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 .
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)(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.
(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, 2, 4-9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Novotny et al. in US Publication 2021/0220680.
Regarding Claim 1, Novotny teaches a fall protection system comprising: an absorber assembly comprising an absorber body (115), the absorber body defining a nose portion (210) and a buffer portion (A, see below), wherein the buffer portion is disposed adjacent to the nose portion on the absorber body, wherein the absorber body is configured to transition from a non-deformed state (Fig. 1) to a deformed state (“permanently deform” – see paragraph 0025) when the absorber body is subject to one or more loading forces, wherein the nose portion is configured to engage with a notch (125) of a rail when the absorber body transitions from the no-deformed state to the deformed state and wherein the buffer portion is configured to deflect against the rail (300) when the absorber body transitions from the non-deformed state to the deformed state; and a shuttle body (140) configured to secure the fall protection system to the rail.
PNG
media_image1.png
546
692
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Novotny teaches that the absorber body further defines one or more holes (B) configured to distribute the one or more loading forces throughout the absorber assembly during deformation.
Regarding Claim 4, Novotny teaches (see Fig. 2) that the absorber body comprises a single integrated piece.
Regarding Claim 5, Novotny teaches a brake (205) disposed on an underside of the fall protection system, and wherein the buffer portion is disposed adjacent to the brake when the absorber body is in the non-deformed state.
Regarding Claim 6, Novotny teaches that the absorber assembly comprises a shock absorber (185).
Regarding Claim 7, Novotny teaches an attachment mechanism (135) configured to secure the fall protection system to a user, wherein the attachment mechanism is operably engaged with the absorber assembly by a fastening device (C).
Regarding Claim 8, Novotny teaches that the attachment mechanism comprises a carabiner.
Regarding Claim 9, Novotny teaches that the attachment mechanism comprises a base (D) configured to swivel such that the attachment mechanism is rotatable relative to the absorber assembly.
Regarding Claim 11, Novotny teaches that the absorber body defines a line of deformation (E) along which the absorber body is configured to transition from the non-deformed state to the deformed state.
Regarding Claim 12 Novotny teaches (see Fig. 3B) that the nose portion is configured to lock with a notch of the rail when the absorber body is in the deformed state.
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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novotny as applied to Claim 1 above. Novotny is silent on the exact force loaded on the device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the device such that the loading force is a force ranging up to 16kilo-Newtons in order to provide for the safe use by a person who, when falling, produces such a force to the device, since such a change would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized a being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novotny as applied to Claim 12 above in view of Roth et al. in US Publication 2016/0059055. Novotny is silent on the nature of the rail. Roth teaches a fall protection system including a rail (120) integrated into a ladder (see Claim 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Novotny by using it on a rail that is part of a ladder as taught by Roth in order to protect the user when on a ladder.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the applicant’s arguments that Novotny fails to teach the nose engaging with a notch in the rail: please see rejections set forth above amended to reflect claim amendments. The nose portion 210 of Novotny is engaged with the rail notch 125 when the device is transitioned from the non-deformed to the deformed state. Likewise with respect to the Claim 12: when in the deformed state, the nose portion engages with the notch when in the deformed state.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
NOAH C. HAWK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/Noah Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636