DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed June 12, 2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-16 and 22-25 are pending. Claims 17-21 are cancelled. Claims 1-16 and 22-25 are rejected as set forth below.
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, 4-10, 22, 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neubauer (US Pub 2021/0348399) in view of Fountain (US 6,053,284).
In regard to Claim 1, Neubauer discloses a ladder system (Figs 10, 15, 21) comprising: a load bearing base unit (200, 300) comprising a base assembly (200) and a pair of support legs (104); and at least one ladder module (310) configured to be releasably mounted on the base unit to extend vertically therefrom (Figs 10, 15, 21) [0102]; wherein the base unit and ladder module together form a stable free-standing ladder in which the ladder module is cantilevered out from its mounting point on the base unit to a free end, with the ladder module extending over the support legs (Figs 10, 15, 21).
Neubauer does not disclose a pair of support legs extending horizontally from the base assembly. Fountain teaches a pair of support legs (12a, 12b) extending horizontally from the base assembly (Fig 1). 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 ladder system of Neubauer to include support legs extending horizontally from the base assembly as taught by Fountain, in order to offer additional support and stability to the system. The examiner notes the support legs of Neubauer are not being replaced with the support legs of Fountain, but added to them just as Fountain demonstrates horizontal support legs with additional angular legs.
In regard to Claim 2, Fountain in the combination discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the support legs extend to distal ends configured for bearing engagement with a surface on which the base unit is positioned (Fig 1).
In regard to Claim 4, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base assembly comprises a box structure having side walls connected by lateral supports (see figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
340
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to Claims 5, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base assembly is configured such that the side walls are load bearing for the ladder module (Figs 10, 15, 21) [0106].
In regard to Claims 6, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, further comprising a base unit connector element (356, 358) mounted on each side wall and a corresponding ladder module connector element (326, 350) mounted on a side rail of the ladder module for engagement with the base unit connector element [0113-0114] (Fig 20).
In regard to Claim 7, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base unit connector element comprises a generally V-shaped slot (354) and the ladder module connector element comprises a tang element (350) shaped to fit within the slot in a wedged engagement [0113-0114] (Fig 20).
In regard to Claim 8, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, comprising a set of ladder modules having different configurations for interchangeable use with the base unit (Figs 10-21).
In regard to Claim 9, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the ladder module is a walk-through ladder module (Figs 10-21).
In regard to Claim 10, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base assembly is configured to be positioned under a lowermost step of the ladder module (Figs 10, 15, 21).
In regard to Claim 22, Neubauer discloses a ladder system (Figs 10, 15, 21) comprising: a base unit (200, 300) comprising a base assembly and a pair of support legs (104) extending from the base assembly (Figs 10, 15, 21); and at least one ladder module (310) configured to be releasably mounted on the base unit to extend vertically therefrom [0102) (Figs 10, 15, 21); wherein the support legs are positioned such that in use they extend under the ladder module to a distal end that bears upon a surface on which the base is positioned (Figs 10, 15, 21); and wherein the base assembly has a box structure that is configured to be placed under a first step of the ladder module, the box structure having side walls connected by lateral supports (see Fig above), the side walls being load bearing for the ladder module (Figs 10, 15, 21) [0106]; wherein the base unit and ladder module together form a stable free-standing ladder in which the ladder module is cantilevered out from the base unit over the support legs (Figs 10, 15, 21).
Neubauer does not disclose a pair of support legs extending horizontally from the base assembly. Fountain teaches a pair of support legs (12a, 12b) extending horizontally from the base assembly (Fig 1). 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 ladder system of Neubauer to include support legs extending horizontally from the base assembly as taught by Fountain, in order to offer additional support and stability to the system. The examiner notes the support legs of Neubauer are not being replaced with the support legs of Fountain, but added to them just as Fountain demonstrates horizontal support legs with additional angular legs.
In regard to Claim 23, Fountain in the combination discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the support legs extend for a distance but does not specifically disclose the distance being at least 1 meter. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the horizontal support legs of Fountain in the combination extend for at least a meter in order to offer enough support for the ladder when an individual is towards the top.
In regard to Claim 25, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base assembly further includes reinforcing plates (unlabeled plate) positioned inboard of the side walls to provide additional load bearing strength to the base assembly (Fig 20).
Claims 3 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neubauer in view of Fountain as applied to claims 1, 2 and 22 above, respectively, and further in view of Weatherall (US Pub 2016/0281427).
In regard to Claim 3, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, but does not disclose the support legs have an arched profile. Weatherall teaches the support legs (2) have an arched profile (Figs 2, 4). 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 base assembly as disclosed by Fountain to make the support legs arched as taught by Weatherall, since an arched profile is old and well known in the art to provide strength.
In regard to Claim 24, Fountain in the combination discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the support legs include a generally straight portion that is spaced above the surface on which the base is positioned, and a vertical portion that terminates in a distal end that contacts and bears upon the surface (Fig 1). Fountain in the combination does not disclose an angled portion. Weatherall teaches an angled portion (6) (Fig 4). 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 base assembly as disclosed by Fountain to include an angled portion as taught by Weatherall, in order to smoothly transition the horizontal to the vertical for a stronger support.
Claims 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neubauer in view of Fountain in view of Weatherall.
In regard to Claim 11, Neubauer discloses a base unit for use in a ladder system that includes a plurality of ladder modules (Figs 10, 15, 21), the base unit comprising: (a) a base assembly (200, 300) having a pair of connector elements (356, 358) configured to engage a corresponding pair of connector elements (326) on a ladder module in a releasable locking and load bearing engagement (Fig 20) [0113- 0114], with the ladder cantilevered out from the base assembly at an angle (Figs 10, 15, 21); and (b) a pair of support legs (300) extending from the base assembly, wherein the support legs are positioned relative to the base assembly such that in use they extend under the ladder module (Figs 10, 15, 21).
Neubauer does not disclose a pair of support legs extending horizontally from the base assembly. Fountain teaches a pair of support legs (12a, 12b) extending horizontally from the base assembly (Fig 2), the support legs include a generally straight portion that is spaced above a surface on which the base is positioned, and a vertical portion that terminates in a distal end that contacts and bears upon the surface (Fig 2). 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 ladder system of Neubauer to include support legs extending horizontally from the base assembly as taught by Fountain, in order to offer additional support and stability to the system. The examiner notes the support legs of Neubauer are not being replaced with the support legs of Fountain, but added to them just as Fountain demonstrates horizontal support legs with additional angular legs.
Fountain in the combination does not disclose an angled portion. Weatherall teaches an angled portion (6) (Fig 4). 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 base assembly as disclosed by Fountain to include an angled portion as taught by Weatherall, in order to smoothly transition the horizontal to the vertical for a stronger support.
In regard to Claim 12, Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base unit is configured to support the ladder module so as to form a stable free-standing ladder (Fig 10, 15, 21).
In regard to Claim 13, Fountain discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base assembly is configured to be positioned under a lowermost step of the ladder module (Figs 10, 15, 21).
In regard to Claim 14, Fountain in the combination discloses the ladder system as described above, but does not disclose the support legs have an arched profile. Weatherall teaches the support legs (2) have an arched profile (Figs 2, 4). 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 base assembly as disclosed by Fountain to make the support legs arched as taught by Weatherall, since an arched profile is old and well known in the art to provide strength.
In regard to Claim 15, Fountain discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein the base assembly comprises a box structure having side walls connected by lateral supports (see annotated Fig above).
In regard to Claim 16, Fountain in view of Neubauer discloses the ladder system as described above, wherein when modified the base unit is configured such that the side walls are load bearing for the ladder module (Fig 20).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
It is noted the newly applied base reference Neubauer clearly discloses a ladder that is free-standing and cantilevered out from its mounting point on the base unit to a free end.
It is also noted with respect to the argument toward claim 3 that the Weatherall reference is not being used to change the direction that the support legs of Fountain and/or Neubauer extend, but merely to modify the support legs to include an angled and/or arched configuration.
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 Brian Mattei whose telephone number is (571)270-3238. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 to 5:00.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights