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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, Claims 8-14, in the reply filed on 03/15/2024 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-7 and 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected groups, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/15/2024.
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.
Claims 8-14 are 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 8 recites the phrasing “a particular sheave,” and similarly Claim 10 recites the phrasing “a particular sheave,” and it is unclear if the phrasing refers to a specific sheave or to merely either one of the pair of sheaves.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN 201809059), in view of Sessions (US 2020/0256436).
The combination is summarized as follows:
The prior art of (CN 201809059) discloses the general structure of the claim, as mapped below, but discloses the use of a wire rope and does not explicitly detail the support plate (100, 200) of the mechanism, and therefore cannot be said to read on a belt; or on the limitations of claim 10. Sessions teaches the use of a belt with a rectangular cross section (fig. 6); and the mechanical details of a support plate (see fig. 7D). Thereafter, the combination of the prior art would have been obvious to an ordinary practitioner since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.1
The combination meets the claimed limitations as follows (mapping to CN unless explicitly noted):
8. A system for a belt driven block and tackle comprising: a first pair of outer sheaves (outermost pulleys of each 100, 200); a first pair of inner sheaves (innermost pulleys of each 100, 200) positioned between the first pair of outer sheaves (fig. 4 clearly shows the claimed configuration); a support plate (either unilluminated structure of CN 100/200, or detailed structure of Sessions fig. 7D) comprising a first face and a second face, wherein a particular sheave of the first pair of outer sheaves (e.g., outermost pulley of 100) and a particular sheave of the first pair of inner sheaves (e.g., innermost pulley of 100) are mounted to the first face (fig. 4 clearly shows the claimed configuration); and a belt (Sessions: fig. 6) extending from a central point, around the first inner pair of sheaves, around the first outer pair of sheaves, and out of the block and tackle (fig. 4 shows the claimed configuration).
9. The system of claim 8, wherein the block and tackle is a first block and tackle, the system further comprising: a second block and tackle mounted adjacent to the first block and tackle (fig. 5 shows the claimed configuration), the second block and tackle comprising: a second pair of outer sheaves (e.g., 112, 212); and a second pair of inner sheaves (e.g., 122, 222) between the second pair of outer sheaves (112, 212), wherein the belt further extends from the central point, around the second inner pair of sheaves and around the second outer pair of sheaves out of the second block and tackle (fig. 5).
10. The system of claim 9, wherein a particular sheave of the second pair of outer sheaves and a particular sheave of the second pair of inner sheaves are mounted to the second face (Sessions: fig. 7D clearly shows the claimed configuration, where respective pulleys are on either side of unlabeled support plate).
11. The system of claim 8, comprising a first pair of intermediate sheaves (fig. 4 shows intermediate pulleys between outermost and innermost pulleys of each 100, 200), wherein the first pair of intermediate sheaves are positioned between the first pair of outer sheaves, and wherein the first pair of inner sheaves are positioned between the first pair of intermediate sheaves (fig. 4).
12. The system of claim 8, wherein the first pair of outer sheaves and the first pair of inner sheaves each comprise a stack of sheaves of varying diameters (fig. 5).
14. The system of claim 8, wherein the belt has a rectangular cross section (Sessions: fig. 6).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN 201809059) and Sessions (US 2020/0256436), in view of Grunwald (US 1,627,558).
Regarding claim 13, CN does not disclose split sheaves. However, the use of split sheaves in the pulley-arts was old and well-known. For instance, Grunwald teaches the use of split sheaves (figs. 1-3), which were known to provide the benefit of ease of installation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to replace the sheaves of the prior art with split sheaves such as those taught by Grunwald, for the expected advantage of easier assembly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to T. S. FIX whose telephone number is (571)272-8535. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-3p.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 5712707778. 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. SCOTT FIX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
1 KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)