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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Comments
The Examiner notes that the office action below may reference support found in the cited prior art by indicating element numbers, figures or by pointing out a specific paragraph (PAR) number in which support can be found. The PAR number referenced corresponds to paragraph number beginning in the "Detailed Description" of the disclosure unless otherwise noted. The pending claims are 15-32.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 20, is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 20 depends from itself and it is not clear what applicant is claiming or what limitations are encompassed by the claim. Claim 20 has been examined as if it depends directly from claim 15. Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-19, 21-22, 28, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 1,047,164 to Butenschoen.
With regard to claim 15, a backpack device comprising: a harness unit (disclosed in fig. 2); a battery pack receptacle (20) for receiving a battery pack capable of supplying an attached accessory with energy (concrete vibrator not positively claimed nor any structural limitations of such accessory claimed), wherein the accessory has an elastically deformable protective hose (15); and a hose guide (fig. 1 shows securement point 9 guides hose 15 over a user’s shoulder), the protective hose guideable via the hose guide with a load-transferring effect over a shoulder of a user of the backpack device.
With regard to claim 16, wherein the hose guide is designed to allow the protective hose to still be movable along a longitudinal direction (hose guide 9, fig. 1, allows hose 15 to move longitudinally within it).
With regard to claims 17-18, further comprising a housing separate from the harness unit, the hose guide being arranged on the housing (the housing 8 with tubular arms 12, 13, and wherein hose guide 9 is secured to, is a separate structure from the harness, see fig. 1).
With regard to claim 19, further comprising a housing, the hose guide being integrated in the housing (fig. 1 shows the hose guide 9 integrated with the housing attached to the harness unit).
With regard to claim 21, wherein the hose guide has a convex surface (hose guide 9, fig. 1, has a convex surface).
With regard to claim 22, wherein the convex surface extends across a major part of a width of the housing (the convex surface of hose guide 9, fig. 1, extends across a part of a width of the housing).
With regard to claim 28, wherein the battery pack receptacle (20) is arranged beneath the hose guide (fig. 2 shows the battery pack receptacle on the harness belt which is located beneath the hose guide 9).
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 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 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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,047,164 to Butenschoen in view of design choice.
As discussed above and with regard to claim 20, Butenschoen discloses the invention substantially as claimed including a backpack device comprising: a harness unit (disclosed in fig. 2); wherein the accessory has an elastically deformable protective hose (15); and a hose guide (fig. 1 shows securement point 9 guides hose 15 over a user’s shoulder). Butenschoen does not disclose wherein the hose guide is formed in one piece with the housing. Having the hose guide as a separately attached element or formed as one piece with the housing is an obvious choice of design modification. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to incorporate the hose guide 9 into the housing since applicant has not disclosed that having the hose guide separate of integrated solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with either design choice.
Claims 29-32, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,047,164 to Butenschoen in view US 2021/0148126 to Gallagher et al.
As discussed above and with regard to claim 15, Butenschoen discloses a backpack device comprising: a harness unit (disclosed in fig. 2); a battery pack receptacle (20) for receiving a battery pack capable of supplying an attached accessory with energy (concrete vibrator not positively claimed nor any structural limitations of such accessory claimed), wherein the accessory has an elastically deformable protective hose (15); and a hose guide (fig. 1 shows securement point 9 guides hose 15 over a user’s shoulder), the protective hose guideable via the hose guide with a load-transferring effect over a shoulder of a user of the backpack device. Now regarding claim 29 (which incorporates claim 15) and claim 32, the accessory of Butenschoen is not a concrete vibrator. However, the accessory attached to the backpack harness is an obvious swap and Gallagher teaches a concreted vibrator (10, fig. 1) mounted on a backpack harness and having a hose (26, fig. 1, mountable over the shoulder of a user, PAR 0019). Gallagher further discloses the hose 26 to be flexible/deformable and the backpack having a battery 22 and electric motor 18, PAR 0017).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the clamed invention to combine the harness of Butenschoen with the concrete vibrator of Gallagher. A person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of providing a backpack harness for a user with an over-the-shoulder hose guide.
With regard to claim 30, wherein the electric motor is arranged in the backpack device (PAR 0017) or the protective hose has a mechanical driveshaft driven by the electric motor.
With regard to claim 31, wherein the electric motor (18) is arranged in a vibrating cylinder of the concrete vibrator see fig. 1), and the protective hose (26) includes an electric cable via which the electric motor is connected to the battery pack (Gallagher discloses the motor to be wirelessly connected with the vibrator, but that may also have a wired connection, PAR 0031).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-27, are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but appear to be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attachment (PTO-892) for notice of references cited and recommended for consideration based on their disclosure of limitations of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian Nash whose telephone number is 571-272-4465. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. The official fax number for this Group is: 571-273-8300; Inventor Assistance Center is 800-786-9199.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system; see www.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).
/BRIAN D NASH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
7/13/2026
Prosecution Insights