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 .
Specification
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 in paragraph [0040] includes a recitation with terms that 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. That is, the drawings and written description describe the clamp 140 as a rotationally operated adjustment mechanism which is presented in Fig. 4A as a conventional worm gear type of clamp such as that found in a typical hose clamp. Paragraph [0040] of the instant application, however, recites that the rotation of the drive member 142 causes the tongue to move “up and down” with respect to the slots 105. This language of an up and down movement of the slot-engaging tongue lacks clarity as it is unclear how the rotation of the drive 142 causes a tongue to somehow move in an up and down manner while also tightening and loosening the retention member. The examiner suggests amending the specification to: either clarify that the tongue moves up and down along the retention member’s plurality of slots; or to eliminate the unclear “up and down” language and replace it with more generic “to engage the slots” description.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in ¶0034, “aide” should be --aid--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 tongue “configured to extend through each of the plurality of slots” (claim 7) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
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 1-5, 10-11, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Knox et al. (US 2006/0261567).
Regarding claims 1 and 21, Knox discloses a handle assembly and method for transporting a structure (12), the handle assembly comprising:
a retention member (104) configured to be secured around the structure;
a coupling apparatus (106; see Fig. 8) coupled to the retention member and configured to couple the retention member to the structure; and
a handle (108) configured to be coupled to the retention member (via the coupling apparatus 106) to allow the structure to be transported via the handle when the retention member is coupled to the structure.
Regarding claims 2-3, Knox further discloses that the handle (108) comprises a concave engagement portion (109, see Figs. 10) and a gripping portion (generally denoted by reference character 102 in Fig. 10), wherein the engagement portion is configured to engage a surface of the structure (see Fig 1), and wherein the gripping portion is spaced from the engagement portion and configured to be gripped by a user when the structure is being transported.
Regarding claims 4 and 23, Knox further discloses that the handle (108) comprises at least one support (106, see e.g., Fig. 11) extending from the engagement portion (109) to the gripping portion, wherein the at least one support has a slot (121), and wherein the retention member extends through the slot (see Fig. 11 showing the two ends 104A, 104B of the retention band passing through the slot formed in the center of the handle body 106).
Regarding claims 5 and 22, Knox further discloses that the coupling apparatus is a quick release opener (see ¶0078) having a lever (110 in Fig. 12A), wherein movement (126) of the lever (110) is configured to move the retention member between a first position corresponding to the retention member having a first length and a second position corresponding to the retention member having a second length, and wherein the second length is greater than the first length (e.g., the lever has a cam surface 110A that pushes against the concave surface 119 of body 106 to further tighten and loosen the strap 104).
Regarding claim 10, Knox further discloses that at least one support (106) comprises a first support and a second support spaced from the first support (see e.g., Fig. 10 showing the two spaced ends of the inboard support portion forming a loop-shaped handle), and wherein each of the first and second supports are substantially perpendicular to each of the engagement portion and the gripping portion (see Fig. 10 showing the vertically oriented engagement and grip portions with the horizontally oriented offsetting supports).
Regarding claim 11, Knox further discloses that two handles (102, 103) coupled to the retention member (104).
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 of this title, 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 6, 8-9, 12-14, 17-20, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knox.
Regarding claim 6, Knox further discloses a fine adjustment mechanism (122) coupled to the retention member (104 via cross shaft 124) and which is configured to move the retention member between a first position corresponding to the retention member having a first length and a second position corresponding to the retention member having a second length, and wherein the second length is greater than the first length (see ¶0077). This embodiment of Knox, however, does not provide for an adjustment mechanism spaced from the coupling apparatus.
Knox further discloses several embodiments of its dolly and handle assembly, including a handle assembly (see Fig. 17) where its retention member (301) couples a handle (306) via a coupling apparatus (e.g., the central slotted structure akin to element 106 in Fig. to the structure (298) and the retention member (301) includes an adjustment mechanism (302) configured to move the retention member between a first position corresponding to the retention member having a first length and a second position corresponding to the retention member having a second length, and wherein the second length is greater than the first length (see ¶0093).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the dolly of Fig. 1 of Knox to include the an in-strap tightening/loosening feature, such as an adjuster as shown in Fig. 17 of Knox since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (making the strap of an adjustable length) with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results (e.g., a handle assembly that can be coupled to different apparatuses with a larger range of sizes).
Regarding claims 8-9 and 24, the above handle assemblies (102/103) are configured with the retention member (104) passing through the handle bodies in the width direction and therefore do not provide for a slot in two handle spacers.
Knox further discloses an embodiment where a flexible retention member (210; see Fig. 14) can pass through a handle assembly (222) and running along the handle’s length such that the retention member passes through the two ends of the spaces that offset the grippable portion of the handle from the structure-abutting engagement portion. As shown in Fig. 14, the retention member (210) passes through two end slots and runs through a groove (implicit) formed in the spacer-spanning portion that engages the structure (202).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the dolly of Knox to use the strap-through-handle arrangement of Fig. 14 of Knox since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (passing the strap lengthwise through the handle body instead of widthwise) with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results (e.g., a handle assembly having its grippable handles oriented in a different direction).
Regarding claims 12 and 25, Knox discloses a dolly comprising:
a handle assembly (100, see Fig. 1) for transporting a structure (12), the handle assembly comprising:
a first retention member (104) configured to be secured around the structure,
a coupling apparatus (106) coupled to the first retention member and configured to couple the first retention member to the structure (e.g., the coupling portion 106 completes the apparatus-surrounding loop), and
a handle (e.g., the closed handle loop generally denoted by reference character 102 in Fig. 10) coupled to the first retention member (via coupling apparatus 106) and configured to allow the structure to be transported when the first retention member is coupled to the structure,
and a base assembly (20) comprising a base member (40; see Fig. 2) and a number of wheels (22) coupled to the base member.
Knox further discloses several embodiments of its dolly, including an embodiment having a second retention member (240; see Fig. 15) that is coupled to both a structure-surrounding handle (236) and a wheeled base (226), but it does not specifically recite a dolly that uses a second retention member that is coupled to its handle assembly that has a coupling apparatus (e.g., a mechanical connection between the greppable handle and the belt).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the dolly of Fig. 1 of Knox to include the handle-to-cart strap connection of Fig. 15 of Knox since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (connecting the strap 240 to the upper handle assembly 100) with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results (e.g., providing an additional means for carrying the structure and/or preventing the two material handling accessories 100/20 from sliding off of the structure to be transported).
Lastly, while Knox does not explicitly recite that the straps (104/240) are made from fabric, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to use a fabric material for the flexible straps, since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to increase the portability of the dolly.
Regarding claim 13, Knox further discloses that the first and second retention members (104, 240) are each made of a flexible material (see ¶0071 where strap 104 is described as being made from nylon or plastic; and ¶0090 where the second retention strap 240 is described as flexible).
Regarding claim 14, Knox further discloses that the number of wheels comprises a first wheel and a second wheel, and wherein the base assembly (40) further comprises a first support member (e.g., side wall 32) and a second support member (34) each coupled to the base member and a corresponding one of the first and second wheels (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Knox further discloses that the handle (108) is a first handle, and wherein the base member (40) comprises a body and a gripping member (24) extending outwardly from the body and being disposed midway between the first wheel and the second wheel (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Knox further discloses that the coupling apparatus (106) and the handle (e.g., the loop “102” in Fig. 10) are formed as a unitary component made from a single piece of material (see Fig. 11 showing how each half 114, 116 separately read upon the recited coupling apparatus and handle and either half is of unibody construction).
Further, even if the two halves 114,116 did not read upon the unitary component recitation, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to make the two-piece handles 102/103 as a single piece of material, since the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in the prior art would have required only routine skill in the art (see In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965)). The motivation for doing so would be to take advantage of modern manufacturing capabilities such as additive manufacturing to form the handle to reduce the number of components (eliminating assembly of halves and the need for mechanical fasteners).
Regarding claims 19-20, Knox further discloses that multiple handles (102/103) can be used (see Fig. 1) and further discloses an embodiment where the flexible base-connecting retention member (210; see Fig. 14) can pass through a handle assembly (222) to be fixed at an upper portion of the structure. As shown in the Figs., the second retention member (210/240) is oriented perpendicularly to the apparatus-surrounding first retention member (104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to provide two sets of handle assemblies (100) instead of a single handle assembly, since a mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to increase the number of grip points to allow multiple workers to carry the structure. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the dolly of Knox as modified above with respect to claim 12 to include the strap-through-handle arrangement of Fig. 14 of Knox since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (connecting the strap 240 to the upper handle assembly 100 through a second, lower handle assembly) with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results (e.g., providing an additional means for carrying the structure and/or preventing the several material handling accessories 100/100/20 from moving around and/or off of the structure to be transported).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knox in view of Gould (6,401,951).
Regarding claim 7, while Knox discloses that the strap size adjustment can be via any appropriate apparatus (see ¶0079), it does not specifically disclose that the adjustment mechanism has a tongue that is configured to extend into a plurality of slots in the retention member when tightening.
Gould teaches the well-known expedient of using a worm gear clamp (130; see Fig. 5 and Col. 5, lines 41-58) that is rotated to have a pinion/tongue (134) that engages a series of slots (138) in a structure-surrounding retention member (136) to tighten around a structure (30).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the handle assembly of Knox to use a worm gear adjuster as taught by Gould to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because doing so constitutes applying a simple substitution of one known element (worm gear adjusters) for another (generic strap tightness adjuster) to yield obtain predictable results.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knox in view of McDonald (5,102,154) and Marques et al. (6,113,12).
Regarding claim 7, Knox does not disclose that its base’s supports are adjustable.
McDonald teaches another dolly including a pair of base-mounted supports (28/29; see Figs. 7, 7A) that can be adjustable in the dolly-width direction.
Marques teaches another dolly having adjustment features that increase and decrease the size of the dolly’s material handling elements (40/43). The adjustment is accomplished via an elongated base (41) having a plurality of thru holes (48). The supports (43, see Fig. 3) are adjustable width wise via a biased pin (49) to lock the supports in a desired width position.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have modified the dolly of Knox with adjustable base supports as taught by McDonald and to use a biased-to-locked adjustment pin and hole adjustment lock as taught by Marques to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because doing so constitutes applying a known technique (e.g., -------making a support adjustable and using a locking pin to readily engage and disengage a locked position) to known devices (e.g., wheeled dolly’s having cantilevered material handling supports) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g., -------a dolly that can be readily adjusted to better carry differently sized structures).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose or otherwise fairly suggest a dolly having the recited support members having an L-shaped leg and an elongated element that connects a wheel to the L-shaped leg and which is connected to a first leg of the L-shaped leg which has a surface oriented at an obtuse angle with respect to the base member along with all of the other recited elements and limitations.
Conclusion
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire reference(s) as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE CLEMMONS whose telephone number is (313)446-4842. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-4:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached on 303-297-4337. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/STEVE CLEMMONS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618