DETAILED ACTION
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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “tangential contact points” recited in claim 1(vii) and the “triangular support points” recited in claim 1(vi) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “1” has been used to designate the nail beds, carrying handle, ladder feet, strap, non-slip membrane, zero-degree position, heavy-duty retainer ring, mounting holes, jack pump housing, walking plank, single 2x6, ground to pitch position and pitch-to-pitch. There are multiple examples of a single reference character being used to identify multiple features.
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.
Specification
Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g).
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM: The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts:
(1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.”
(2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.”
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74.
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i) - (p).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE: See 37 CFR 1.72 (b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING: See 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421 - 2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01.
35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are: there are multiple examples of numbers in parentheses throughout the specification which don’t correspond to features in the drawings. All instances of numbers in parentheses should be removed to avoid confusion surrounding which, if any, feature is being referred to. When noting a drawing feature simply use the number of the feature following the name of the feature.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1(a) recites a ladder (of variable widths). The parentheses should be removed.
Claim 2(a)(iii) recites two wedges (for clearance). The parentheses should be removed.
Claim 2(a)(iii) recites a “lateraL rib”. The quotations should be removed and the upper case “L” should be corrected to lower case.
Claim 2(b) recites pump jack housing (square post anchor). The parentheses should be removed.
Claim 2(c) recites “the 360 degree platform” there should be a hyphen between 360 and degree.
Claim 2(f) recites a zero-pitch(collapsed into flattened position). The parentheses should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. See Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2d 1211 (D.D.C. 1995). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation, 37 CFR 1.75(i). MPEP 608.01 (m) – Form of Claims
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 1-2 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the “full 360-degree maneuverability, allowing easy adjustment and repositioning of the ladder in any direction” since the repositioning is not depicted in the drawings it is unclear to the examiner if this is done by maneuvering the ladder or if the ring is allowed to turn.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “tangential contact points” in section (vii), which renders the claims indefinite as there does not appear to be any additional structure on the inner rim. For the purpose of this Office Action the examiner will interpret this to mean the ladder is in contact with the inner rim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(v) Drainage slots integrated into the tie-down slots, enabling effective liquid drainage from the platform” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear to the examiner how a slot can be integrated with another slot since it would just result in a larger slot. For the purpose of this Office Action the examiner will interpret this to mean that the tie-down slots are configured to allow water to drain from the upper platform.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(vi) Triangular support points formed by the ladder feet abutting the inner rim of the ladder stop, ensuring stable load distribution” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear to the examiner what exactly is being claimed since a rectangular ladder foot cannot fully abut a circular rim as it would only abut the rim at the bottom of the ladder foot. Additionally, Fig. 14 appears to depict the top of the triangle above the rim, thus at best, there would only be contact with a truncated triangular foot and only if the ladder foot had a circular outer side. For the purpose of this Office Action the examiner will interpret this to mean that the ladder has triangular support feet.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(ix) Simplified setup with a minimalistic design, reducing the need for multiple ladder set configurations” which renders the claim indefinite because it does not appear that any structure is being claimed.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the platform base” in section (ii). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the lower roofing jack support platform" in section (d). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this Office Action the examiner assumes the applicant meant to recite the support bracket.
Claims 1-2 recite the terms “4/12 to 16/12, including increments of 6/12, 8/12, 10/12, 12/12, and 14/12” which are relative terms and render the claims indefinite. The terms “4/12 to 16/12, including increments of 6/12, 8/12, 10/12, 12/12, and 14/12” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Additionally, it is unclear how the ladder stop provides this capability as the ladder stop is merely the rim that surrounds the upper platform.
Claims 1-2 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett (2003/0230451) in view of Knight (WO 2025/176969).
Claim 1 as best understood by the examiner: A heavy load capacity, portable, horizontal, adjustable roof platform supporting a ladder and pump jack anchoring system, comprising:
(a) An upper platform (Fig. 1; 1) configuration centered around a 360-degree ladder stop that anchors a ladder (of variable widths), in all directions (Fig. 1; 11, Para. [0296]), said ladder stop comprising:
(iii) Eight equally spaced "tie-down" slots distributed along the outer rim of the ladder stop, facilitating secure attachment of the ladder (Fig. 1; 16, Para. [0297]).
(v) Drainage slots integrated into the tie-down slots, enabling effective liquid drainage from the platform (Fig. 1; 16 are able to allow drainage from the platform).
(vi) Triangular support points formed by the ladder feet abutting the inner rim of the ladder stop, ensuring stable load distribution (Fig. 5; see detail).
PNG
media_image1.png
625
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(ix) Simplified setup with a minimalistic design, reducing the need for multiple ladder set configurations (Fig. 1; the platform is depicted as a minimalistic design).
(x) Compatibility with standard pitch options, ranging from 4/12 to 16/12, including increments of 6/12, 8/12, 10/12, 12/12, and 14/12 (Fig. 1; slots 10 allow for adjusting the platform based on the roof pitch).
While Garrett fails to specifically disclose a robust lockdown strap and fastener system for use within each tie-down slot. Garrett does disclose a tie-down system (Fig. 55; 550) in an alternate embodiment which could be used to attach the bracket to the rung of the ladder and hook into the tie-down slots. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the tie-down system disclosed in the alternate embodiment with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide an additional method to secure the ladder to the platform.
Garrett fails to disclose (i) A circular rim forming the outer edge of the ladder stop, providing a structural boundary and secure stop.
(ii) A high-friction, anti-slip surface covering the platform base and inner rim of the ladder stop, preventing ladder slippage.
However, Knight discloses a circular rim forming the outer edge of the ladder stop (Fig. 1; 18) and a high-friction surface (Pg. 4, lines 31-33).
Therefore, 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 platform of Garrett to include the circular rim and the high friction surface, as taught by Knight, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow the ladder to be placed at any angle on the platform and prevent the ladder from slipping.
Thus, in combination Garrett and Knight disclose the drainage slots and tie-down slots, of Garrett incorporated into the circular rim, of Knight and (vii) tangential contact points (any point where the ladder of Garrett is tangential to the inner rim, of Knight, providing secure bracing for ladders of various widths where the combination of Garrett and Knight allow full 360-degree maneuverability, allowing easy adjustment and repositioning of the ladder in any direction.
Claim 2 as best understood by the examiner: Garrett discloses the roof platform according to claim 1 further comprising:
(a) A support bracket for achieving a horizontally-level platform (Fig. 1; 2 and 3, Para. [0283]), said support bracket:
(i) Being adjustable to accommodate various pitch options, including standard pitch options ranging from 4/12 to 16/12, with increments of 6/12, 8/12, 10/12, 12/12, and 14/12 (Para. [0282]).
(ii) Being Securely fastened to the upper platform (Fig. 1; via connection of 3 and 7), ensuring stability and structural integrity.
(iii) A reinforced structural configuration on the underside of the base platform to sustain heavy load capacities that incorporates a "lateraL rib" (Fig. 1; 2) constructed from a formed sheet metal (Para. [0284]) of which includes two wedges (for clearance) (Fig. 1; 7 left and right), holes that connect pivot connection to platform (Fig. 1; at 15), and triangular, truss support (Fig. 1; 1,2,3 and 7 create a triangular truss support).
b) A central pump jack housing (square post anchor), for accommodating a pump jack pole (Fig. 1; see detail).
PNG
media_image2.png
461
729
media_image2.png
Greyscale
c) A tool-less fastener configuration for anchoring of the ladder to the 360 degree platform (Fig. 55; via 550).
d) A hinge mechanism connecting the upper platform to the lower roofing jack support platform, allowing for adjustable positioning, stability, and enabling a collapsible configuration (Fig. 1; via 15, Para. [0289]).
f) A dual-purpose handle for carrying the platform and as a "tie-down" in a zero-pitch (collapsed into flattened position) configuration for extreme pitches (Fig. 1; via 6, Para. [0291]).
g) Two nail beds to securely attach the platform to the roof (Fig. 1; via 12, Para. [0287]).
While Garrett fails to specifically disclose a walking plank housing. Garrett does disclose a support channel (Fig. 11; 918, Para. [0305]) in an alternate embodiment which could be used to attach a plank or board. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the support channel disclosed in the alternate embodiment with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide a level walking area for a user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kathleen M. McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-9139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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.
/Kathleen M. McFarland/Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Kathleen M. McFarland
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635