DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/26/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 4-10, 12-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackburn US 796797 in view of Trimborn US 10211565.
Regarding claim 1, Blackburn discloses a device comprising:
a strap member (10) wherein the strap member is configured to extend around a circumference of an elongate article 6;
a cylindrical tensioning member (headed bolt 7) comprising:
a first end (top in figure 2), and a second end (bottom in figure 2), wherein the tensioning member includes a threaded surface formed on a length of the tensioning member;
a first nut (9, lower nut) comprising a first threaded bore extending through the first nut;
a second nut (8, upper nut) comprising a second threaded bore extending through the
second nut; and
wherein the tensioning member is configured to extend through the first nut by threading into the first threaded bore of the first nut to enable the second end to directly contact a surface of the elongate article and place the elongate article in electrical connection with the tensioning member, and
a position of the tensioning member in the first nut being adjustable in a direction substantially perpendicular to the elongate article to apply a tension force between the strap member and the elongate article by threading the tensioning member in a respective direction in the first threaded bore;
the second nut configured to be installed onto the tensioning member and the second nut is configured to act on the first nut to retain a position of the tensioning member relative to the first nut.
Blackburn discloses that the second nut 8 is a standard nut rather than a cap nut and that the bolt 7 is a headed bolt rather than a stud bolt (i.e., a bolt having no head, also known as a threaded rod).
Trimborn discloses the use of a headed bolt 28 (figure 14), analogous to Blackburn bolt 7. Trimborn discloses alternately the use of a well-known non-headed bolt 37 (figures 15-18, a.k.a., stud bolt or threaded rod) and well-known cap nut (38, 39) on the non-headed bolt 37.
It would have been obvious to replace the Blackburn headed bolt 7 and standard second nut 8 with a stud bolt (Trimborn at 37) and cap nut (Trimborn 38, 39) as taught in Trimborn. The substituted components and their functions were known in the art. One with ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ.2d 1385 (2007). Such a replacement would better protect the bolt from environmental damage as was known in the art and prevent accidental snagging of foreign objects onto the bolt as was known in the art.
The result would inherently mean that the tensioning member (stud bolt) extends only partway through the second nut (cap nut) as taught in Trimborn.
PNG
media_image1.png
1137
926
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Per claim 4 the second nut applies a compressive force onto the first nut to retain the position of the tensioning member in the first nut.
Per claim 5, the strap member comprises:
a first flange (labeled F1 in annotated figure 2 above),
a second flange (labeled F2),
a central portion (labeled CP),
a first aperture (labeled A1) located on the first flange, and
a second aperture (labeled A2) located on the second flange,
wherein the first flange and the second flange extend from opposing ends of the central portion.
Per claim 6, the tensioning member is configured to extend through the first aperture and the second aperture to retain the strap member around the elongate article.
Per claim 7, the second nut applies a compressive force onto the first nut to retain the position of the tensioning member relative to the first nut;
wherein the first flange and the second flange are located between the first nut and the second nut.
Per claim 8, the strap member further comprises:
a third aperture 11 located on the second flange adjacent the second aperture,
wherein the tensioning member is configured to extend through the first aperture and the third aperture to retain the strap member around the elongate article.
Per claim 9, the central portion of the strap member is configured to substantially extend around the circumference of the elongate article until the first flange is in contact with the second flange along adjacent sides.
Per claim 10 the first nut further comprising:
one or more threads formed on an inner surface of the bore extending through the first nut,
wherein one or more threads of the tensioning member engages the one or more threads of the first nut.
Per claim 12, as set out regarding claim 1, Trimborn discloses a cap nut.
Per claim 13, the tensioning member comprises a set screw (i.e., a screw for adjusting or clamping parts of a machine, Google definition).
Regarding claim 14, Blackburn discloses inherently or explicitly a method comprising:
installing a strap member (10) around an elongate article 6;
positioning a tensioning member 7 to extend through a first flange (labeled F1 above) and a second flange (labeled F2 above) of the strap member;
installing the tensioning member into a first nut 9 to extend through the first nut and to directly contact a surface of the elongate article;
applying a tension force between the strap member and the elongate article; and
installing a second nut 8 onto the tensioning member to enable the second nut to act on the first nut. To the extent that any step is arguably not inherent or explicit in the disclosure, such step would have been obvious to achieve the configuration shown in figure 5 as a matter of routine experimentation.
Blackburn discloses that the second nut 8 is a standard nut rather than a cap nut and that the bolt 7 is a headed bolt rather than a stud bolt (i.e., a bolt having no head, also known as a threaded rod).
Trimborn discloses the use of a headed bolt 28 (figure 14), analogous to Blackburn bolt 7. Trimborn discloses alternately the use of a well-known non-headed bolt 37 (figures 15-18, a.k.a., stud bolt or threaded rod) and well-known cap nut (38, 39) on the non-headed bolt 37.
It would have been obvious to replace the Blackburn headed bolt 7 and standard second nut 8 with a stud bolt (Trimborn at 37) and cap nut (Trimborn 38, 39) as taught in Trimborn. The substituted components and their functions were known in the art. One with ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ.2d 1385 (2007). Such a replacement would better protect the bolt from environmental damage as was known in the art and prevent accidental snagging of foreign objects onto the bolt as was known in the art.
The result would inherently mean that the tensioning member (stud bolt) extends only partway through the second nut (cap nut) as taught in Trimborn.
Per claim 16, Blackburn inherently discloses positioning a tensioning member to extend through a first flange and a second flange further comprises positioning the tensioning member to extend through a first aperture on the first flange and a second aperture on the second flange.
Per claim 17, Blackburn inherently discloses positioning a tensioning member to extend through a first flange and a second flange further comprises positioning the tensioning member to extend through a first aperture on the first flange and a third aperture on the second flange.
Regarding claim 18, Blackburn discloses an apparatus comprising:
a strap member (10), comprising:
a first flange (labeled F1 above) comprising: a first aperture (labeled A1 above),
a second flange (labeled F2 above) comprising: a second aperture (labeled A2 above), and
a central portion (labeled CP above), wherein the central portion is configured to substantially extend around a circumference of an elongate article until the first flange is in contact with the second flange along adjacent sides;
a cylindrical tensioning member 7 comprising a first end and a second end and including a threaded surface formed along a length of the tensioning member;
a first nut 9 comprising a threaded bore:
a second nut 8; and
wherein the tensioning member is configured to extend through the first nut to enable the second end to contact a surface of the elongate article and place the elongate article in electrical connection with the tensioning member, and a position of the tensioning member in the first nut being adjustable in a direction substantially perpendicular to the elongate article to apply a tension force between the strap member and the elongate article;
wherein the second nut is located at the first end of the tensioning member and the second is configured to act on the first nut to retain a position of the tensioning member in the first nut.
The Blackburn second nut is not a cap nut.
Trimborn discloses the use of a headed bolt 28 (figure 14), analogous to Blackburn bolt 7, and Trimborn discloses alternately the use of a non-headed bolt 27 (figure 15) and cap nut 38 on the non-headed bolt 37. Trimborn discloses that the cap nut is used to compress the cable lug 5 against the underlying conductor 11 (analogous to the Blackburn strap). It would have been obvious to replace the Blackburn headed bolt 7 with a non-headed bolt (Trimborn at 37) and cap nut (Trimborn at 38) as taught in Trimborn. The substituted components and their functions were known in the art. One with ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ.2d 1385 (2007). Such a replacement would better protect the bolt from environmental damage as was known in the art and prevent accidental snagging of foreign objects onto the bolt as was known in the art.
The result would inherently mean that the tensioning member (stud bolt) extends only partway through the second nut (cap nut) as taught in Trimborn.
Per claim 19 the tensioning member is configured to extend through the first aperture and the second aperture;
wherein the first nut and the cap nut retain the strap member on the tensioning member and around the elongate article.
Per claim 20, the second flange further comprises:
a third aperture located adjacent the second aperture; and
wherein the tensioning member is configured to extend through the first aperture and the second aperture to retain the strap member on the tensioning member and around the elongate article;
wherein a diameter of an opening formed by the strap member is inherently configured to be adjustable based on the tensioning member extending through the second aperture or the third aperture.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Blackburn and Trimborn in view of Polidori US 5616036. Blackburn discloses a ground wire 12 between the first and second nuts rather than a compression lug. Polidori discloses a compression lug 60 located between the first nut 56 and the second nut 64 and the tensioning member 50 extends through the compression lug, wherein the compression lug is connected to a grounded electrical conductor 18 (see also Trimborn lug 5).
It would have been obvious to substitute well known wire connectors such as the Polidori compression lug 60 (see also Trimborn lug 5) and wire 18 (see also Trimborn conductor 1) taught in Polidori for the ground wire 12 taught in Blackburn. The reason for doing so would have been to facilitate a more secure connection between the ground wire and tension unit as taught in Polidori. The substituted components and their functions were known in the art. One with ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element for another and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ.2d 1385 (2007).
Per claim 3, given the substation set out above, the Blackburn tensioning member places the elongate article in electrical connection with the compression lug and the grounded electrical conductor as taught in Polidori.
Claims 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackburn and Trimborn in view of Sachs US 4664469.
Regarding claim 11, Blackburn does not disclose that the first nut comprises a press nut or a rivet nut. Sach discloses that the first nut 24 comprises a press nut or a rivet nut. It would have been obvious to replace the Blackburn first nut with a press or rivet nut as taught in Sachs. The reason would have been to secure the nut to the strap as taught in Sachs.
Regarding claim 15, Blackburn does not disclose that the first nut comprises a press nut or a rivet nut. Sach discloses that the first nut 24 comprises a press nut or a rivet nut. It would have been obvious to replace the Blackburn first nut with a press or rivet nut as taught in Sachs. The reason would have been to secure the nut to the strap as taught in Sachs.
Given this substitution, Sachs inherently discloses that the first nut is attached to the first flange by inserting the first nut into a first aperture of the first flange; and applying a clamping force onto the first nut to mechanically deform the first nut in the first aperture because the nut is riveted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered. As set out above, Trimborn discloses the use cap nut such that the threaded stud bolt does not extend through the cap nut. As set out above, the use of a cap nut and stud bolt in place of a standard nut and headed bolt would have been obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROSS N GUSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2005. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday 8:00AM – 5PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Koehler, can be reached at (571)272-3560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ROSS N GUSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834