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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/02/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
The Amendment filed Jan 02, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-18 and 20-21 remain pending in the application. Claim 19 is cancelled. Arguments and amendment as combined filed on 01/02/2026 are deemed persuasive, and thus rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Timm, and Mugler, respectively, have been withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1, in lines 7, 9 and 10, “pole” is recited as being a claimed element interacting with other elements to provide limitations to the claimed clamping device.
Regarding claim 8, in lines 9-10, “pole” is recited as being a claimed element interacting with other elements to provide limitations to the claimed clamping device.
Regarding claim 14, in lines 2, 6, 8 and 10, “pole” is recited as being a claimed element interacting with other elements to provide limitations to the claimed clamping device.
However, according to Figs 3A, 3b, 4A, 4B of instant application, which shows a pole 202, and Figs 6, 7A, 7B, which shows a pole 602, that does not appear to belong as components or element belonging to the clamping device 100, 500 itself.
Meanwhile, for the sake of compact prosecution, examiner suggests correction for claims 1, 8 and 14 in the preamble to read: “A clamping device adapted for use to be mounted around a pole”. Correction is required.
Regarding claim 8, in lines 4-6, “for receiving one or more fasteners” is expressed in the form of functional language without specifying whether the “fasteners” belongs as an element/component of the clamping device itself. Therefore, It is confusing that “fasteners” is then further interacting with other elements. Meanwhile, fastener 522 as shown in Figs 5 and 6, and 7A appear to be a component belong to the clamping device 500. Thus, correction is required.
Meanwhile, for the sake of compact prosecution, examiner suggests further correction for claim 8 to further read: “A clamping device …….. comprising: a belt …… a base plate …… one or more fasteners,…the base plate having one or more slots for receiving the one or more fasteners” (note: parts omitted for brevity).
By virtue of dependency upon base claims 1, 8 and 14, respectively, dependent claims 2-7, 9-13, 15-20, are also 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18, 20-21 contain allowable subject matter. However, claims 1-18, 20-21 remain 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, as previously discussed herein above, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome above rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal and statutory requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with.
The closest prior art of record are Mugler (DE10334914A1), Timm (US 2178819) and Kasubke (EP0508050A2) which, singularly or in combination, fail to disclose, teach or suggest the following particular subject matter that have been considered as allowable: “the belt extending through and between the at least two slots ….. and the elongated portion extends external to the second surface of the belt” of claim 1, and
“and the at least two peaks extends internal to the first surface of the belt” of claim 8, and “the elongated portion extends external to the second surface of the belt and the first and second peaks extend internal of the first surface of the belt” of claim 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kasubke (EP0743480A2), Bendlak (US 11649910B2)
and McCraney (US 6340143B1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DING Y TAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4271. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00 am MT--5:00 pm MT. 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached on 571-272-4797. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DING Y TAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights