 1, see Figure 1 of this action. Therefore Richardson discloses the limitation and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON R MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (303)297-4608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 0700-1600 MST [0900-1800 EST] 2nd Friday 0700-1500 MST [0900-1700 EST].
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/AARON R MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723