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 .
Status of Claims
This present office action is responsive to the Application filed on July 27, 2023. As directed, claims 1-20 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 2 recites, “wherein the body is comprised of a foam material” in ln 1-2 which deems to be same limitation of claim 1. Thus, claim 2 does not further limit the subject matter of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
(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, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hateley (US 20110240076 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hateley discloses, an invalid stair-climbing assist device (a walking aid 9, Fig 1) comprising: a body (4, Fig 1) comprised of a foam material (¶0015, “The body can be formed of any suitable material such as foamed plastics or any other flexible or rigid plastics”) and a flat bottom surface (a flat bottom surface of 4 as shown Fig 1); and a vertical handle (a crutch 2, Figs 1-2) attached to the body.
Regarding claim 2, Hateley discloses the device of claim 1 as discussed above.
Hateley further discloses, wherein the body is comprised of a foam material (¶0015; as discussed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 4, Hateley discloses the device of claim 1 as discussed above.
Hateley further discloses, wherein the vertical handle is comprised of a grip (a handle of the clutch as shown in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, Hateley discloses, an invalid stair-climbing assist device (a walking aid 9, Fig 1) comprising: a body (4, Fig 1) comprised of a flat bottom surface (a flat bottom surface of 4 as shown Fig 1) and a top surface (a top surface of 4 as shown Fig 1); and a vertical handle (a crutch 2, Figs 1-2) attached to the body.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chi (US 20230240931 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Chi discloses, an invalid stair-climbing assist device (a device 100 of Fig 7) comprising: a body (a body of the device 100 of Fig 7) comprised of a flat bottom surface and a top surface (see annotation below, Fig 7); and a vertical handle attached to the body (a handle 711, 712, 713 attached to the body as shown in Fig 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
651
745
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Chi discloses, a method of using an invalid stair-climbing assist device (Fig 14; ¶0059, “a user utilizing the device 100 to ascend or descend a flight of stairs”), the method comprising the steps of:
providing an invalid stair-climbing assist device (a device 100 of Fig 7) comprised of a body (a body of the device 100 of Fig 7) and a handle attached to the body (a handle 711, 712, 713 attached to the body as shown in Fig 7);
placing a bottom surface of the body on a first top surface of a first stair (a bottom surface of the body is placed on the stair as shown in Fig 14, ¶0059, “the device 100 is placed adjacent to the stairs with a user resting a knee and lower leg on the horizontal top surface 16…the horizontal top surface 16 is substantially parallel to the level”);
placing a knee of a first leg on a body top surface of the body (¶0059, “the device 100 is placed adjacent to the stairs with a user resting a knee and lower leg on the horizontal top surface 16”; placing the knee as shown in Fig 14);
placing a second leg on the first top surface of the first stair (¶0059; placing a leg on the surface of the stair as shown in Fig 14);
lifting the invalid stair climbing assist device upwards and onto a second top surface of a second step via the handle (¶0059-0060, “showing a user utilizing the device 100 to ascend or descend a flight of stairs… preferably, the hand on the same side of the injured leg to lift the device 100 and place it on the next higher stair step”); and
placing the second leg on the second top surface (¶0059-0060, implies that the second leg is on the second top surface once the user has ascended to the next step).
PNG
media_image2.png
651
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim 8-15, and 17-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chi (US 20230240931 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Chi discloses the device of claim 7 as discussed above.
While Chi discloses, the holder which are well known in the art and come in a large number of configurations, including but not limited to clips, buckles, hooks, magnets, sliding adjustors, snaps, hook and loop fasteners, or any other device suitable for holding the strap 702 while also allowing it to be easily adjusted or removed by the user (¶0050), Chi is silent on having a first strap and a second strap.
However, one of the ordinary skills in the art would have recognized that the fastening configuration would have a pair of straps in order to fasten via the clips, buckles, or hook and loop fastener as known configuration in the art in form of design variations without unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chi to include a first strap and a second strap for the purpose of the obvious matter of design choice without unexpected result. See MPEP 2144.04.VI.C.
Regarding claim 9, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Modified Chi discloses, wherein the first strap is comprised of a first fastener (¶0050; Examiner note that one strap would have a form of fastener and another strap would a corresponding form of fastener).
Regarding claim 10, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Modified Chi discloses, wherein the second strap is comprised of a second fastener (¶0050; Examiner note that one strap would have a form of fastener and another strap would a corresponding form of fastener).
Regarding claim 11, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Modified Chi further discloses, wherein the first strap and the second strap are positioned on the top surface (¶0050; 702 as shown in Fig 7).
Regarding claim 12, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, wherein the top surface is comprised of a padding (a knee pad 701, Fig 7).
Regarding claim 13, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, wherein the top surface is comprised of a recessed area (the shape of the knee pad is concave as well as the top surface where the knee pad is placed as shown in Fig 7).
Regarding claim 14, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, wherein the handle is comprised of an opening (see annotation below, Fig 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
651
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Chi discloses the device of claim 8 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, wherein the body is comprised of a plastic material (¶0015, “preferably constructed of a lightweight, strong material, which can be wood, plastic, aluminum, alloy steel or other material”).
Regarding claim 17, Chi discloses the method of claim 16 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, a first strap and a second strap (¶0050, “Such holders 703 are well known in the art and come in a large number of configurations, including but not limited to clips, buckles, hooks, magnets, sliding adjustors, snaps, hook and loop fasteners, or any other device suitable for holding the strap 702 while also allowing it to be easily adjusted or removed by the user”; Examiner notes that the clips, buckles and hooks, magnets, sliding adjustors, snaps, and hook and loop fasteners are known for two strap components in order to connect/fasten as described in ¶0029 of the instant application).
Regarding claim 18, Chi discloses the method of claim 16 as discussed above.
While Chi discloses, the holder which are well known in the art and come in a large number of configurations, including but not limited to clips, buckles, hooks, magnets, sliding adjustors, snaps, hook and loop fasteners, or any other device suitable for holding the strap 702 while also allowing it to be easily adjusted or removed by the user (¶0050), Chi is silent on having a first strap and a second strap.
However, one of the ordinary skills in the art would have recognized that the fastening configuration would have a pair of straps in order to fasten via the clips, buckles, or hook and loop fastener as known configuration in the art in form of design variations without unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chi to include a first strap and a second strap for the purpose of the obvious matter of design choice without unexpected result. See MPEP 2144.04.VI.C.
Modified Chi is silent on the method of using the holding means.
However, one of the ordinary skills in the art would have recognized that the straps would have be placed around the knee of a user and then fastened by clips, buckles, hooks, magnets, sliding adjustors, snaps, or hook and loop fasteners in means to hold the knee in place once it has been placed on the body top surface as shown in Fig 14.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chi to include a step of fastening the first strap to the second strap around the knee of a user once the knee has been placed on the body top surface in order to hold the knee as shown in Fig 14 of Chi by different fastening configuration as matter of design choices. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 19, Chi discloses the method of claim 16 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, wherein the handle is comprised of an opening (see annotation below, Fig 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
651
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Chi discloses the method of claim 19 as discussed above.
Chi further discloses, a step of placing a hand of a user through the opening (a hand of a user is partially within the opening as shown in Fig 14; Examiner notes that the person can hold the handle opposite direction from the bottom side as to lifting using arms in inwards motion; ¶0060-61, “…the hand on the same side of the injured leg to lift the device… one hand by grasping the handle”).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hateley (US 20110240076 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Slusher (US Pat 4062372 A).
Regarding claim 3, Hateley discloses the device of claim 1 as discussed above.
While Hateley discloses that known projecting hand support, typically projecting substantially perpendicular to the support structure (¶0004), Hateley does not specifically discloses, wherein the vertical handle is comprised of a T-shaped handle.
However, Slusher which is analogous art to the claimed invention teaches, wherein the vertical handle is comprised of a T-shaped handle (Col 1, ln 30-35, “Handle 12 is in the form of a closed rectangular shaped ring and enclosed along its upper section 14 by a resilient tube 15”; Fig 1) as it is well-known in the art of crutches, canes, and supports that handle grips are available in a variety of standard shapes - including T-shapes, L-shapes, and off-curve shapes as a design choice.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hateley to include a T-shaped handle as taught by Slusher for the purpose of the obvious matter of design choice without unexpected result. See MPEP 2144.04.VI.C.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hateley (US 20110240076 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Stoller (machine translation of EP 95114088).
Regarding claim 5, Hateley discloses the device of claim 4 as discussed above.
While Hateley discloses, a slip resistant material is rubber for improving grip (¶0023), Hateley is silent on the grip comprising of a non-slip material.
However, Stoller which is analogous art to the claimed invention for the crutch having a foot stand and a handle (abstract), teaches the handle body and a non-slip and non-slip surface structure (Fig 2-5; PG 2, ln 3-8, “a damping element made of elastic material, which is oriented in the circumferential and longitudinal directions… having a non slip and non-slip surface structure) such as rubber (PG 4, ln 1-6) in order to compensate the load from the body weight transferring the load onto the handle for preventing inflammation, blisters or sores (PG 2, ln 9-13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hateley to include the grip comprising of a non-slip material as taught by Stoller in order to compensate the load from the body weight transferring the load onto the handle for preventing inflammation, blisters or sores (PG 2, ln 9-13).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hateley (US 20110240076 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Russo (US 20070000531 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Hateley discloses the device of claim 4 as discussed above.
Hateley does not specifically discloses that the grip is comprised of a texture.
However, Russo which is analogous art to the claimed invention for the walking aid, teaches the grip is comprised of a texture (¶0020, “the handle 47 can be in the form of a replaceable non-slip grip that provides positive traction. It can also have absorptive qualities, which can be useful to cushion the grip for those with arthritic or physically painful conditions affecting gripping”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hateley to include the grip comprising of a non-slip material as taught by Russo in order to provide cushioning effect for those with arthritic or physically painful conditions affecting gripping.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fazulyanov et al. (US 20230233398 A1) is cited for a hybrid hands-free crutch having a base of foam material and a vertical handle as shown in Fig 4.
Smith (US 20170290730 A1) is cited for a combination crutch and knee walker device having cross bar with a rubber hand grip having texture for comfortable gripping (¶0081-82).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEICK JANG whose telephone number is (703)756-4569. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 4:30.
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, Kendra D Carter can be reached at (571) 272-9034. 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.
/J.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/JOSEPH D. BOECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785