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 § 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, 9-10, 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vario USP 6368036 in view of Bullock 8979449 and Bullock 933899
Regarding claim 10, Vario teaches a method of securing cargo in a cargo container, the method comprising:
affixing a first attachment region of a first load restraint strip to a first interior side wall of the cargo container (see figure 3), wherein the first load restraint strip comprises a first base layer (column 3 lines 28-54) and an exposed first adhesive layer in the first attachment region (column 3 lines 28-54);
affixing a second attachment region of a second load restraint strip to a second interior side wall of the cargo container (see figure 3), wherein the second load restraint strip comprises a second base layer (column 3 lines 28-54) and an exposed second adhesive layer in the second attachment region (column 3 lines 28-54);
loading cargo units in the cargo container (figure 9);
placing one or more cargo restraint panels (92) adjacent to the loaded cargo units, a first major surface facing the loaded cargo units and contacting a portion of the loaded cargo units, a second major surface facing away from the loaded cargo units, and sides connecting the first and second major surfaces (figure 9);
after placing the one or more cargo restraint panels, wrapping a first tail of the first load restraint strip and a second tail of the second load restraint strip across, and in contact with, the one or more second major surfaces of the one or more cargo restraint panels (see figure 6); and
after wrapping the first tail and the second tail around the one or more cargo restraint panels, attaching a first connector of a tensioning strip to the first tail and a second connector of the tensioning strip to the second tail (“To join the panels together, the second ends 59 of panels 52 and 58 are overlapped, twisted together, and sealed by an interface adhesive panel, as described more fully below. As shown in FIG. 10, when using the commercially available product TY-GARD 2000, after the free ends 59 of the panels are overlapped, a tool 102 is provided for tightly pulling the free ends of the panels together to ensure that the panels are attached together in a tensile state. The second ends 59 of the panels 52, 58 are first overlapped. The tightening tool 102 has a slit 104 which engages the overlapped portion 106. The tightening tool 102 is then twisted, as shown in FIG. 11, twisting the free ends 59 of the panels 52, 58 with it and tightening the panels. When the panels are sufficiently tightened, interface adhesive panel 92 is placed on the overlapping portion of the panels, as shown in FIG. 11, tightly securing the second ends 59 of the panels together. The tightening tool can then be removed by sliding the overlapped portion 106 out of the slit 104 of the tightening tool 102. FIG. 12 shows the panels 52, 58 in a folded configuration 101, after the tightening tool has been removed.” Column 6 lines 36-65 and “The interface adhesive panel 92 is commercially available as TY-PATCH 2000, also from Walnut Industries, Inc. of Philadelphia, Pa.” – see figure 10 where panels ends 59 overlaps and panel 92 holds the configuration –
wherein
the tensioning strip comprises an elastic material strip – Vario teaches elastic portions of the strap column 3 lines 28-54 - although (92) is not disclosed as being elastic, column 3 lines 28-54 discloses the use of elastic materials for tensioning- that creates tension when elongated, the strips
a first end of the elastic material strip is fixed to the first connector, and
a second end of the elastic material strip is fixed to the second connector.
Vario fails to teach the strips comprise a first reinforcement layer fixed to the first base layer, a second reinforcement layer fixed to the second base layer, and each of the one or more cargo restraint panels comprising a polymer foam core.
Bullock ‘449 teaches the strip has a base layer (114), reinforcement layer (110) and adhesive layer (106).
Bullock ‘899 teaches the panels comprise polymer foam core (abstract).
It would have been obvious to modify the device of Vario have 92 be elastic, to include the strip layers and foam panels as taught by Bullocks, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would been motivated to make this combination prior to the effective filing date of the instant application because it would have improved the method of securing cargo.
Regarding claim 12, Vario et al teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the first connector comprises a first adhesive patch that is adhered to the first tail after the attaching to the first tail, the second connector comprises a second adhesive patch that is adhered to the second tail after the attaching to the second tail, and the elastic material strip pulls the first adhesive patch toward the second adhesive patch after the attaching to the first tail and the attaching to the second tail. See claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 13, Vario et al teach method of claim 10, further comprising adhering an adhesive-backed patch to the first tail, the second tail, and the attached tensioning strip. See claim 10 above, 92 is a patch with adhesive.
Regarding claim 14, Vario et al teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the one or more cargo restraint panels comprises two cargo restraint panels, wherein the first major surfaces of the two cargo restraint panels contact portions of a portion of the loaded cargo units, wherein the first tail, after the wrapping of the first tail and the second tail around the one or more cargo restraint panels, contacts the second major surface of one of the two cargo restraint panels, and wherein the second tail, after the wrapping of the first tail and the second tail around the one or more cargo restraint panels, contacts the second major surface of the other of the two cargo restraint panels. Vario teaches using panels between loads and often 7 loads are on one truck (column 7 lines 13-30).
Regarding claim 15, Vario teaches a method of claim 10, wherein the one or more cargo restraint panels are not mechanically interlocked with a floor of the cargo container, a ceiling of the cargo container, or side walls of the cargo container. See column 7 lines 13-44.
Regarding claim 16, Vario teaches a method of claim 10, however fails to teach wherein the cargo container comprises a semi-trailer. Vario teaches loading onto a truck but does not explicitly indicate it’s a semi. It 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 to use the methods of Vario with a semi-trailer to provide the ability to transport large amounts of cargo.
Regarding claim 17, Vario teaches an article comprising (see claim 10 above for citations):
a cargo container;
a first load restraint strip comprising a first attachment region affixed to a first interior side wall of the cargo container, wherein the first load restraint strip comprises a first base layer and an adhesive layer in the first attachment region adhering the first attachment region to the first interior side wall;
a second load restraint strip comprising a second attachment region affixed to a second interior side wall of the cargo container, wherein the second load restraint strip comprises a second base layer and an adhesive layer in the second attachment region adhering the second attachment region to the second interior side wall;
cargo units loaded in the cargo container and stacked to a height, in a vertical direction from a floor of the cargo container to an interior surface of a top of the cargo container, of at least four cargo units and to a width, in a horizontal direction from first interior side wall to the second interior side wall, of at least four cargo units – see figure 1 which shows it’s known to stack at least 4 across and 4 high of cargo. Applicant has not defined the cargo.
one or more cargo restraint panels adjacent the loaded cargo units, a first major surface facing the loaded cargo units, a second major surface facing away from the loaded cargo units, and sides connecting the first and second major surfaces; and
a tensioning strip comprising an elastic material strip that creates tension when elongated, a first connector fixed to a first end of the elastic material strip, and a second connector fixed to a second end of the elastic material strip,
wherein a first tail of the first load restraint strip and a second tail of the second load restraint strip are horizontally wrapped across, and are in contact with, the one or more second major surfaces of the one or more cargo restraint panels, and
wherein the first connector is attached to the first tail and the second connector is attached to the second tail.
Vario fails to teach the strips comprise a first reinforcement layer fixed to the first base layer, a second reinforcement layer fixed to the second base layer, and each of the one or more cargo restraint panels comprising a polymer foam core.
Bullock ‘449 teaches the strip has a base layer (114), reinforcement layer (110) and adhesive layer (106).
Bullock ‘899 teaches the panels comprise polymer foam core (abstract).
It would have been obvious to modify the device of Vario have 92 be elastic, to include the strip layers and foam panels as taught by Bullocks, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would been motivated to make this combination prior to the effective filing date of the instant application because it would have improved the method of securing cargo.
Regarding claim 3, Vario teaches an article of claim 17, wherein the one or more cargo restraint panels are not mechanically interlocked with a floor of the cargo container, a ceiling of the cargo container, or side walls of the cargo container - See column 7 lines 13-44.
Regarding claim 9, Vario teaches an article of claim 17, however fails to teach wherein the cargo container comprises a semi-trailer. Vario teaches loading onto a truck but does not explicitly indicate it’s a semi. It 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 to use the methods of Vario with a semi-trailer to provide the ability to transport large amounts of cargo.
Regarding claim 18, Vario teaches an article of claim 17, wherein the one or more cargo restraint panels comprises two cargo restraint panels, wherein the first major surfaces of the two cargo restraint panels contact portions of a portion of the loaded cargo units, wherein the first tail contacts the second major surface of one of the two cargo restraint panels, and wherein the second tail contacts the second major surface of the other of the two cargo restraint panels. Vario teaches using panels between loads and often 7 loads are on one truck (column 7 lines 13-30).
Regarding claim 19, Vario teaches an article of claim 17, wherein the first connector comprises a first adhesive patch and the second connector comprises a second adhesive patch (see claim 10 above).
Regarding claim 20, Vario teaches an article of claim 17, further comprising an adhesive- backed patch adhered to the first tail, the second tail, and the tensioning strip (see claim 10 above).
Claims 4 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vario USP 6368036 in view of Bullock 8979449 and Bullock 933899 as applied to claims 10 and 17 above, in further view of Josephs USP 4854560.
Regarding claim 4, Vario et al teaches a method of claim 10, however fails to explicitly teach wherein an average volume of the cargo units is 3.375 cubic feet or less per cargo unit.
However, Josephs, in a similar field of cargo restraint, teaches a container (10) having 1,280 cubic feet of storage (C2, L27-29). It would have been obvious to have cargo units with an average volume of 3.375 cubic feet or less per cargo unit because this would allow for approximately 380 cargo units to be transported. It would also allow for cargo units of varying sizes to be transported. It would have been obvious to incorporate the dimensions of the container from Josephs, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation, because it would have improved the efficiency of the cargo restraint system of Vario et al to store more cargo units of varying sizes. It is also noted that the application being examined places no criticality on the average volume of 3.375 cubic feet or less per cargo unit.
Regarding claim 21, Vario et al teaches an article of claim 17, however fails to teach wherein an average volume of the cargo units is 3.375 cubic feet or less per cargo unit.
However, Josephs, in a similar field of cargo restraint, teaches a container (10) having 1,280 cubic feet of storage (C2, L27-29). It would have been obvious to have cargo units with an average volume of 3.375 cubic feet or less per cargo unit because this would allow for approximately 380 cargo units to be transported. It would also allow for cargo units of varying sizes to be transported. It would have been obvious to incorporate the dimensions of the container from Josephs, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation, because it would have improved the efficiency of the cargo restraint system of Vario et al to store more cargo units of varying sizes. It is also noted that the application being examined places no criticality on the average volume of 3.375 cubic feet or less per cargo unit.
Claims 11 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vario USP 6368036 in view of Bullock 8979449 and Bullock 933899 as applied to claims 10 and 17 above, in further view of Marshall 2018/0264989
Regarding claim 11, Vario et al teaches a method of claim 10, however fails wherein the first connector comprises a first clip that grips the first tail after the attaching to the first tail, the second connector comprises a second clip that grips the second tail after the attaching to the second tail, and the elastic material strip pulls the first clip toward the second clip after the attaching to the first tail and the attaching to the second tail. It is noted that Vario teaches use of tools to pull panels, but does not say “clips”.
Marshall further teaches wherein each of the one or more tensioned elastic strips (100a, 100b) comprises a first clip gripping the first tail (200a), a second clip gripping the second tail (200b), and an elastic material attached to the first clip and to the second clip and pulling the first clip toward the second clip (400a, [0039], [0041)).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the one or more tensioned elastic strips, the first clip, second clip, and elastic material of Marshall into the load restraining method of Vario et al, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation prior to the effective filing date of the instant application, because it would improve the effectiveness of the load restraining method by allowing the user to adjust the tension by adjusting the elastic material relative to the elastic strips (Marshall, [0050]).
Regarding claim 6, Vario et al teaches an article of claim 17, however fails to teach wherein the first connector comprises a first clip that grips the first tail, and wherein the second connector comprises a second clip that grips the second after the attaching to the second tail. It is noted that Vario teaches use of tools to pull panels, but does not say “clips”.
Marshall further teaches wherein each of the one or more tensioned elastic strips (100a, 100b) comprises a first clip gripping the first tail (200a), a second clip gripping the second tail (200b), and an elastic material attached to the first clip and to the second clip and pulling the first clip toward the second clip (400a, [0039], [0041)).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the one or more tensioned elastic strips, the first clip, second clip, and elastic material of Marshall into the load restraining method of Vario et al, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation prior to the effective filing date of the instant application, because it would improve the effectiveness of the load restraining method by allowing the user to adjust the tension by adjusting the elastic material relative to the elastic strips (Marshall, [0050]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant does not make any arguments. Applicant supplied IDS with reference that is applied above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY REGINA WEISBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-5500. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:15-4:15.
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.
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.
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights