DETAILED ACTION
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 locking pin of amended claim 5
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 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Lines 3-4, “, or vice versa,” should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bingham (US20120118666) in view of Brand (EP1228785).
1: A rope wrench (Figs. 1-8, 10) comprising or including a base plate (25) having a lever arm (18) at one end and a lever handle opposite the lever arm, a pair of bollards (16) at the lever arm end for receiving therebetween an anchored climbing rope (22), and a gate (Fig. 5, 124) spaced from the back plate and pivotable about one of the bollards (Fig. 5), thereby permitting mid-rope access to the bollards when open and preventing mid-rope detachment when closed ([0033]: ”Optionally, as shown in FIG. 5, one of the side members 124 may be swingable about an axis of the friction element 136. The second aperture 132 has an open end (i.e., is a notch along the edge of the side member 124) so that the side member 124 can release from the friction element 137)”), the arrangement being such that when the gate is closed and the lever arm is rotated by the handle about the major axis of one of the bollards they collectively cause the rope to assume a serpentine shape to shorten the effective length of the main rope and assist ascent by the climber or to impart friction to the rope when descending whereby to permit controlled descent (Figs. 2 and 3, see also [0024]: “rope climbing apparatus 10 serves as a friction assist tool”),
wherein one of the two bollards includes a rotatable cam by which to vary the distance between the two bollards to suit rope diameter or rope type ([0029]: “Generally, the friction elements 36, 37 should be spaced so that they are slightly wider apart than the diameter of the rope or just touching the climbing rope and not so tight that the apparatus 10 drags along the climbing rope during ascent. Alternatively, the friction element may have a lobed cam surface that is cooperable with the slotted aperture 32 for adjustment of the position of the friction element 37”), and
wherein the bollard with the cam includes a spring-biased indexing arrangement whereby particular angular positions of the cam can be selected as required ([0029]: “Alternatively, the friction element may have a lobed cam surface that is cooperable with the slotted aperture 32 for adjustment of the position of the friction element 37”), however, Bingham fails to disclose wherein the indexing arrangement is spring biased. Brand teaches, in the context of rope wrenches, a spring biased indexing arrangement (Fig. 2, 23, and MT [0015]: “Preferably, at the narrowest point of the cross section of the longitudinal opening 3 of the fall prevention device 1, a movable element in the form of a roller 23 is arranged, which is pressed onto the guide 2 by means of spring force”). It 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 to have included spring biasing to the index arrangement in the rope wrench disclosed by Bingham according to the teachings of Brand in order to render the rope wrench even more suitable for “guides 2, or cables, of different diameters” MT [0015].
2: Bingham in view of Brand disclose the rope wrench according to Claim 1 wherein the gate includes a hand-operated latch by which to secure the gate in a closed position for use and with which to open the gate when the rope wrench is being attached or detached from an anchored rope ([0033]: “Optionally, the tether connector may include a quick release mechanism . . . so that the apparatus can be installed anywhere along the line of climbing rope (as opposed to just at an end)”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bingham (US20120118666) in view of Brand (EP1228785) and further in view of Merritt (US10258829).
5: Bingham in view of Brand disclose the rope wrench according to Claim 1 wherein an indexing arrangement comprises axially rotating it to a required angular position and locking the bollard in the new position. ([0029]: “the friction element may have a lobed cam surface that is cooperable with the slotted aperture 32 for adjustment of the position of the friction element 37”). However, Bingham in view of Brand fails to disclose wherein the indexing arrangement includes a locking pin selectively engageable in one of a series of sockets or vice versa by pulling the bollard away from the base plate, rotating it to a required angular position and releasing it, whereby to temporarily lock the bollard in the new position. Merritt teaches, in the context of rope wrenches, wherein the axially rotating indexing arrangement includes a locking pin selectively engageable in one of a series of sockets, or vice versa, by pulling the bollard away from the base plate, axially rotating the bollard to a required angular position and releasing it, whereby to temporarily lock the bollard in the new position (col. 4, lines 48-55: “Eccentric pins 108a and 108b are drilled and tapped through the rotational axis to receive bolts 119a-119c. Further, one end of each of eccentric pins 108a and 108b may be milled and/or shaped to a pattern matching that cut/milled into the third aperture of upper side plate 102 and lower side plate 104, thus providing a mechanism for indexing the position of rotation of the eccentric pin (see FIG. 5)”). It 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 to have included wherein the axially rotating indexing arrangement includes a locking pin selectively engageable in one of a series of sockets, or vice versa, by pulling the bollard away from the base plate, axially rotating the bollard to a required angular position and releasing it, whereby to temporarily lock the bollard in the new position disclosed by Bingham in view of Brand according to the teachings of Merritt in order to provide an axially rotatable indexing arrangement with discrete adjustment settings “to accommodate various rope sizes and constructions” col. 4, lines 55-57 of Merritt.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4 May 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant initially argues that “Although Bingham discloses a friction element with a lobed cam surface, this does not equate to Bingham disclosing the structure of the claimed indexing arrangement” (pg. 5, last two lines of the Amendment of 4 May 2026). However, the “friction element with a lobed cam surface” is not relied upon for the claimed indexing arrangement. The portion of Bingham relied upon to meet the claimed indexing arrangement is ([0029]: “the friction element may have a lobed cam surface that is cooperable with the slotted aperture 32 for adjustment of the position of the friction element 37” – see pg. 5, first three lines of Non-Final Rejection of 4 February 2026).
Applicant next argues that “Bingham does not disclose the cam includes a spring biased indexing arrangement whereby particular angular positions of the cam can be selected as required” (pg. 5, second to last paragraph of Amendment of 4 May 2026). Here again, Bingham is not relied upon to show that the indexing arrangement is spring biased. However, and as noted above, Bingham does disclose “whereby particular angular positions of the cam can be selected as required” – specifically, by adjustment of the position of the friction element.
In response to applicant’s argument that Bingham does not disclose any indexing arrangement and no evidence has been offered to support otherwise, it is noted that Bingham discloses not only an infinitely adjustable indexing arrangement, as discussed above, but also an indexing arrangement with discrete adjustments, “In another arrangement, adjustment of the friction element may be effected by providing a plurality of second apertures through which the friction element 37 may alternatively positioned”, see [0029] of Bingham.
In response to applicant's argument that Bingham fails to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the feature upon which applicant relies (i.e., a locking pin selectively engageable in one of a series of sockets ofd claim 5) is not recited in rejected claim 1.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Applicant argues that “Brand does not disclose any bollards”, (pg. 6, fourth paragraph of the Amendment of 4 May 2026). However, as the term is used by Applicant, Brand’s roller 23 meets the claim limitation of bollard, see Applicant’s disclosure at pg. 1, line 8, “rope-receiving”.
Applicant next argues that Brand does not disclose one of the two bollards includes a rotatable cam, nor that the bollard with the cam includes a spring biased indexing arrangement whereby particular angular positions of the cam can be selected as required. However, Brand is not relied upon for this teaching. Brand is relied upon for a teaching of spring biasing the indexing arrangement of Bingham who discloses wherein one of the two bollards includes a rotatable cam by which to vary the distance between the two bollards to suit rope diameter or rope type and wherein bollard with the cam includes an indexing arrangement whereby particular angular positions of the cam can be selected as required, as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1.
It is also noted that each of Bingham, Brand, and Merritt disclose adjusting the size of a rope opening with an indexing arrangement, see Bingham at [0029]: “Adjusting the slot 14 size allows for use of various sizes of climbing rope”, see Brand at MT [0015]: “By means of this roller 23, the fall prevention device 1 is suitable for guides 2, or cables, of different diameters”, and see Merritt at col. 4, lines 55-57: “to accommodate various rope sizes and constructions”.
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 Ben Pezzlo whose telephone number is (571)272-9656. The examiner can normally be reached M to Th 7 to 5.
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.
/BAP/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights