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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species Figures 1-6B with stopper 100A and 100B in the reply filed on January 7, 2026 is acknowledged. In the reply applicant identified all claims 1-20 as reading on, or generic to the elected species.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that “there would not be a serious burden to the Examiner to examine all the species together” and that “employing a multifaceted search strategy covering different fields, classes, and subject matter cannot be considered a serious burden but instead is a part of the normal burden of examining patent application.”
This is not found persuasive because the distinct features and construction of each of the identified shuttle stopper species require their own consideration in different fields of search, and even when overlapping in classification prior art applicable to one species may not be applicable to the other, resulting in the examiner performing more than one examination, essentially requiring a separate search and examination for each of the species. When reasonably obvious variants of embodiments are presented in one application a restriction/election may not be necessary and it may be appropriate to examiner all together. However, that is not always the situation, especially when features like that between the immediate species are present; i.e. divergent in both barrier construction and attachment features.
For at least these reasons the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3, line 2, it appears that “configured intersect” should be “configured to intersect”
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the shuttle" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While claim 7 incorporates “the shuttle stopper of claim 1”, there is no shuttle positively claimed in claim 1, nor is there one claimed in lines 1-3 of claim 7.
It appears claim 7, line 4 should read “a shuttle, wherein the shuttle comprises a pin,….”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Garness et al. (US 12,005,564).
Garness et al. disclose:
1. A shuttle stopper (20, figure 8) configured to be attached to a rail (70) to facilitate alignment of a shuttle with the rail (intended use), the shuttle stopper (20) comprising:
an alignment portion (see annotated figure 9 below) defining an alignment surface (42, see below) configured to face inwardly towards a center axis of the rail (longitudinal axis of rail 70, see below), the alignment surface (42) defining a first distance to the center axis (see annotated figure 8 below); and
a safety portion (see annotated figure 9 below) defining a safety surface (38, figure 8) configured to face inwardly towards the center axis of the rail on an opposite side of the center axis from the alignment surface (see below), the safety surface defining a second distance to the center axis (see below),
wherein the second distance is greater than the first distance (see below), and
wherein the shuttle stopper (20), including the alignment portion (see below) and the safety portion (see below), is configured to rigidly attach to the rail (figure 8).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
429
677
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2. The shuttle stopper of claim 1, wherein the shuttle stopper further comprises an attachment portion (22, see above) configured to secure the shuttle stopper to the rail (see above).
3. The shuttle stopper of claim 1, wherein the alignment surface (42) and the safety surface (38) are configured intersect a height of a pin of the shuttle the height configured to be defined perpendicular to a direction of travel of the shuttle (intended use/no shuttle positively claimed; configuration capable).
4. The shuttle stopper of claim 1, wherein the second distance is configured to be greater than a pin distance of the shuttle (intended use, no shuttle claimed), such that, the pin distance is measured from the center axis of the rail to a top of a pin of the shuttle (intended use/ configuration capable).
5. The shuttle stopper of claim 1, wherein the safety surface (38) is configured to permit a pin of the shuttle to pass inwardly of the safety surface in an instance in which the shuttle is in a correctly installed position on the rail (intended use/no shuttle positively claimed; configuration capable).
6. The shuttle stopper of claim 1, wherein the alignment portion (42) is configured to engage with at least a portion of the shuttle in an instance in which the shuttle is positioned backwards on the rail (intended use/no shuttle positively claimed; configuration capable).
8. A shuttle stopper assembly (figure 8) configured to be attached to a rail (70, figure 8) to facilitate alignment of a shuttle (intended use) with the rail, the shuttle stopper assembly comprising:
a shuttle stopper (20, figure 8) comprising:
an alignment portion (see below) defining an alignment surface (42) configured to face inwardly towards a center axis of the rail (see below), the alignment surface (42) defining a first distance to the center axis (see below);
a safety portion (see below) defining a safety surface (38) configured to face inwardly towards the center axis of the rail on an opposite side of the center axis from the alignment surface (see below), the safety surface defining a second distance to the center axis (see below),
wherein the second distance is greater than the first distance (see below), and
wherein the shuttle stopper (20), including the alignment portion and the safety portion, is configured to rigidly attach to the rail (see below); and
the rail (70), wherein the rail defines the center axis (see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
429
677
media_image2.png
Greyscale
9. The shuttle stopper assembly of claim 8, wherein the shuttle stopper (20) further comprises an attachment portion (22) configured to secure the shuttle stopper to the rail (see above).
10. The shuttle stopper assembly of claim 9, wherein the attachment portion (22) is further configured to define an axis of the shuttle stopper (in the same way the applicant’s does -by creating a channel between 38 and 42 by its spacing) wherein the axis is parallel to the center axis of the rail (the pass through channel created between 38 and 42 is parallel to the axis of rail 70), and wherein the alignment surface (42) and safety surface (38) each define planes parallel to the axis of the shuttle stopper (in that the planes of surfaces 38 and 42 are infinite along the length of the axis of 70).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-20 are allowed.
Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection above and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. This indication of allowability for claim 7 is with the interpretation that claim 7 is to positively claim a shuttle, as noted above.
Claims 11-16 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE whose telephone number is (571)272-6289. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM-4:00PM.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
COLLEEN M. CHAVCHAVADZE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3634
/COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634