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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
[0123], second to last line, “second shoulder 318” is not shown in Fig. 40.
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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0123], third to last line, “is” should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 7, “to” should be removed.
Line 19, “should” should be replaced with “shoulder”
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Second to last line, “should” should be replaced with –shoulder--.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
first line, “includes” should be replaced with –including--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lanham (US3480311).
15: A locking assembly (Figs. 1-7, 16) for a lift device, comprising: a handle (18) rotatably coupled to a tab (18a) via a lock shaft (18b) so that the tab is configured to rotate between an unlocked position (Fig. 5) and a locked position (Fig. 6); and a locking plate (6a) defining an external cutout (20) and an internal cavity (28), wherein the internal cavity is defined by a first shoulder that opposes a second shoulder (see below annotated Fig. 7), wherein the tab is configured to be inserted through the external cutout and into the internal cavity in the unlocked position (Fig. 5), wherein rotation of the handle in a locking direction is configured to rotate the tab within the internal cavity to the locked position (Fig. 6) where the tab is prevented from being removed from the internal cavity, and wherein the first should and the second shoulder limit rotation of the tab in both the locking direction and an unlocking direction via engagement with the tab (Fig. 7).
16: The locking assembly of claim 15, wherein when the tab (18a) is in the locked position (Fig. 6), rotation of the handle (18) in the unlocking direction is configured to rotate the tab within the internal cavity to the unlocked position (Fig. 5) where the tab is allowed to be removed from the internal cavity and the external cutout.
17: The locking assembly of claim 15, wherein the first shoulder is defined by a first lock surface and a first unlock surface, and the second shoulder is defined by a second lock surface and a second unlock surface (see below annotated Fig. 7).
18: The locking assembly of claim 17, wherein the first lock surface and the second lock surface face in opposite directions so that the first lock surface and the second lock surface limit rotation of the tab in the locking direction (see below annotated Fig. 7).
19: The locking assembly of claim 17, wherein the first unlock surface and the second unlock surface face in opposite directions so that the first unlock surface and the second unlock surface limit rotation of the tab in the unlocking direction (see below annotated Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image1.png
600
909
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanham (US3480311) in view of Kremer (DE102011000443).
20: Lanham fails to disclose the locking assembly of claim 15, further including a detent pin extending into the internal cavity that is configured to aid in maintaining the tab in the locked position. Kremer teaches, in the context of locks, a detent pin (13) extending into the internal cavity (12) that is configured to aid in maintaining the tab in the locked position. 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 a detent pin extending into the internal cavity that is configured to aid in maintaining the tab in the locked position in the locking assembly disclosed by Lanham according to the teachings of Kremer to provide resistance to the movement of the tab (see e.g., [0024] of MT of Kremer).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 are allowed.
Claims 9-14 are objected to as being dependent upon an objected to base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection to claim 9.
Conclusion
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
/COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634