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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application Number: 18/369,748 filed on 9/18/23 has a total of 15 claims pending for examination; there is/are 1 independent claims and 14 dependent claims, all of which are examined below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 (e) with reference to Application Number: 202320391611.8 filed on 3/6/23.
Drawings
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 “plastic fastening member further comprises an arc-shaped mounting groove having a second bottom opening and corresponding to the rear leg tube” (see 112b rejection below of claim 2) 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 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim appears to improperly introduce a second vertical rod when reciting “two of the vertical rods” in line 3. The claim should be amended to properly introduce a second instance of a vertical rod since only a single vertical rod had been previously introduced at this point within the claim dependency.
Also, the claim appears to improperly introduce a second ladder frame when reciting “two of the ladder frames” in line 4. The claim should be amended to properly introduce a second instance of a ladder frame since only a single ladder frame had been previously introduced at this point within the claim dependency.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
With regards to claim 1, the phrase “plastic fastening member” renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear if it should be interpreted as a fastening member being manufactured out of a plastic material or if the fastening member is plastic as in it’s capable of being flexible or bendable.
With further regards to claim 1, the phrase “the vertical rod is located at a front position of the outside of the front leg tube” renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear how Applicant’s figures show this limitation. The figures appear to only show the vertical rod element(s) 32 on lateral sides of element 12. As such, the limitation is being interpreted as ---the vertical rod is located at a lateral position of the outside of the front leg tube---.
With regards to claims 2-15, due to their direct or indirect dependence from claim 1, they suffer from the same deficiencies and are rejected under the same rationale.
With further regards to claim 2, the phrase “the plastic fastening member further comprises an arc-shaped mounting groove having a second bottom opening and corresponding to the rear leg tube.” renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear if the arc-shaped mounting groove truly corresponds to the rear leg tube since figure 4 of the specification appears to disclose element 162 to correspond to the opening for the vertical rod of the handrail and not the rear leg. As shown, the arc shape of element 162 is interpreted to correspond to the opening for the vertical rod of the handrail and not for the rear leg tube. Due to the above, the cited phrase is being interpreted as ---the plastic fastening member further comprises a mounting groove having a second bottom opening and corresponding to the rear leg tube---.
With further regards to claims 11-12, due to their direct or indirect dependence from claim 2, they suffer from the same deficiencies and are rejected under the same rationale.
Due to the vagueness and a lack of clear definiteness in the claims, the claims have been treated on their merits as best understood by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 11,149,493 to Boyer (hereinafter Boyer) in view of US Patent No. 7,100,739 to Parker et al. (hereinafter Parker).
With regards to claim 1, Boyer teaches a connecting structure [figs 9-13 – element 10’] of a handrail [figs 9-13 element 16’] and a ladder frame [figs 9-13 elements 12’, 14’] of a lambdoid foldable ladder [figs 9-11], wherein:
the handrail comprises a vertical rod [figs 9-13 element 16’],
the ladder frame comprises a front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’], a rear leg tube [figs 9-13 element 14’] , and a plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’],
the plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’] is disposed on a top end of the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’ – as shown], and a top end of the rear leg tube [figs 9-13 element 14’] is rotatably connected to the plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’], so as to enable the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’] and the rear leg tube [figs 9-13 element 14’] to form a lambdoid rotatable structure [figs 9-11],
the vertical rod [figs 9-13 element 16’] is parallel to the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’] and is configured to slide to pass through the plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’ – element 16’ is slid into and fitted within an upper opening of element 30’],
the rear leg tube [figs 9-13 element 14’] and the vertical rod [figs 9-13 element 16’] are disposed on an outside of the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’ – as shown, elements 16’ and 14’ are outside of element 12’],
a connecting position of the rear leg tube [figs 9-13 element 14’] and the plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’] is located at a rear position of the outside of the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’ – as shown],
and the vertical rod [figs 9-13 element 16’] is located at a front position of the outside of the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’ – as shown].
Boyer teaches all of the above but is silent as to the fastening member comprised of plastic.
However, Parker teaches a ladder fastening member [Parker figs 1, 12 elements 10 made of elements 27] comprised of plastic [Parker column 6 lines 30-34] for the benefit of providing durability as well as a desirable aesthetic appearance [Parker column 6 lines 30-34].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Boyer and Parker to have the fastening member [Parker figs 1, 12 elements 10 made of elements 27] comprise plastic [Parker column 6 lines 30-34] for the benefit of providing durability as well as a desirable aesthetic appearance [Parker column 6 lines 30-34].
With regards to claim 2, the combination of Boyer and Parker teaches the connecting structure of the handrail and the ladder frame of the lambdoid foldable ladder according to claim 1, wherein:
the plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’] comprises an insert groove [figs 9-13 element 30’ is shown to fit around element 12’] having a first bottom opening [figs 9-13 element 30’ – opening where element 12’ is shown inserted within element 30’] and corresponding to the front leg tube [figs 9-13 element 12’], and
the plastic fastening member [figs 9-13 element 30’] further comprises an arc-shaped mounting groove (interpreted as “a groove” – see 112b rejection above) [figs 9-13 element 30’ is shown to fit around element 14’] having a second bottom opening [figs 9-13 element 30’ – opening where element 14’ is shown inserted within element 30’] and corresponding to the rear leg tube [figs 9-13 element 14’].
Claim(s) 3-4 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 11,149,493 to Boyer (hereinafter Boyer) in view of US Patent No. 7,100,739 to Parker et al. (hereinafter Parker) in view of US Patent No. 3,139,155 to Skeels (hereinafter Skeels).
With regards to claim 3 and 11 the combination of Boyer and Parker teaches all of the above but is silent as to wherein a cross-section of the front leg tube is rectangular,
a cross-section of the rear leg tube is a square, and
a cross-section of the vertical rod is circular.
However, Skeels teaches a ladder [Skeels fig 1 element 10] having a cross-section of a front leg being rectangular [Skeels fig 1 element(s) 11 is shown having a rectangular cross-section], a cross-section of a rear leg being a square [Skeels fig 1 element(s) 14 is shown having a square cross-section], and a cross-section of a vertical rod being circular [Skeels fig 1 element 26 is shown having a circular cross-section] for the benefit of providing a stable ladder structure that is secure for a user to ascend or descent.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Boyer, Parker and Skeels to have a cross-section of the front leg tube be rectangular [Skeels fig 1 element(s) 11 is shown having a rectangular cross-section], a cross-section of the rear leg tube be a square [Skeels fig 1 element(s) 14 is shown having a square cross-section], and a cross-section of a vertical rod be circular [Skeels fig 1 element 26 is shown having a circular cross-section] for the benefit of providing a stable ladder structure that is secure for a user to ascend or descent.
With regards to claims 4 and 12, the combination of Boyer and Parker teaches all of the above but is silent as to wherein: a diameter of the vertical rod is smaller than a width of the rear leg tube.
However, Skeels teaches a ladder [Skeels fig 1 element 10] having a diameter of a vertical rod [Skeels fig 1 elements 26a, 26b] of a handrail [Skeels fig 1 element 26] being smaller than a width of a rear leg [Skeels fig 1 shows element 26 being narrower than elements 14] for the benefit of providing a stable ladder structure that is secure for a user to ascend or descent and is comfortable to grip/handle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Boyer, Parker and Skeels to have a diameter of the vertical rod [Skeels fig 1 elements 26a, 26b] be smaller than a width of a rear leg tube [Skeels fig 1 shows element 26 being narrower than elements 14] for the benefit of providing a stable ladder structure that is secure for a user to ascend or descent and is comfortable to grip/handle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-10 and 13-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to claim 5, the prior art of record alone or in combination fails to teach or fairly suggest the ladder frame further comprises a sliding sleeve, the sliding sleeve is slidably sleeved on the front leg tube, a bottom end of the vertical rod is connected to the sliding sleeve, and the vertical rod is configured to drive the sliding sleeve to slide on the front leg tube, in combination with the other limitations found in the claim.
With regards to claims 6-10 and 13-15, due to their direct or indirect dependence from claim 5, they include allowable subject matter for at least the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publication No. 20230417106 to Leng teaches a foldable ladder having front and rear legs that connect at the top to a sleeve that allows them to pivot.
US Patent Application Publication No. 20200248507 to Moss et al. teaches handrails attached to ladder stiles.
US Patent Application Publication No. 20100170750 to Leng teaches in figure 3 a ladder having front legs, rear legs and a handrail that couple via a connector element.
US Patent No. 11,753,868 to Boyer et al. teaches a step stool with a slidable handrail.
US Patent No. 11,525,304 to Gian teaches a telescoping handrail for a ladder that attaches to the ladder using elbows.
US Patent No. 11,319,751 to Zhu et al. teaches a ladder having a telescopic handle and a connecting piece element where the front leg, rear leg and handrail meet.
US Patent No. 10,844,660 to Leng teaches a folding ladder hanving a handrail that has a narrower diameter than the front leg tubes so as to slide within the front leg tubes.
US Patent No. 2,467,800 to Backlin et al teaches a handrail being attached to a foldable ladder.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4152. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5pm.
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 P Cahn can be reached on (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.
DEM
/DAVID E MARTINEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634