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 § 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 and 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bardon (US1694051A) in view of Sword (US4323273A).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4-7, Bardon discloses a reeving device (4; Figures 1-5) for attaching to an oversized end (3) of a hoist rope (2), comprising: a body (B; see Bardon annotated Figure 1 below) comprising a cavity (5) and a sidewall (6, 7) including a lateral opening (LO) configured to allow the oversized end (3) of the hoist rope (2) to enter into the cavity (5);
a tether (1) attached to one end of the body (B);
wherein the body (B) includes a pair of opposing ends (8, 9), a central portion (CP), and a first tapered portion (1TP) extending from one of the pair of opposing ends (9) to the central portion (CP), wherein the cavity (5) extends within the central portion (CP), the first tapered portion (1TP), and at least one of the pair of opposing ends (9).
wherein the body (B) further comprises a second tapered portion (2TP) extending from at least one of the pair of opposing ends (8) to the central portion (CP).
wherein the central portion (CP) of the body (B) includes a wider portion of the cavity (5) than a width of the cavity (5) adjacent to at least one of the pair of opposing ends (8, 9; Figure 2; the cavity tapers with a smaller diameter at the ends 8,9), but fails to teach the body including an inner tapered portion at least partially bounding the cavity and adapted for engaging the oversized end of the hoist rope when positioned in the cavity; wherein the inner tapered portion of the body for engaging the oversized end of the hoist rope has a width less than a width of the lateral opening.
PNG
media_image1.png
281
364
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bardon, Annotated Figure 1
Sword teaches a similar reeving device and further teaches the body (34; Figure 4) including an inner tapered portion (Figure 7; tapered surface of seat 48 where oversized end 20 sits, in which is formed to match the tapered bottom portion of the oversized end 20) at least partially bounding the cavity (36) and adapted for engaging the oversized end (20) of the hoist rope (18; 2 of Bardon) when positioned in the cavity (36); wherein the inner tapered portion of the body (34) for engaging the oversized end (20) of the hoist rope (18; 2 of Bardon) has a width less than a width of the lateral opening (52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reeving device of Bardon to include the body defining an inner tapered portion as taught by Sword in order to assist with positioning and locking the end of the rope into the tapered seat to reduce movement and shifting of the rope end within the device.
Claim(s) 8-10, 12, 16-18, and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuke in view of Sword.
Regarding claims 8-10, 12 and 21, Fuke discloses a mobile crane (1; Figures 17-18) for lifting an object, the mobile crane (1) comprising: a boom (3) having a first boom section (3a) and a second boom section (3b); a hoist rope (6) configured to traverse the first and second boom sections (3a, 3b); a winch (5) for spooling and paying out the hoist rope (6); a reeving device (4; R; Figures 8-18) including a body (41, 42, 45) for receiving and removably connecting with an oversized end (62) of the hoist rope (6); and a tether (7) connected to the body (41, 42, 45);
wherein the reeving device (4) comprises the body (41, 42, 45) having a cavity (area within the bent portions 42b) and a sidewall (41 and 42) including a lateral opening (LO; see Fuke annotated Figure 3 below) configured to allow the oversized end (62) of the hoist rope (6) to enter into the cavity;
wherein the lateral opening extends to one end (41a) of the body (41, 42, 45), but fails to teach wherein the body comprises an inner tapered portion; the inner tapered portion of the body at least partially bounding the cavity and adapted for engaging the oversized end of the hoist rope when positioned in the cavity; wherein the oversized end of the hoist rope is tapered to correspond to the inner tapered portion of the body.
PNG
media_image2.png
213
320
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fuke, Annotated Figure 3
Sword teaches a similar reeving device and further teaches wherein the body (34) comprises an inner tapered portion (Figure 7; tapered surface of seat 48 where oversized end 20 sits, in which is formed to match the tapered bottom portion of the oversized end 20); the inner tapered portion of the body (34) at least partially bounding the cavity (36) and adapted for engaging the oversized end (20) of the hoist rope (18; 6 of Fuke) when positioned in the cavity (36); wherein the inner tapered portion of the body (34) for engaging the oversized end (20) of the hoist rope (18; 6 of Fuke) has a width and the lateral opening (LO of Fuke) has a width; wherein the oversized end (20) of the hoist rope (18; 6 of Fuke) is tapered to correspond to the inner tapered portion of the body (34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reeving device of Fuke to include the body defining an inner tapered portion and a tapered oversized end of the hoist rope as taught by Sword in order to assist with positioning and locking the end of the rope into the tapered seat to reduce movement and shifting of the rope end within the device; and further to include inner tapered portion of the body has a width less than the width of the lateral opening to help easily guide the oversized end of the rope through and over the lateral opening into the cavity and ensure that the oversized end engages the base plate of the body and does not move passed the base plate. It is known to one skilled in the art that by modifying the base plate of the body of Fuke with the inner tapered portion of Sword would be limited to the thickness of the base plate and diameter of the oversized end of the rope, therefore the width of the inner tapered portion would be equal to or less than the width of the rounded edges of the lateral opening of Fuke.
Regarding claims 16-18 and 20, Fuke discloses a method for positioning a hoist rope (6) of a mobile crane (1), comprising: inserting an oversized end (62) of the hoist rope (6) through a lateral opening (42c; Figure 14) into a cavity (area within the bent portions 42b) of a body (41, 42, 45); delivering the hoist rope (6) to or from a winch (5); and pulling a tether (7) attached to the body (42) to tension the hoist rope (6) and thereby engage the oversized end (62) of the hoist rope (6);
wherein the pulling step is completed during the delivering step (Figures 7-11);
removing (column 10, lines 5-22, the hoist rope 6 is removably attached to the device) the oversized end (62) from the cavity to disconnect the body (41, 42, 45) from the hoist rope (6);
moving the hoist rope (6) along first and second end portions (3a, 3b) of a boom (3) of the mobile crane (1), but fails to teach engaging the oversized end of the hoist rope with an inner tapered portion of the body at least partially bounding the cavity.
Sword teaches a similar reeving device and further teaches engaging the oversized end (20) of the hoist rope (18; 6 of Fuke) with an (inner tapered portion Figure 7; tapered surface of seat 48 where oversized end 20 sits, in which is formed to match the tapered bottom portion of the oversized end 20) of the body (34) at least partially bounding the cavity (36). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reeving device of Fuke to include the body defining an inner tapered portion as taught by Sword in order to assist with positioning and locking the end of the rope into the tapered seat to reduce movement and shifting of the rope end within the device.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuke, in view of Sword, and in further view of Bardon.
Regarding claims 13-15, modified Fuke discloses the above mobile crane, but fails to teach
wherein the body includes a pair of opposing ends, a central portion, a first tapered portion extending from one of the pair of opposing ends to the central portion, and a cavity extending within the central portion, the first tapered portion, and at least one of the pair of opposing ends;
wherein the body further comprises a second tapered portion extending from at least one of the pair of opposing ends to the central portion;
wherein the central portion of the body includes a wider portion of the cavity than a width of the cavity adjacent to at least one of the pair of opposing ends.
Bardon teaches a similar reeving device for hoist rope and further teaches wherein the portion (P) of the body (B) for engaging the oversized end (3) of the hoist rope (2) has a width less than a width of the lateral opening (LO);
wherein the body (B) includes a pair of opposing ends (8, 9), a central portion (CP), a first tapered portion (1TP) extending from one of the pair of opposing ends (9) to the central portion (CP), and a cavity (5) extending within the central portion (CP), the first tapered portion (1TP), and at least one of the pair of opposing ends (9);
wherein the body (B) further comprises a second tapered portion (2TP) extending from at least one of the pair of opposing ends (8) to the central portion (CP);
wherein the central portion (CP) of the body (B) includes a wider portion of the cavity (5) than a width of the cavity (5) adjacent to at least one of the pair of opposing ends (8, 9; Figure 2; the cavity tapers with a smaller diameter at the ends 8,9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reeving device of Fuke to include the reeving device body as taught by Bardon in order to increase safety by further preventing the hoist rope from accidently being removed from the reeving device when the hoist rope experiences loose movements.
PNG
media_image1.png
281
364
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bardon, Annotated Figure 1
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 with respect to claims 1, 8, and 16 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, in the last four paragraphs of page 5, in pages 6-7, and first three lines of page 8, the applicant argued that there is no motivation to combine the teaching of Sword with that of Bardon since Bardon teaches flat seating of the cylindrical ferrules and introducing Sword’s seat geometry would require reconstruction and eliminate the flat seating of Bardon, rendering Bardon’s mechanism inoperable. The applicant further argued that there is no teaching in Sword to describe the locking of the end of the rope with the tapered seating.
However, the examiner construed that it is known to one of ordinary skill in the art that the tapered seat of Sword provides a grip around the circumference of the cylindrical ferrule creating a wedging effect in order to lock the end of the rope into the tapered seat to reduce movement perpendicular and parallel to the hoist rope. Since the inner walls of Bardon are curved, when the hoist rope loosens, the cylindrical ferrule may wiggle or tilt, therefore the tapered seat of Sword will help reduce that movement. Furthermore, it is also known in the art that adding a taper to the edges of holes is common in the manufacturing process to reduce sharp edges, therefore reconstruction is not needed to modify Bardon with the teaching of Sword.
Regarding claims 8 and 16, in the last three paragraphs of page 8, in page 9, and first three paragraphs of page 10, the applicant argued that there is no motivation to combine the teaching of Sword with that of Fuke since Fuke teaches a different structure than that of Sword and there is no teaching in Sword to describe the locking of the end of the rope with the tapered seating. The applicant further argued that there is no teaching in Fuke or Sword wherein a pulling of the tether engages the oversized end of the hoist rope with an inner tapered portion of the body.
However, the examiner construed that it is known to one of ordinary skill in the art that the tapered seat of Sword provides a grip around the circumference of the cylindrical ferrule creating a wedging effect in order to lock the end of the rope into the tapered seat to reduce movement perpendicular and parallel to the hoist rope. Furthermore, it is also known in the art that adding a taper to the edges of holes is a common manufacturing process and is limited to the thickness of the base plate of Fuke to reduce sharp edges, therefore one would be motivated to modify Fuke with the teaching of Sword. Therefore, modified Fuke teaches pulling the tether and engaging the oversized end of the hoist rope with the inner tapered portion of Sword. Thus, contradicting to applicant’s assertions, such amendment/argument does not overcome the prior art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619