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 .
Claims 1-5 are pending in the current application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a size adjusting means that changes a back length of the harness main body in a plurality of stages”. The examiner interprets size adjusting means to include a releasably coupled two-part harness (#50 back plate and #60 center panel) and a series of vertically aligned indexing holes 58a-58e and 59a-59c on back plate #50 and corresponding vertically aligned indexing holes 63a, 63b and 65a, 65b and 68a, 68b in center panel 60 that allow the back plate 50 and center panel 60 to be vertically adjusted as shown in Fig.7.
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 1 - 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka, US 5363790. Matsuoka discloses a buoyancy compensator jacket having an up-down direction, a width direction, and a front-rear direction intersecting one another (see Figs. 1 and 3), and comprising a harness (3 parts #22, #63 & #71) for fastening an air cylinder, the harness including shoulder belts #26a, #26b, a harness main body #22 disposed to face a back side of a diver, and a size adjusting means #44, #45 that adjusts the effective length of the harness in a plurality of stages. The examiner considers the size adjusting means to be the adjustable positions of coupler plates 63 and 71 on the harness main body body #22 through indexing holes #47 (See Fig. 3). Matsuoka does not disclose that the size adjusting means changes a back length of the harness main body. The examiner contends that the apparatus of Matsuoka achieves identical fitment of the buoyancy compensator as the current invention by changing the “effective back length” to accommodate users of different sizes. Applicants size adjusting means allow vertical separation of back plate #50 (including shoulder straps #11) from center plate #60 (includes waist fastening means 40) allowing the position of the shoulder straps to move with respect to the waist fastening means.
Matsuoka achieves the same vertical separation of shoulder straps and waist fastening means by vertically moving coupler plate #71 (includes shoulder straps #26) away from coupler plate #63 which includes waist straps #24.
Regarding claim 2: Matsuoka discloses waist belts #24 and a lower back pad #31, wherein the waist fastening means and the harness main body #22 are separated bodies and the waist fastening means moves in the up-down direction by a sliding mechanism (see Fig. 4 and Column 2, lines 47-56; Column 5 lines 36-55).
Regarding claim 3: the examiner considers the main harness of Matsuoka to include parts #22, #63 & #71. Part #22 being the back plate and part #71 being a center panel releasably coupled to the back plate.
Regarding claim 4: The examiner considers the waist belts #24 as connected to the harness main body #22 and to constitute rotatable side panels that are coupled with the shoulder belts (See Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5: The examiner considers the side panels #24 to constitute weight means, in that weights can be attached to the waist belt.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the apparatus of Matsuoka and the corresponding size adjusting means to allow size adjustment of the buoyancy compensator to accommodate varying sizes of users. Doing so achieves the same results of the current invention with a slightly varied size adjusting means comprising three releasably coupled parts instead of tow releasably coupled parts to achieve the same effect.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5562513 discloses a buoyancy compensator device including an adjustable harness. US 6477709 discloses a buoyancy compensator jacket including a back plate and cushion pad.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D WIEST whose telephone number is (571)270-5974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 - 3:00.
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, Samuel Morano can be reached at 571 272 6684. 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.
/ANTHONY D WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615