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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 5th, 2025 has been entered. Claim 5 is cancelled. Claims 1-4 and 6 remain pending in the application. Claim 1 is currently amended. Applicant’s amendments to the claim has overcome the objection to the claim and 35 USC § 103 rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed October 1st, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, Ln. 29, for clarity, Examiner suggests “to slow the reeling” should read --in order to allow the brake to decrease reel speed--
Claim 1, Ln. 32, “to move the brake away from the ratcheted wheels not to slow the reeling” does not positively recite the functional limitation of brake position on reeling speed. Examiner suggests “not to slow the reeling” should read --in order to prevent the brake from decreasing reel speed--
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 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 1, Ln. 30-32, “the handle is lifted far from the brake to provide a user with easy and direct access to the brake to move the brake away from the ratcheted wheels not to slow the reeling” is vague and indefinite. The terms “far” and “easy” are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “far” and “easy” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear how far the handle must be lifted from the brake to meet the claim. It is unclear which requirements must be met, and to which degree they must be met, for the access to the brake to be considered easy as defined by the claim.
Claims 2-4 and 6 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
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 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 7,503,736) and further in view of Huck (US 7,789,603) and Breeden (US 7,874,047).
PNG
media_image1.png
687
538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. Annotated Figure 2 from Chen
Regarding Claim 1, Chen, Figures 1-13 and annotated Figure 1 above, teaches a tie-down 10 comprising:
a frame 12 comprising two lateral plates 14 each of which comprises a slit 52, an orifice 100, a bore 101 between the orifice and the slit 52 and an edge 102 formed with a manual-mode section 63;
a reel 200 comprising a tube 24 and two ratcheted wheels 16 connected to the tube 24;
a strap 30 wound around the tube 24;
a retaining detent 50 movable along the slits 52 of the lateral plates 14 and normally in elastic engagement with the ratcheted wheels 16 (See Chen, Col. 3, Ln. 32-34);
a brake 60 pivotally connected to the frame 12 and normally in elastic contact with the ratcheted wheels 16 (See Chen, Col. 3, Ln. 40-44);
a handle 42 formed with two cams 80 each of which comprises a slit 103; and
a driving detent 44 movable along the slits 103 of the cams 80 and operable for elastic contact with the edges 102 of the lateral plates 14 so that two portions 66 of the driving detent 44 are moved along the edges 102 of the lateral plates 14 when the handle 42 is switched between a manual mode 36 and an automatic mode 38 (See Chen, Col. 3, Ln. 51-56);
wherein in the manual mode 36, the handle 42 is pivoted back and forth on the base to move the driving detent 44 back and forth along the manual-mode sections 63 of the edges 102 of the lateral plates 14 to allow the driving detent 44 and the retaining detent 50 to alternately engage with the ratcheted wheels 16 (See Chen, Col. 3, Ln. 5-27) when the brake 60 is in elastic contact with the ratcheted wheels 16 (See Chen, Col. 3, Ln. 40-46);
wherein in the automatic mode 38, the driving detent 44 and the retaining detent 50 are disengaged from the ratcheted wheels 16, leaving the brake 60 in elastic contact with the ratcheted wheels 16 to slow the reeling (See Chen, Col. 3, Ln. 63-66).
Chen teaches all the elements of the tie-down except for the edges of the lateral plates having automatic-mode cutouts which mate with the driving detent during automatic mode, an axle which passes through the bores in the lateral plates and the tube, and the handle being lifted from the brake in the automatic mode.
PNG
media_image2.png
367
358
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2. Annotated Figure 2A from Huck
However, Huck, Figure 1, Figure 8, and annotated Figure 2 above, teaches an edge 71 formed with a manual-mode section 80A and an automatic-mode cutout 74A above the bore 44A;
a first axle 48 inserted in the bores 44A, 44B of the lateral plates 12A, 12B;
a tube 30 for receiving the first axle 48;
wherein in the automatic mode (free-spooling position; See Huck, Col. 10, Ln. 20), the driving detent 142A, 142B is inserted in the automatic-mode cutouts 74A, 74B of the lateral plates 12A, 12B (See Huck, Col. 10, Ln. 34-38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Chen with automatic-mode cutouts and an axle, as taught by Huck, for the purpose of further defining the structure of the device. Chen teaches that the tube is to be mounted on an axis which passes through the bores in the lateral plates which implies that an axle can be used. Chen further teaches a protrusion which keeps the driving detent in place while in automatic mode which implies that a slot or recess can be used for the same purpose and the exact shape of the lateral plate edge is a matter of design choice.
PNG
media_image3.png
385
742
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 3. Annotated Figure 7b from Breeden
Breeden, Figures 1-8 and annotated Figure 3 above, teaches wherein in the automatic mode (non-operational position; See Breeden, Fig. 6b-7b, Col. 8, Ln. 31-51), the handle 32 is lifted far from the brake 86’ to provide a user with easy and direct access to the brake 86’ to move the brake away from the ratcheted wheels 52, 52’ (the free end 90 can be configured to ride upon (e.g., engage) either or both of the side elements 42, 42' or even the ratchet wheels 52, 52', See Breeden, Col. 11, Ln. 23-26) not to slow the reeling (See Breeden, Col. 11, Ln. 46-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Chen with a handle which lifts away from the brake during the automatic mode, as taught by Breeden, for the purpose of increasing safety (i.e., “inhibit[ing] a snapping motion of the webbing 12, hook 15, or the like or to provide various other safety features”) (See Breeden, Col. 10, Ln. 60-62).
Regarding Claim 2, Chen in view of Huck and Breeden are advanced above.
Chen further teaches a second axle 72 for pivotally connecting in the brake 60 to the lateral plates 14.
Regarding Claim 3, Chen in view of Huck and Breeden are advanced above.
Chen further teaches wherein the brake 60 comprises a plate 104 and two lugs 105 extending downward from the plate, wherein each of the lugs 105 comprises a bore 106 for receiving a portion of the second axle 72.
Regarding Claim 4, Chen in view of Huck and Breeden are advanced above.
Chen further teaches wherein the brake 60 further comprises two horns 106 extending forward from the plate 104 to contact the ratcheted wheels 16.
Regarding Claim 6, Chen in view of Huck and Breeden are advanced above.
PNG
media_image4.png
298
512
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 4. Annotated Figure 5 from Chen
Chen, annotated Figure 4 above, teaches a double spring 107 comprising a connective section 108 in contact with the plate 104 and two torque springs 109 each of which comprises a first rectilinear section 110 extending from the connective section 108, a second rectilinear section 111 in contact with the frame 12, and a helical section 112 formed between the first rectilinear section 110 and the second rectilinear section 111.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the objection to the Claims, Applicant has submitted acceptable amendments. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn. However, new claim objections have been raised.
Regarding the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant has amended the claim. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously set forth rejection. Therefore, this rejection has been withdrawn. However, a new ground of rejection has been set forth under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on the amended claim.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Such references include ratchet style strap tensioners with multiple modes of operation and/or braking features.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIFFANY DOMONIQUE JEFFERSON whose telephone number is 571-272-0403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-7:30pm ET.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at 313-446-4858. 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.
/T.D.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654