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 .
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.
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase "preferably" 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).
Dependent claim 12 fails to resolve the deficiency.
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, 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, 8-10, 13-14, 16, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hetrich (US 20190313746) in view of Stephens et al. (US 20210275190), hereinafter Stephens.
Regarding claim 1, Hetrich teaches of (fig. 1) a fall-protection safety harness configured so that when the harness is worn by a user (abstract, wearable body harness 100), a first ventral strap of the harness extends from the right shoulder of the user to the right hip of the user (shoulder strap 126b and strap 102c extends from the right shoulder of the user to the right hip of the user) and a second ventral strap of the harness extends from the left shoulder of the user to the left hip of the user (shoulder strap 126a and strap 102c extends from the left shoulder of the user to the left hip of the user),
wherein a first buckle portion is mounted on the first ventral strap (portion of connection arrangement 200 on the first ventral strap 126b, 102c for buckle attachment) and a second buckle portion is mounted on the second ventral strap (portion of connection arrangement 200 on the second ventral strap 126a, 102c for buckle attachment), the first and second buckle portions being detachably attached to each other to form a ventral buckle (fig. 2A, ¶0073, connection arrangement 200 detachably connected to each other),
wherein the first and second ventral straps and the first and second buckle portions (200) are configured so that the ventral buckle is at least generally aligned with a sagittal plane of the user and harness (¶0073, the connection arrangement 200 is configured for connecting portions of the shoulder strap 126 across the user's chest. With symmetrical arrangement, the connection arrangement 200 would be aligned with a sagittal plane of the user and harness),
wherein each of the first and second buckle portions comprises a respective vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within degrees of a vertical axis of the harness (fig. 3B, opening 226a),
wherein, for at least one of the first and second ventral straps (126b, 102c or 126a, 102c), two layered portions of the at least one ventral strap, in an overlapping relation pass through the respective vertically-elongated slot (226a) of the buckle portion mounted on the at least one ventral strap, thereby forming a securing portion on the at least one ventral strap (fig. 6C, strap 102 of the first ventral strap 126b, 102c and second ventral strap 126a, 102c passes through respective vertically-elongated slot 226a of the buckle portion mounted on the at least one ventral strap and overlaps to form the layered portions on strap 102, thereby forming a securing portion on the at least one ventral strap),
wherein the harness further comprises at least one strap securing means (fig. 6C, adjustment bar 230a), and
wherein the at least one strap securing means (230a) and the securing portion of the at least one ventral strap are configured and arranged such that the buckle portion mounted on the at least one ventral strap is secured to the at least one ventral strap (fig. 6C, ¶0081, strap 102 is looped around the strap securing means 230a, the frictional contact prevents the strap from moving relative to the first connector 202).
Hetrich does not appear to teach of wherein a respective vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within plus or minus 20 degrees of a vertical axis of the harness.
Stephens teaches of (fig. 6) the portions comprise a vertically-elongated slot (channel 614 is vertical if the hook 120 is oriented vertically) that is oriented within plus or minus 20 degrees of a vertical axis (fig. 6, ¶0095, first leg strap channel 614 may extend along a second longitudinal axis, the second longitudinal axis forming an angle of less than ninety degrees with the first longitudinal axis of channel 612, which can be an angle of 10, 20, 30, 40 , or 50 degrees).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hetrich to incorporate the teachings of Stephens of the buckle portions comprise a vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within plus or minus 20 degrees of a vertical axis of the harness in order to have an angled slot that aligns the strap in a degree the user would want and would allow securement of the strap to the user while also following the user’s body for comfort.
It should be noted that the degree as claimed does not show criticality as disclosed in the specifications or the drawings.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the vertically-elongated slot orientated within any degree range of a vertical axis of the harness in order to use an angle that secures the strap to the user while following the shape of the user and providing comfort, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 2, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 1, and wherein the two layered portions of the at least one ventral strap form a loop that is arranged around the at least one strap securing means (seen in fig. 6C).
Regarding claim 8, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 1, and wherein (fig. 6C) the respective vertically-elongated slot of at least one of the first and second buckle portions (fig. 6C, opening 226a is a vertically-elongated slot as modified in claim 1); and
wherein the at least one of the first and second buckle portions that comprises the substantially vertically-elongated slot also comprises at least one auxiliary elongate slot (fig. 3A, gap 218a) that exhibits a long axis that is oriented at an angle of from 0 degrees to 90 degrees relative to the substantially vertically-elongated slot (226a) (seen in fig. 6C).
Hetrich does not appear to teach of a substantially vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within plus or minus 10 degrees of a vertical axis of the harness.
Stephens teaches of (fig. 6) a substantially vertically-elongated slot (channel 614 is vertical if the hook 120 is oriented vertically) that is oriented within plus or minus 10 degrees of a vertical axis (fig. 6, ¶0095, first leg strap channel 614 may extend along a second longitudinal axis, the second longitudinal axis forming an angle of less than ninety degrees with the first longitudinal axis of channel 612, which can be an angle of 10, 20, 30, 40 , or 50 degrees).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hietrich to incorporate the teachings of Stephens of a substantially vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within plus or minus 10 degrees of a vertical axis of the harness in order to have an angled slot that aligns the strap in a degree the user would want and would allow securement of the strap to the user while also following the user’s body for comfort
It should be noted that the degree as claimed does not show criticality as disclosed in the specifications or the drawings.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the vertically-elongated slot orientated within any degree range of a vertical axis of the harness in order to use an angle that secures the strap to the user while following the shape of the user and providing comfort, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 9, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 8, and wherein (fig. 3A) the substantially vertically-elongated slot (226a) and/or the at least one auxiliary elongate slot (218a) are integrally formed with the at least one of the first and second buckle portions (seen in fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 10, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 8, and wherein (fig. 3A) the substantially vertically-elongated slot (226a) and/or the at least one auxiliary slot (218a) are provided by a strap routing means (connectors 202, 204 of connection arrangement 200 are strap routing means) attached to the at least one of the first and second buckle portions (seen in fig. 6C), wherein preferably the substantially vertically-elongated slot and the at least one auxiliary elongate slot are integrally formed with each other in the strap routing means (seen in fig. 3A, integrally formed together on the same buckle portion).
Regarding claim 13, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 1, and wherein each of the first and second ventral straps comprises two layered portions in an overlapping relation (fig. 6C, straps 102 and 126a seen in overlapping two layered portions. Ventral strap 126b also would be in overlapping two layered portions) that pass through the respective vertically-elongated slot (226a) of the corresponding one of the first and second buckle portions, thereby forming a securing portion on each of the first and second ventral straps (seen in fig. 6C),
wherein the fall-protection safety harness comprises two strap securing means (fig. 2A, 230a for each connector 202, 204), and wherein each of the two strap securing means and the securing portion of a corresponding one of the first and second ventral straps are configured and arranged such that each of the first and second buckle portions is secured to the corresponding one of the first and second ventral straps (the secured arrangement is seen in figs. 1 and 6C).
Regarding claim 14, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 8, and wherein (fig. 6C) each of the first and second buckle portions comprises a respective substantially vertically-elongated slot (226a) that is oriented within degrees of the vertical axis of the harness (fig. 3B, opening 226a), and wherein each of the first and second buckle portions also comprises at least one respective auxiliary elongate slot (fig. 3A, gap 218a) that exhibits a long axis that is oriented at an angle of from 0 degrees to 90 degrees relative to the respective substantially vertically-elongated slot (226a) (seen in fig. 6C).
Hetrich does not appear to teach of a respective substantially vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within plus or minus 10 degrees of a vertical axis of the harness.
Stephens teaches of (fig. 6) each of the buckle parts comprises a substantially vertically-elongated slot (channel 614 is vertical if the hook 120 is oriented vertically) that is oriented within plus or minus 10 degrees of a vertical axis (fig. 6, ¶0095, first leg strap channel 614 may extend along a second longitudinal axis, the second longitudinal axis forming an angle of less than ninety degrees with the first longitudinal axis of channel 612, which can be an angle of 10, 20, 30, 40 , or 50 degrees).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hietrich to incorporate the teachings of Stephen of each of the buckle parts comprises a substantially vertically-elongated slot that is oriented within plus or minus 10 degrees of a vertical axis of the harness have an angled slot that aligns the strap in a degree the user would want and would allow securement of the strap to the user while also following the user’s body for comfort.
It should be noted that the degree as claimed does not show criticality as disclosed in the specifications or the drawings.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the vertically-elongated slot orientated within any degree range of a vertical axis of the harness in order to use an angle that secures the strap to the user while following the shape of the user and providing comfort, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 16, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 1, and wherein the first and second buckle portions are directly attached to each other by way of metal components of the first and second buckle portions (fig. 3A, ¶0074, the connection arrangement 200 may be made from metal. First and second buckle portions are seen directly attached to each other) and wherein the first and second buckle portions are not directly attached or connected to each other by way of any flexible strap or webbing (seen in fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 23, Hetrich teaches of a method of donning the fall-protection safety harness according to claim 1 (as rejected in claim 1 above), the method comprising wrapping an upper portion of the safety harness about the shoulders and upper torso of the user in the manner of a jacket (¶0071, the shoulder straps 126a, 126b may be connectable together at a front portion of the harness 100 in an area of the user’s chest. Examiner notes this way is in the manner of a jacket) and then attaching the first and second buckle portions to each other to form the ventral buckle (seen in fig. 2A), wherein the method does not require any step of pulling the harness downward over the head and shoulders of the user in the manner of a pullover sweater (¶0071, wrapped around the user like a jacket and not downward over the head and shoulders of the user).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hetrich as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Lang et al. (US 20060102423), hereinafter Lang.
Regarding claim 12, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 10, and wherein each of the first and second buckle portions comprises metal (¶0074, the connection arrangement 200 may be made from metal).
Hetrich does not appear to teach of wherein each strap routing means comprises a polymeric material.
Lang teaches of wherein the buckle portions comprise metal and wherein the strap routing means comprise a polymeric material (figs. 2A-2G, ¶0148, connectors 200a and 200b are preferably fabricated from materials (which can, for example, include one or more metals, high-strength polymeric materials, high-strength composite materials or combinations thereof; fig. 5A, ¶0156, high-strength clip 600 can be fabricated from a polymeric material).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hetrich to incorporate the teachings of Lang of wherein each strap routing means comprises a polymeric material in order to use materials of sufficient strength and can withstand loads experienced in a fall as motivated by Lang in para. 0148.
Claims 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hetrich as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Casebolt et al. (US 6668434), hereinafter Casebolt.
Regarding claim 17, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 1, but does not appear to teach of wherein the first buckle portion comprises a base plate and a cover plate that are permanently attached to each other by multiple mechanical fasteners, and wherein the base plate and the cover plate of the first buckle portion are configured to define a receiving cavity into which a catch of the second buckle portion can be received in order to attach the first and second buckle portions to each other, and wherein the base plate and the cover plate also define an opening into which the catch of the second buckle portion can be inserted to reach the receiving cavity.
Casebolt teaches of (fig. 1) wherein the first buckle portion (buckle 100) comprises a base plate (intermediate plate 130) and a cover plate (outer plates 111, 112) that are permanently attached to each other by multiple mechanical fasteners (rivets 122 hold the base plate 130 and the cover plates 111, 112 permanently together), and wherein the base plate (130) and the cover plate (111, 112) of the first buckle portion are configured to define a receiving cavity (fig. 2, receiving end 107) into which a catch of the second buckle portion (catch 170) can be received (seen in fig. 3) in order to attach the first and second buckle portions to each other (seen in fig. 3), and wherein the base plate (130) and the cover plate (111, 112) also define an opening (fig. 2, opening at receiving end 107 extending to cavity of opening 119) into which the catch of the second buckle portion (170) can be inserted to reach the receiving cavity (seen in fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hetrich to incorporate the teachings of Casebolt of wherein the first buckle portion comprises a base plate and a cover plate that are permanently attached to each other by multiple mechanical fasteners, and wherein the base plate and the cover plate of the first buckle portion are configured to define a receiving cavity into which a catch of the second buckle portion can be received in order to attach the first and second buckle portions to each other, and wherein the base plate and the cover plate also define an opening into which the catch of the second buckle portion can be inserted to reach the receiving cavity in order to have a sliding latching and catching mechanism to buckle the portions together and have the increased friction keep the connection secure and to have a lesser chance to unlatch due to external forces.
Regarding claim 18, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 17, but does not appear to teach of wherein the first buckle portion comprises first and second pivotable latches that are pivotably mounted to the base plate and/or to the cover plate and that are pivotably movable between a first, unlatched position that allows the catch of the second buckle portion to exit the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion to detach the first and second buckle portions from each other, and a second, latched position that securely holds the catch of the second buckle portion within the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion and prevents the catch from being removed from the receiving cavity.
Casebolt teaches of (fig. 1) wherein the first buckle portion (100) comprises first and second pivotable latches (pawls 158, 159) that are pivotably mounted to the base plate (col. 2 lines 24-36, pawls 158, 159 are pivotally mounted on the base plate 130) and/or to the cover plate (col. 2 lines 24-36, pawls 158, 159 pivotally mounted to cover plates 111, 112) and that are pivotably movable between a first, unlatched position that allows the catch of the second buckle portion (170) to exit the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion (107) to detach the first and second buckle portions from each other (col. 3 lines 1-7, As a person uses his/her thumb and forefinger to urge respective force receiving portions to the pawls 158 and 159 away from the tab 132, the thumb and forefinger thereafter encounter the relatively wider portion of the catch 170 upon release of the catch 170 from the housing 101. This "transitional" arrangement facilitates both unlatching and removal of the catch 170 in one continuous motion.), and,
a second, latched position that securely holds the catch of the second buckle portion (170) within the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion (107) and prevents the catch from being removed from the receiving cavity (col. 2 lines 47, As the end 171 is inserted into the housing 101, it pushes the latching portions of the pawls 158 and 159 away from one another. Upon continued insertion of the end 171, the pawls 158 and 159 encounter the recessed edges 175 of the catch 170 and snap back toward one another (and behind the forwardmost portion of the catch 170)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hetrich to incorporate the teachings of Casebolt of wherein the first buckle portion comprises first and second pivotable latches that are pivotably mounted to the base plate and/or to the cover plate and that are pivotably movable between a first, unlatched position that allows the catch of the second buckle portion to exit the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion to detach the first and second buckle portions from each other, and a second, latched position that securely holds the catch of the second buckle portion within the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion and prevents the catch from being removed from the receiving cavity in order to have a latching mechanism that uses friction and force to keep the buckle secure and requires a certain force and direction to unlatch the buckle.
Regarding claim 19, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 18, but does not appear to teach of wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion are biased by biasing members toward the second, latched position, and wherein the first and second pivotable latches are configured so that the fingers of a user can overcome the biasing force of the biasing members and manually pivot the first and second latches from the second, latched position into the first, unlatched position by manipulating exposed ear portions of the first and second pivotable latches.
Casebolt teaches of (fig. 1) wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion (158, 159) are biased by biasing members (respective springs 160) toward the second, latched position (col. 2 lines 37-46, The pawls 158 and 159 have respective latching portions that are biased toward one another by respective springs 160.), and wherein the first and second pivotable latches (158, 159) are configured so that the fingers of a user can overcome the biasing force of the biasing members and manually pivot the first and second latches from the second, latched position into the first, unlatched position by manipulating exposed ear portions of the first and second pivotable latches (col. 3 lines 1-7, As a person uses his/her thumb and forefinger to urge respective force receiving portions to the pawls 158 and 159 on the exposed ear portions away from the tab 132, the thumb and forefinger thereafter encounter the relatively wider portion of the catch 170 upon release of the catch 170 from the housing 101. This "transitional" arrangement facilitates both unlatching and removal of the catch 170 in one continuous motion.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hetrich to incorporate the teachings of Casebolt of wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion are biased by biasing members toward the second, latched position, and wherein the first and second pivotable latches are configured so that the fingers of a user can overcome the biasing force of the biasing members and manually pivot the first and second latches from the second, latched position into the first, unlatched position by manipulating exposed ear portions of the first and second pivotable latches in order to have a latching mechanism that uses friction and force to keep the buckle secure and requires a certain force and direction by the user to unlatch the buckle.
Regarding claim 20, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 19, but does not appear to teach of wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion are configured so that moving the first and second buckle portions toward each other in a transverse direction so that the catch of the second buckle portion enters the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion causes a leading end of a head of the catch to impinge on contact surfaces of the first and second pivotable latches and overcome the biasing force of the biasing members so as to urge the first and second pivotable latches to pivotably move to their first, unlatched position.
Casebolt teaches of (fig. 1) wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion (158, 159) are configured so that moving the first and second buckle portions toward each other in a transverse direction so that the catch of the second buckle portion enters the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion causes a leading end of a head of the catch to impinge on contact surfaces of the first and second pivotable latches (158, 159) and overcome the biasing force of the biasing members so as to urge the first and second pivotable latches to pivotably move to their first, unlatched position (fig. 3, col. 3 lines 1-7, a person moving the first and second pivotable latches 158, 159 away from the tab 132 means moving the first and second pivotable latches 158, 159 towards each other in a transverse way. This pushes the catch of the second buckle portion 170 to enter the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion 107, causing a leading end 171 of a head of the catch 170 to impinge on contact surfaces of the first and second pivotable latches 158, 159 and overcome the biasing force of the biasing members 160 so as to move to an unlatched position).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Hetrich to incorporate the teachings of Casebolt of wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion are configured so that moving the first and second buckle portions toward each other in a transverse direction so that the catch of the second buckle portion enters the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion causes a leading end of a head of the catch to impinge on contact surfaces of the first and second pivotable latches and overcome the biasing force of the biasing members so as to urge the first and second pivotable latches to pivotably move to their first, unlatched position in order to have a unlatching mechanism that uses a specific force and direction to unlatch the buckle such that it is prevented from unlatching by other means.
Regarding claim 21, Hetrich as modified teaches of claim 20, and Casebolt further teaches of (fig. 2) wherein the first and second pivotable latches of the first buckle portion (158, 159) are configured so that sufficient penetration of the catch of the second buckle portion (170) into the receiving cavity of the first buckle portion (107) causes the biasing force exerted by the biasing members (160) to urge the first and second pivotable latches (158, 159) to automatically pivotably move into the second, latched position to securely hold the catch within the receiving cavity (abstract, First and second springs are interconnected between the at least one intermediate plate and respective pawls in a manner that biases the latching portions of the pawls to pivot toward one another to be in a latched position.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 15 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/7/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hetrich does not disclose “a first ventral strap extending from the right shoulder of the user to the right hip of the user and a second ventral strap extending from the left shoulder of the user to the left hip of the user” and rather discloses first and second shoulder straps arranged in an X-shaped configuration at a front portion of the harness, citing para. 0067. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Para. 0067 of Hetrich does not teach of the first and second shoulder straps arranged in an X-shaped configuration at a front portion of the harness. Instead, Hetrich teaches of “The shoulder strap 126 may have a first shoulder strap 126a and a second shoulder strap 126b arranged to overlap one another in an X-shaped configuration” (¶0067), “the connection arrangement 200 is configured for connecting portions of the shoulder strap 126 across the user's chest, the connection arrangement 200 can be used to connect any two or more straps of the harness 100” (¶0073), and of a back strap 130 (¶0070). Furthermore, the first and second ventral straps as referred to above are shoulder straps 126a, 126b, and leg strap intermediate portion 102c. The X-shaped configuration as seen in fig. 1 seems to be able to be located on the back and a portion of the shoulder strap 126 is “configured to extend over at least a portion of the user's shoulders” to the user’s chest and extend downwards to the respective left and right hip via strap 102c.
Applicant argued that the connection arrangement 200 being connected at the chest does not teach of the claimed ventral buckle formed by first and second buckle portions mounted on the first and second ventral straps. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The first and second ventral straps as referred to above are shoulder straps 126a, 126b, and leg strap intermediate portion 102c. Being connected on the chest portion means the first and ventral straps 126a, 126b, 102c are located on the ventral portion of the user and as seen in fig. 1, the ventral straps extend from the connection arrangement 200 downwards to the hips via strap 102c.
Applicant argues that Hetrich’s adjustable buckle opening 226a is not the claimed slot arrangement of claim 1 because Hetrich's opening 226a is part of adjustable buckle 222a and cooperates with movable adjustment bar 230a, which is in contrast to claim 1 reciting a vertically-elongated slot of a buckle portion through which two layered portions of a ventral strap pass in overlapping relation to form a securing portion on the ventral strap. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Hetrich teaches of the vertically-elongated slot 226a of a buckle portion (portion of connection arrangement 200) through which two layered portions of a ventral strap pass in overlapping relation (fig. 6C, strap 102 of the ventral straps passes through vertically-elongated slot 226a and back around to have a top and bottom portion that are layered in overlapping relation) to form a securing portion on the ventral strap (securing portion formed by attaching to the adjustable buckle 222a).
Applicant argues that Stephen does not teach of an orientation of a buckle slot relative to a vertical axis of a fall-protection harness worn by a user because Stephen discloses of an angular relationship between first leg strap channel 614 and a longitudinal axis of hook 120. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Hetrich already teaches of an orientation of a buckle slot relative to a vertical axis of a fall-protection harness worn by a user (fig. 3B, opening 226a is orientated relative to a vertical axis of the fall-protection harness when worn by a user). An angled orientation is still taught by Stephen and can be applied in relation to any axis, including a longitudinal axis of the buckle or a harness. One of ordinary skill in the art would incorporate the teachings of an angled orientation to Hetrich in order to have an angled slot that aligns the strap in a degree the user would want and would allow securement of the strap to the user while also following the user’s body for comfort. Furthermore, the claim is broad in which it can be interpreted that the buckle on which the slot is located on can be moved around based on whether the harness is worn or unworn, or adjusted on the user, such that the angle in relation to a vertical axis of the harness is changed, and only one position with the claimed angle is needed to read upon the claim.
In response to applicant's argument that Stephen being a tourniquet that has a different structure and different purpose from Hetrich is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Stephen is within the field of harnesses and a teaching of the harness of Stephen can be applied to the harness of Hetrich.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). The teaching of Stephens is for an angling an orientation of a slot to fit a user’s purpose, which one of ordinary skill in the art can use the teaching to apply to any slot of Hetritch in order to fit the user’s purpose to have an angled slot that aligns the strap in a degree the user would want and would allow securement of the strap to the user while also following the user’s body for comfort.
Applicant argues that the rationale that the claimed angular range is merely an optimized workable range is misplaced because Stephens is a tourniquet. The Applicant respectfully disagrees.
The optimized workable range is not in regards to Stephens and rather for a general teaching using case law that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the vertically-elongated slot orientated within any degree range of a vertical axis of the harness in order to use an angle that secures the strap to the user while following the shape of the user and providing comfort, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. This rationale is an alternative obviousness rejection to teach of the angled orientation.
Applicant argues that Hetrich does not expressly disclose the claimed donning method in respect to claim 23 because para. 0071 of Hetrich states only shoulder straps may be connectable together at a front portion of the harness in the area of the user's chest and does not teach of wrapping an upper portion of the safety harness about the shoulders and upper torso of the user in the manner of a jacket, nor does it teach that the method avoids pulling the harness downward over the head and shoulders in the manner of a pullover sweater. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The shoulder straps extends over at least a portion of the user’s shoulders (¶0067) and being connected together at a front portion of the front portion of the harness in the area of the user’s chest teaches of wrapping an upper portion of the safety harness about the shoulders and upper torso of the user in the manner of a jacket. The shoulder straps 126a, 126b of the ventral straps are at an upper portion of the safety harness about the shoulders and being connected at the chest means being connected at an upper torso of the user. The manner of a jacket is interpreted to be in a way the upper garment can be placed on a user’s shoulder and can at least partially be closed by closing in front of the user’s chest. Jackets can additionally be worn in different ways. If the Applicant is arguing for a specific jacket wearing that is not taught in Hetrich, the claim does not claim it. The claim also does not claim that the harness avoids pulling the harness downward over the head and shoulders in the manner of a pullover sweater. The claim merely claims “does not require any step of pulling the harness downward over the head and shoulders of the user in the manner of a pullover sweater”. Hetrich teaches of extending the shoulder straps around the user’s shoulders (¶0067) and connecting the straps together at the user’s chest (¶0071), which, as a way to don the harness, inherently teaches that it does not require the step of pulling the harness downward over the head and shoulders of the user in the manner of a pullover sweater.
In response to applicant's argument that Lang does not teach of wherein each strap routing means comprises a polymeric material because Lang's polymeric clip 600 is an accessory attachment clip, not a strap routing means associated with a buckle portion as recited in claim 12, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Hetrich already teaches of the arrangement of the strap routing means associated with a buckle portion and Lang is used to teach specifically of using a polymeric material in order to use materials of sufficient strength and can withstand loads experienced in a fall as motivated by Lang in para. 0148.
Applicant argues that Casebolt’s inspection openings 119 does not teach of the claimed opening in claim 17 because openings 119 are inspection windows that allow a person to visually confirm engagement of the pawls with the catch and are not openings into which the catch is inserted to reach the receiving cavity and rather, the catch is received through the receiving end 107 of the housing. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The Examiner agrees that openings 119 are inspection windows that allow a person to visually confirm engagement of the pawls with the catch but the opening is also part of the cavity in which it communicates with the receiving end 107 to receive the catch. The opening 119 is interpreted to include the window opening for inspection and the cavity opening for receiving the catch.
Regarding claim 20, Applicant argues that Casebolt does not teach of moving the first and second buckle portions toward each other so that a leading end of the catch impinges on contact surfaces of the latches during insertion because Casebolt teaches of a different buckle mechanism of a user moving the pawls with thumb and forefinger relates to unlatching and removal, and insertion of the catch causes the pawls to move apart and then snap back into engagement with recessed edges of the catch. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Claim 20 is broadly claimed, to which the buckle mechanism of Casebolt reads upon it. In addition to what is recited above for the rejection of claim 20, the Applicant’s argument that Casebolt teaches of “insertion of the catch causes the pawls to move apart and then snap back into engagement with recessed edges of the catch” reads upon the claimed “moving the first and second buckle portions toward each other so that a leading end of the catch impinges on contact surfaces of the latches during insertion”. Casebolt teaches of moving the first and second buckle portions toward each other (movement of first buckle portion 107 and second buckle portion with catch 170 toward each other leads to insertion of second buckle portion with the catch 170 to the first buckle portion 107) so that a leading end of the catch (170) impinges on contact surfaces of the latches during insertion (leading end of catch 170 impinges, or collides, on the contact surfaces of the pawls/latches 158, 159 during insertion). As long as the prior art is capable of operating the claimed limitations, the mechanism reads upon the claim.
Applicant argues that there is not an adequate articulated reason why a person of ordinary skill would have modified Hetrich's cited harness arrangement to include the specific Casebolt buckle structure in the claimed ventral-buckle configuration. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The argument does not appear to cite why the reasoning recited is not adequate. One of ordinary skill in the art would modify the teaching of Casebolt of a latch mechanism in order to have a latching mechanism that uses friction and force to keep the buckle secure and requires a certain force and direction to unlatch the buckle, which is more secure compared to having only a fictional engagement.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The cited references made of record in the contemporaneously filed PTO-892 form and not relied upon in the instant office action are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and may have one or more of the elements in Applicant’s disclosure and at least claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOE TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8530. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-6pm EST.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/ZOE TAM TRAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3647
