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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1-14 contain various grammatical errors. For example, claims utilize inconsistent use of punctuation and parenthesis, see claim 6 and claim 3, line 5: “calve” should be “valve”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
The following are non-limiting examples of indefinite or unclear claim limitations:
Claims 1-14 contain the indefinite pronoun(s) “it” and/or “itself”. Please replace with the noun to which it refers.
As an example, claim 1 recites the limitation "the side surfaces" and “the swivel parts” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. This is a non-limiting example of insufficient antecedent basis for claims 1-14.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "e.g." (for example) and “such as” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 5, the phrase "and the like" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "and the like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear to Examiner what is meant by “healthy opening” and “corrugated structure” as these terms are not provided within the specification.
Examiner recommends rewriting the claims to positively recite the components being claimed and the structural relationship between the components consistent with the disclosure.
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flynn (US 20200206641 A1) in view of Tilley (US 20110083577 A1) and Brannan (US 7966941 B1).
Regarding claim 1: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn teaches backward anti-slip adventure park roller, wherein, it comprises of the following; central safety point where the side surfaces are attached, side surfaces that are located in the center, placed on the central security point consisting of 2 symmetrical parts, on which movable roller, outer cover anti-slip valve spring are attached to the spaces thereon, moving roller that is movable and wear-resistant placed between the side surfaces part, allows the wedge part to pass without being stuck with the help of its oval design (Fig.11), external coating that is placed on the side surfaces part, enables intervention of the moving parts in the interior from the outside, is designed to prevent the parts to be jammed from getting inside, to be protected from rain or sun rays, and also to prevent the user from being harmed (such as pinching his/her hand, rubbing against the rope, etc.) (top of frame 101; Fig.11), backward anti-slip valve that is placed on the side surfaces part, opens only in one direction and then closes by itself with the help of the spring engaged thereto (106; Fig.11), allows itself to pass through the wedge then, comes to a position to prevent the roller from slipping back by closing with the help of the spring, spring that is connected between the anti-slip valve and the side surfaces ensures that the anti-slip valve is closed after the wedge passage (Fig.11), valve limiter fixed wedge which is the fixed part on the side surfaces part (bottom surface of 101 preventing further movement of 106; Fig.11), security backward anti-slip wedge which is placed on the steel rope and works in interaction with the anti-slip valve cover in sloping areas (Fig.11). Flynn does not teach the use of plastic or swivel which is the part used for the connection of the user of the safety roller and the part on which the parts (e.g., carabiner, caver carabiner, locked carabiner, etc.) that will ensure a safe connection with the user are attached, valve bearing housing that is integrated on the backward anti-slip valve in which the valve bearing is inserted, valve bearing that is placed inside the valve bearing housing part, is used to reduce friction during the passage of the wedge part on the steel rope and to enable the same to move freely on the steel rope, brake system wedge which is placed on the central safety point and can be removed when not desired, security connection apparatus, rope which is the part that ensures the safety of the users.
However, Tilley teaches swivel which is the part used for the connection of the user of the safety roller and the part on which the parts (e.g., carabiner, caver carabiner, locked carabiner, etc.) that will ensure a safe connection with the user are attached (Fig.57), valve bearing housing in which the valve bearing is inserted, valve bearing that is placed inside the valve bearing housing part, is used to reduce friction during the passage of the wedge part on the steel rope and to enable the same to move freely on the steel rope (340; Fig.25), and security connection apparatus, rope which is the part that ensures the safety of the users (480; Fig.57). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with a swivel connection and security connection to provide a safe connection for user attachment and a valve bearing to reduce friction of actuated moving parts to prevent component damage and wear with a reasonable expectation of success.
Further, Brannan teaches a brake system wedge which is placed on the central safety point and can be removed when not desired (34FL; Fig.6B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with a brake system wedge to provide a user activated braking device for safe roller operation with a reasonable expectation of success.
Flynn in view of Tilley and Brannan teach the claimed invention except for the outer cover being plastic. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize plastic as desired, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP § 2144.07.
Regarding claim 2: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein; it comprises a central safety point to which side surfaces are attached, through which the wedge can easily pass with the help of the space therein (Fig.11). Flynn does not teach the brake system wedge can be installed with the help of the slots on the upper side, and which can be mounted on the side surfaces parts by means of the slots thereon, to which the swivel part on the bottom can be mounted, consists of materials resistant to abrasion, impacts and loads that may occur thereon.
However, Tilley teaches bottom mounted swivel parts (Fig.57). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with the swivel parts to provide a safe connection of the user to the roller with a reasonable expectation of success.
Further, Brannan teaches the brake system wedge that is installed on slots on the upper side, and which can be mounted on side surfaces by means of the slots thereon (34FL; Fig.6B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with a brake system wedge to provide a user activated braking device for safe roller operation with a reasonable expectation of success.
Flynn in view of Tilley and Brannan teach the claimed invention except for the use of materials resistant to abrasion, impacts and loads that may occur thereon. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize resistant materials as desired, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP § 2144.07.
Regarding claim 3: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn further teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein; it comprises side surfaces which are mounted on the central security point have slots for mounting and fixing the parts inside, and have the parts placed inside as follows; moving roller plastic external cover backward anti-slip valve spring which has valve limiter fixed wedge protrusion that stands fixedly on the side surfaces part, protruding outward, prevents the roller assembly from slipping back on inclined areas by means of the backward anti-slip valve and the spring placed thereon, thus have valve limiter fixed wedge thereon so as to prevent possible accidents of the user (Fig.11).
Regarding claim 4: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn further teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein; it comprises moving roller whose side surfaces are fixed between its parts, which can rotate around its own axis by means of the bearings inside, provides convenience in the transition of wedges with the help of its design and wide inner oval structure, allows the wedge to move freely without getting stuck while passing through the roller assembly and to allow the movement capability that passes over the same, is friction resistant and durable (Fig.11).
Regarding claim 5: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises external coating which is at the top of all moving and stationary parts therein, prevents the connection parts on the central security point and the side surfaces from being interfered with from the outside, at the same time, prevents the user from squeezing his/her hand or other objects into the roller assembly during the movements of moving parts such as the moving roller the backward anti-slip valve and the like, allows users to avoid accidents that occur in case of collision or friction with the roller assembly with minimum damage with the help of its oval structure (Fig.11). Flynn does not teach the use of a brake system wedge to be mounted and removed whenever desired with the space on the upper part of it.
However, Brannan teaches a brake system wedge that can be mounted and removed as desired (34FL; Fig.6B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with a brake system wedge to provide a user activated braking device for safe roller operation with a reasonable expectation of success.
Flynn in view of Tilley and Brannan teach the claimed invention except for the outer cover being plastic. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize plastic as desired, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP § 2144.07.
Regarding claim 6: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn further teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises backward anti-slip valve which is mounted inside the side surfaces is a moving part, allows the wedge piece on the steel rope to pass depending on the direction of passage during their passage, returns to its former position after the wedge passes, with the help of the spring engaged with it, allows passage in one direction, allows passage or prevents back-slipping according to the structure of the wedge allows the roller assembly to move in one direction, is located behind the direction of travel of the roller assembly and thus sticks on the wedge and restricts its progress if the roller assembly is placed on the steel rope in the wrong direction (Fig.13) (for cases where the backward anti-slip valve is located at the front), this situation restricts the misuse of the roller and prevents possible accidents), allows the valve limiter wedge backward anti-slip valve on side surfaces to open in one direction and restricts their movement in the other direction (Fig.11).
Flynn in view of Tilley and Brannan teaches the claimed invention except for the wedge being conical. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the wedge a conical shape, since it has been held the modifying the configuration or shape of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B).
Regarding claim 7: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn further teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises spring which is mounted between the backward anti-slip valve and the side surfaces creates a force for the backward anti-slip valve to return to its original position after it moves (106; Fig.11).
Regarding claim 8: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn does not teach a swivel which is the movable part mounted under the central security point and on which a security connection apparatus can be connected to the slots thereon and thus which enables the user connection with the roller assembly, can move around its own axis and connection axis with the help of its moving parts, reduces the loads on the roller in the movements of the safety roller assembly in different directions with its mobility, prevents buckling of the connection apparatus made by the user with its rotation ability.
However, Tilley teaches a swivel which is the movable part mounted under the central security point and on which a security connection apparatus can be connected to the slots thereon and thus which enables the user connection with the roller assembly, can move around its own axis and connection axis with the help of its moving parts, reduces the loads on the roller in the movements of the safety roller assembly in different directions with its mobility, prevents buckling of the connection apparatus made by the user with its rotation ability (Fig.57). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with the swivel parts to provide a safe connection of the user to the roller with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 9: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises the backward anti-slip valve and during the passage of the wedge on the steel rope the anti-slip valve allows the wedge to pass (Fig.11). Flynn does not teach the valve bearing housing which is the fixed part in which valve bearing can be placed and which allows the valve bearing to provide preliminary contact.
However, Tilley teaches the use of a valve bearing housing which is the fixed part in which valve bearing can be placed and which allows the valve bearing to provide preliminary contact of moving actuated parts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with a valve bearing to reduce friction of actuated moving parts to prevent component damage and wear with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 10: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises the wedge and backward anti-slip valve (Fig.11). Flynn does not teach the valve bearing which is mounted in the valve bearing housing provides ease of opening with the help of its movable structure in wedge transitions, at the same time prevents the steel rope from rubbing against the backward anti-slip valve cover, prevents wear and damage to the backward anti-slip valve cover, provides a healthy opening of the cover by making contact beforehand during the pass through the roller assembly or the wedge being conical.
However, Tilley teaches a valve bearing which is mounted in the valve bearing housing provides ease of opening with the help of its movable structure in wedge transitions, at the same time prevents rubbing of components, prevents wear and damage to components, and provides an opening by making contact beforehand during the pass through the roller assembly (340; Fig.25). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with the valve bearing of Tilley to reduce friction of actuated moving parts to prevent component damage and wear with a reasonable expectation of success.
Flynn in view of Tilley and Brannan teaches the claimed invention except for the wedge being conical. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the wedge a conical shape, since it has been held the modifying the configuration or shape of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B).
Regarding claim 11: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn further teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises valve limiter wedge which has a protrusion located on the side surfaces is a rear section located on the side surface parts, limits the reverse movements of the wedge to this cover after the cover of the backward anti-slip valve is opened, supports the one-way operation of the backward anti-slip valve (Fig.11).
Regarding claim 12: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn does not teach the brake system wedge which is mounted on the upper section of the central security point and is a portable piece that can be disassembled when not desired, is used to prevent repulsion in activities to be carried out on the safety line and in braking systems for stopping purposes, is a one-way protrusion.
However, Brannan teaches a brake system wedge which is mounted on the upper section of the central security point and is a portable piece that can be disassembled when not desired, is used to prevent repulsion in activities to be carried out on the safety line and in braking systems for stopping purposes, is a one-way protrusion (34FL; Fig.6B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with a brake system wedge to provide a user activated braking device for safe roller operation with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 13: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn does not teach a security connection apparatus which is a detachable connection piece that users use when connecting to the roller assembly.
However, Tilley teaches a security connection apparatus which is a detachable connection piece that users use when connecting to the roller assembly (490; Fig.57). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the roller of Flynn with the security connection apparatus of Tilley to provide a safe connection for users to the roller with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 14: As best understood by Examiner, Flynn further teaches the backward anti-slip adventure park roller according to claim 1, wherein, it comprises the wedge which is placed on the steel rope so as to prevent the roller assembly from slipping back on sloping areas, allows the movement of the roller in one-way transitions with the help of its structure (Fig.13).
Flynn in view of Tilley and Brannan teaches the claimed invention except for the wedge being conical. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the wedge a conical shape, since it has been held the modifying the configuration or shape of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEAVEN BUFFINGTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am to 5:00pm ET.
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 (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571)272-8300. 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.
/HEAVEN R BUFFINGTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615