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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicants Amendment did not overcome the previous rejections. Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered and are not persuasive.
This office action is made final.
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.
Claim 10 is 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 10 recites the limitation " the first, second, third, and fourth fastening members". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roger et al. (US 2019/0105521), hereinafter Roger.
In re. claim 1, Roger teaches a harness assembly comprising: an upper panel (2) and a lower panel (3) (fig. 11); said upper panel having first and second upper panel loops (8) mounted thereto (figs. 11-12); said lower panel having first and second lower panel loops (8) mounted thereto (figs. 11-12); a first fastening element (7) operatively connected to the first upper panel loop such that the first fastening element is selectively slidable along the first upper panel loop (figs. 10-11); a second fastening element (7) operatively connected to the second upper panel loop such that the second fastening element is selectively slidable along the second upper panel loop (figs. 10-11); a third fastening element (7) operatively connected to the first lower panel loop such that the third fastening element is selectively slidable along the first lower panel loop (figs. 10-11); a fourth fastening element (7) operatively connected to the second lower panel loop such that the fourth fastening element is selectively slidable along the second lower panel loop (figs. 10-11); a first yoke member (6) interconnecting the first fastening element and the third fastening element (figs. 10-11); a second yoke member (6) interconnecting the second fastening element and the fourth fastening element (figs. 10-11).
In re. claim 2, Roger teaches the harness assembly of claim 1, further comprising a bridge (17) having a first end operatively connected to the first yoke member and a second end operatively connected to the second yoke member (fig. 11).
In re. claim 3, Roger teaches the harness assembly of claim 1, wherein each of said first, second, third, and fourth fastening elements are configured such that friction between each of the fastening elements and a respective one of the upper and lower panel loops is selectively variable (by passing through the openings (7) (para [0047]).
In re. claim 6, Roger teaches a method comprising:operatively connecting the harness assembly of claim 1 to a tree (para [0003]); and moving the lower panel independently of the upper panel by sliding the first and second lower panel loops relative to the third and fourth fastening elements (understood when moving up and down the tree) (para [0003]).
In re. claim 7, Roger teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the upper panel contacts a back during said moving the lower panel (fig. 11); and said lower panel contacts legs or buttocks after said moving of the lower panel (fig. 11).
In re. claim 8, Roger teaches the method of claim 6, further comprising moving the upper panel independently of the lower panel by sliding the first and second upper panel loops relative to the first and second fastening elements (understood by independent connection of upper panel (2) to opening (7)) (figs. 10-11).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 9 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.
Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues Accordingly, the pass-through openings 7 in Roger are configured to have the attachment elements 8 freely slidable through the pass- through openings 7. Nothing in Roger discloses or suggests the pass-through openings 7 being operatively connected to the respective attachment element 8 such that the fastening element is selectively slidable along the attachment element 8.
It is unclear as to the difference between selectively slideable and freely slideable, and the applicant has provided no discussion of what would distinguish an apparatus that is selectively slideable from being freely slideable. Instead, a freely slideable fastening element allows the user to select locations as to which the fastening element is located, i.e. selective. For example, the user of the Roger harness may selectively move the fastening element (7) along the panel loop (8) from the far right position, the far left position, or any position in-between. As the applicant fails to discuss any difference in the terms, the argument is considered non-persuasive.
Regarding claim 3, applicant argues The pass-through openings 7 in Roger have a set size and shape (i.e., size and/or shape of the pass-through openings 7 are not adjustable). Roger is also silent with respect to any significant adjustment of the position of each attachment element 8 within its respective pass-through openings 7.
The examiner notes that claim 3 does not recite an adjustable size opening. 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., an adjustable size opening) are not 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). Therefore, the argument is considered non-persuasive.
Regarding claim 3, applicant argues Accordingly, the contact of each attachment element 8 with surface(s) of its respective pass-through openings 7 would be generally consistent, such that the friction of the attachment elements 8 with the pass-through openings 7 would be constant (i.e., fixed friction amount, non- variable). Nothing in Roger discloses or suggests the pass-through openings 7 being configured to have a friction with the attachment elements 8 that is selectively variable.
The examiner notes that it is well-known that friction increases with additional weight. That is, when the user is hanging from the harness of Roger, it would be much more difficult to move the loops (8) within the openings (7) than when the user was not hanging from the harness. As the friction is selectively adjustable based on the amount of weight supported by the harness, the argument is considered non-persuasive.
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 Christopher D. Hutchens whose telephone number is (571)270-5535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/C.D.H./
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3647
/Christopher D Hutchens/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647