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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Group II shaft/handle device invention in the reply filed on 7/7/2025 remains acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 19 recites “the first cam laterally translates away from the second cam” which is contrary to the disclosure and thus unclear. Note that applicant’s cams are in direct contact with each other in both positions such that they are not “away” from one another in either position. For purposes of applying the prior art to claim 19 elsewhere below, the examiner interprets the claim to regard certain portions of the cams as translating away/toward other certain portions of the cams. See MPEP 2173.03 as quoted below:
See MPEP 2173.03 which states that a claim may be "indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty”.
Claim 20 recites “the first cam laterally translates toward the second cam” which is contrary to the disclosure and thus unclear. Note that applicant’s cams are in direct contact with each other in both positions such that they are not away in either position and thus do not translate “toward” one another between positions. For purposes of applying the prior art to claim 20 elsewhere below, the examiner interprets the claim to regard certain portions of the cams as translating away/toward other certain portions of the cams. See MPEP 2173.03 as quoted above.
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 11-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Fretz US20160068376.
Claim 11. Fretz discloses a disconnection device, comprising: a shaft assembly (261 or 264) having a handle (162, 282 and/or “external actuator coupled to 282), wherein the shaft assembly is disposed within a housing (110, 120), and wherein the handle is configured to rotate the shaft assembly, and wherein the shaft assembly comprises a first position (a first rotational position of 261/264 such as to cause 252/254 to be one of “interlocked”, para.0049 or “decoupled”, para.0050) and a second position (a second rotational position of 261/264 such as to cause 252/254 to be the other of “interlocked”, para.0049 or “decoupled”, para.0050) based on a position of the handle, and wherein the shaft assembly includes a first cam (one of 252 and 254) biased against a second cam (other of 252 and 254), and wherein the disconnection device is mounted to a fairlead (150) of a winch (70).
Claim 12. The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the housing comprises a first housing portion (one of 110 or 120) removably coupled to a second housing portion (other of 110 or 120).
Claim 13. The disconnection device of claim 12, wherein the first housing portion and the second housing portion are removably coupled via a plurality of securing members (297, 299, and/or “bolts, rivets or screws”, para.0020).
Claim 14. The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the shaft assembly (264) engages a drive shaft (262) in the first position, and wherein the shaft assembly is disengaged (“decoupled”, para.0050) from the drive shaft in the second position.
Claim 15. The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the shaft assembly translates in a first direction (first direction to cause one of “interlocked”, para.0049; or “decoupled”, para.0050) or a second direction (second direction to cause the other of “interlocked”, para.0049 or “decoupled”, para.0050) based on the rotation of the handle.
Claim 16. The disconnection device of claim 11 further comprising a base portion (base portion of 252, see para.0050) coupled to the housing, wherein, responsive to a force, the base portion is configured to laterally translate in relation to the housing, wherein the force exceeds a predetermined threshold, and wherein lateral translation of the base portion causes the shaft assembly (264) to disengage (via decoupling of 252/254) a drive shaft (262).
Claim 17. The disconnection device of claim 16 further comprising a spring (256), wherein, responsive to the force, the base portion is configured to compress (see para.0050) the spring and laterally translate in relation to the housing.
Claim 19 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections). The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the first cam (252) is configured to rotate in response to the handle rotating, and wherein the first cam laterally translates away from the second cam (left-most portion of 252 as seen in fig.4 translates away from right-most portion of 254), causing the shaft assembly (264) to engage a drive shaft (262) in the first position (“interlocked”, para.0049).
Claim 20 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections). The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the first cam (252) is configured to rotate in response to the handle rotating, and wherein the first cam laterally translates toward the second cam (left-most portion of 252 as seen in fig.4 translates toward right-most portion of 254), causing the shaft assembly to disengage a drive shaft (262) in the second position (“decoupled”, para.0050).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 11-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie US8157077 in view of Fretz US20160068376.
Claim 11. Xie discloses a disconnection device (fig.6), comprising: a shaft assembly (6) having a handle (2), wherein the shaft assembly is disposed within a housing (7), and wherein the handle is configured to rotate the shaft assembly, and wherein the shaft assembly comprises a first position (one of the position in fig.2 or position in fig.3) and a second position (other of the position in fig.2 or position in fig.3) based on a position of the handle, and wherein the shaft assembly includes a first cam (one of 21 or 31) biased (via 5) against a second cam (other of 21 or 31), and wherein the disconnection device is mounted to a winch (see written description of “winch” for winding rope). Fretz teaches that it was extremely well known in the winch art for a winch to have a mounted fairlead (150) for the purpose of guiding the winding of the rope. Therefore, 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 Xie winch as such. The resulting modification would necessarily result in the disconnection device being mounted to the resulting fairlead via mounting to the winch (e.g., the disconnection device being mounted to the resulting fairlead at least via the winch).
Claim 12. The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the housing comprises a first housing portion (7) removably coupled to a second housing portion (8).
Claim 13. The disconnection device of claim 12, wherein the first housing portion and the second housing portion are removably coupled via a plurality of securing members (7, 8, 81).
Claim 14. The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the shaft assembly engages a drive shaft (8 and/or unlabeled central horizontal shaft in figs. 5 and 6) in the first position (fig.3 position), and wherein the shaft assembly is disengaged from the drive shaft in the second position (fig.2 position).
Claim 15. The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the shaft assembly translates in a first direction (one of up or down between fig.2 and fig.3 positions) or a second direction (other of up or down between fig.2 and fig.3 positions) based on the rotation of the handle.
Claim 16. The disconnection device of claim 11 further comprising a base portion (1 and/or base portion of 6) coupled (via 3 and 73) to the housing, wherein, responsive to a force, the base portion is configured to laterally translate in relation to the housing, wherein the force exceeds a predetermined threshold, and wherein lateral translation of the base portion causes the shaft assembly to disengage a drive shaft (8 and/or unlabeled central horizontal shaft as seen in figs. 3 and 5).
Claim 17. The disconnection device of claim 16 further comprising a spring (5), wherein, responsive to the force, the base portion is configured to compress (see fig. 2) the spring and laterally translate in relation to the housing.
Claim 19 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections). The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the first cam (21) is configured to rotate in response to the handle rotating, and wherein the first cam laterally translates away from the second cam (lower portion of 21 translates away from upper portion of 31), causing the shaft assembly to engage a drive shaft (8 and/or unlabeled central horizontal shaft as seen in figs. 3 and 6) in the first position (position seen in figs.3 and 6).
Claim 20 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections). The disconnection device of claim 11, wherein the first cam (21) is configured to rotate in response to the handle rotating, and wherein the first cam laterally translates toward the second cam (lower portion of 21 translates toward upper portion of 31), causing the shaft assembly to disengage a drive shaft (8 and/or unlabeled central horizontal shaft as seen in figs. 2 and 5) in the second position (position seen in figs. 2 and 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant arguments have been carefully considered but are moot in view to the new grounds/art applied above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on the attached PTO-892 and not relied upon above is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as follows:
Regarding applicant’s claim 19, Telford US5261646 shows a disconnection device (10) wherein the first cam (40) is configured to rotate in response to the handle (17 and/or 29) rotating, and wherein the first cam laterally translates away from the second cam (30), causing the shaft assembly to engage (via 22) a drive shaft (12) in the first position. See col.3, ll.43-53, which states “the cam follower 40 can move axially away from cam 30 through compression of the wave spring 46…”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618