DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed April 20, 2023 in which claims 1-22 are presented for examination.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the Figures 18-25 improperly contain only black and white photographs.
It is noted that black and white photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. In order photographs to properly replace line drawings, the photographs or photomicrographs must show the invention more clearly than they can be done by India ink drawings and otherwise comply with the rules concerning such drawings. Black and white photographs submitted in lieu of ink drawings must comply with 37 CFR 1.84(b). There is no requirement for a petition or petition fee, and only one set of photographs is required. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1). To be acceptable, such photographs must be of sufficient quality so that all details in the photographs are reproducible in the printed patent. If several photographs are used to make one sheet of drawings, the photographs must be contained on a single sheet.
Photographs or photomicrograph printed on sensitized paper are acceptable as drawings, in lieu of India ink drawings, as are photographic images submitted via EFS-Web, to illustrate inventions which are incapable of being accurately or adequately depicted by India ink drawings, e.g., electrophoresis gels, blots, (e.g., immunological, western, Southern, and northern), autoradiographs, cell cultures (stained and unstained), histological tissue cross sections (stained and unstained), animals, plants, in vivo imaging, thin layer chromatography plates, crystalline structures, metallurgical microstructures, textile fabrics, grain structures and, in a design patent application, ornamental effects. See MPEP 608.02.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because reference numeral 87 points to different elements in Figures 18 and 19 versus Figure 21.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “rack 83” (see at least para. 0044 of the specification).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “side wall 89” (see at least para. 0045 of the specification).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “87” has been used to designate both “lock bar” and “face” (see at least paras. 0044 and 0045 of the specification).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “rack” as recited in claim 18 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 5 recites the limitation “a linear mount,” which upon information and belief should be amended to recite “a liner mount.”
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following minor informalities: Lines 8-9 recite the limitation “so that an angle between the top platform and the base platform are adjustable,” which should be amended to recite “so that an angle between the top platform and the base platform is adjustable” for grammatical purposes.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-15 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by USPN 12,310,865 Stevenson.
To claim 1, Stevenson discloses a device to assist donning of a prosthetic liner (see Figures 1-25; col. 4, line 63 – col. 8, line 27), said device comprising:
a holder device configured to removably receive the prosthetic liner (28) (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 14-16; col. 5, lines 47-65), comprising:
a base (26) (see Figures 1 and 9; col. 4, line 63 – col. 5, line 18);
a plurality of elongate fingers (12) arranged concentrically about a central space (16) (see especially Figures 1 and 13; col. 5, lines 35-65), each said finger comprising:
a lower end (30) pivotably attached to said base (see Figures 1-3; col. 5, lines 19-34); and
an upper end (38) (see Figures 1-3; col. 5, lines 19-34);
wherein each said upper end of each said finger is elastically connected to two adjacent said fingers thereby permitting said fingers to move radially outwardly and inwardly away from and toward said central space (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; elastically connected via elastic member 22).
To claim 2, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said finger comprises a hinge (18) acting between said finger and said base (see Figures 1 and 9; col. 5, lines 4-46).
To claim 3, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said finger comprises:
a lower portion (78) which includes said lower end (see Figure 17; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23);
an upper portion (74) which includes said upper end (see Figure 17; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23);
a hinge (76) attaching said upper portion to said lower portion, said hinge being positioned between said lower and upper ends and oriented to permit motion of each said finger radially toward and away from said central space (see Figure 17; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23).
To claim 4, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein said hinge is positioned at a mid-point of each said finger (see Figure 17; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23).
To claim 5, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said finger comprises a roller (72) positioned proximate said upper end, each said roller having an axis of rotation oriented transversely to a longitudinal axis of said finger (see Figures 17-18; col. 7, lines 7-14).
To claim 6, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said roller has a cylindrical shape (see Figures 17-18; col. 7, lines 7-14).
To claim 7, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said finger comprises a plurality of rollers, said rollers being positioned in spaced relation lengthwise along said finger, each said roller having an axis of rotation oriented transversely to a longitudinal axis of said finger (see Figures 17-18; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23).
To claim 8, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said roller has a cylindrical shape (see Figures 17-18; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23).
To claim 9, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said finger comprises a respective barrel positioned proximate said upper end, each said barrel defining a respective bore there through, each said bore being concentric with a respective axis oriented transversely to a longitudinal axis of each said finger; wherein an elastic member (22) extends through each said bore, said elastic member elastically connecting said upper ends of said fingers to one another (col. 5, lines 47-65).
To claim 10, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein said elastic member is substantially continuous (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; col. 6, lines 28-41).
To claim 11, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein said elastic member comprises an elastic core surrounded by a braided sheath (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; col. 6, lines 28-41).
To claim 12, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said finger comprises a respective barrel positioned proximate said hinge, each said barrel defining a respective bore there through, each said bore being concentric with a respective axis oriented transversely to a longitudinal axis of each said finger; wherein an elastic member extends through each said bore, said elastic member elastically connecting said fingers to one another between said upper and lower ends thereof (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; col. 6, lines 28-41).
To claim 13, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein said elastic member is substantially continuous (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; col. 6, lines 28-41).
To claim 14, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein said elastic member comprises an elastic core surrounded by a braided sheath (see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; col. 6, lines 28-41).
To claim 15, Stevenson further discloses a device wherein each said barrel is integrally formed with a respective one of said hinges (see Figure 17; col. 6, line 55 – col. 7, line 23; see especially Figures 1, 9, and 13; col. 5, lines 47-65; col. 6, lines 28-41).
To claim 22, Stevenson further discloses a kit further comprising at least one of the prosthetic liners (28) (see Figures 1, 9, and 13-16; col. 6, lines 16-41).
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 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stevenson (as applied to claim 1, above) in view of USPN 5,806,729 Ramon.
To claim 16, Stevenson discloses a device as recited in claim 1, above.
Stevenson does not disclose a device further comprising: a base platform; a top platform that is pivotably secured to the base platform; and a liner mount disposed on a top surface of the top platform that is configured to removably secure the holder device to the top platform, wherein an angle defined between the top platform and the base platform is adjustable.
However, Ramon teaches a donning aid device comprising further comprising: a base platform; a top platform that is pivotably secured to the base platform; and a liner mount disposed on a top surface of the top platform that is configured to removably secure the holder device to the top platform, wherein an angle defined between the top platform and the base platform is adjustable (see Figures 1-6; col. 3, line 16 – col. 4, line 51).
Stevenson and Ramon teach analogous inventions in the field of donning aids. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the device of Stevenson to include a stand as taught by Ramon because Ramon teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows the device to be adjusted to different angles depending on the desired usage of the device by a user (see Figures 5 and 6).
To claim 17, the modified invention of Stevenson (i.e., Stevenson in view of Ramon, as detailed above) further teaches a device wherein the stand further comprises: an angle bracket comprising: a bottom arm having a distal end pivotably secured to a top surface of the base platform; and a top arm having a distal end pivotably secured to a bottom surface of the top platform; wherein a proximal end of the bottom arm and a proximal end of the top arm are pivotably connected so that an angle between the top platform and the base platform is adjustable (see Figures 1-6 and col. 3, line 16 – col. 4, line 51 of Ramon).
To claim 18, the modified invention of Stevenson (i.e., Stevenson in view of Ramon, as detailed above) further teaches a device wherein the angle bracket further comprises: an angle arm having a first end and a second end, the first end being pivotably secured to the top arm; a lock block including a lock bar, the lock block being pivotably secured to the second end of the angle arm; a rack formed by a plurality of teeth disposed on a top edge of the bottom arm, wherein the lock block is slidable along the bottom arm, and lock bar is selectively engageable with a selected one of gaps defined between adjacent teeth of the rack (see Figures 1-6 and col. 3, line 16 – col. 4, line 51 of Ramon).
To claim 19, the modified invention of Stevenson (i.e., Stevenson in view of Ramon, as detailed above) further teaches a device wherein: the stand further comprises a substantially cylindrical liner mount extending outwardly from the top surface of the top panel; and the base of the holder device defines a mounting aperture that is configured to slidably receive the liner mount therein (see Figures 1-6 and col. 3, line 16 – col. 4, line 51 of Ramon).
To claim 20, the modified invention of Stevenson (i.e., Stevenson in view of Ramon, as detailed above) further teaches a device wherein the liner mount further comprises at least one mounting slot, the mounting aperture includes at least one mounting tab extending radially-inwardly therefrom, and the at least one mounting tab is slidably receivable in the at least one mounting slot (see Figures 1-6 and col. 3, line 16 – col. 4, line 51 of Ramon).
To claim 21, the modified invention of Stevenson (i.e., Stevenson in view of Ramon, as detailed above) further teaches a device further comprising a pair of elongate handles that extend outwardly from a top surface of the base of the holder device on opposing sides of the mounting aperture (see Figures 1-6 and col. 3, line 16 – col. 4, line 51 of Ramon).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Additional donning aids analogous to the instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRIFFIN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-0546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Alissa Tompkins can be reached at (571) 272-3425. 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.
/F Griffin Hall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732