DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: a comma “,” appears to be needed between “a second cable support member” (line 3) and “the second cable support member” (lines 3-4). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: “second mast portion” (line 4) appears to need to be changed to -the second mast portion-, as “a second mast portion” is already claimed in lines 1-2. 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 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 15, this claim claims:
“wherein the plurality of legs and the mast are oriented such that when the legs are in the inward position, the legs prevent the mast from moving from the non-vertical position to the vertical position.”, see last 3 lines of the claim.
This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is consistent with the Specification. Paragraphs 0045-0047 of the Specification disclose that a leg locking assembly (36) prevents the mast from achieving a full vertical position. Thus, the leg locking assembly prevents the mast from moving from the non-vertical position to the vertical position, not the plurality of legs as currently claimed.
Further, the claim is indefinite because the claim is not clear as to how the positioning of the legs in the inward position prevent the mast from moving.
Regarding claim 20, this claim claims:
“wherein the mast and plurality of legs are configured such that when the legs are in the inward orientation, the mast cannot move from the non-vertical orientation to the vertical orientation”, see lines 12-14 of the claim.
This limitation renders the claim indefinite because the limitation is consistent with the Specification. Paragraphs 0045-0047 of the Specification disclose that a leg locking assembly (36) prevents the mast from achieving a full vertical position. Thus, the leg locking assembly prevents the mast from moving from the non-vertical position to the vertical position, not the plurality of legs as currently claimed.
Further, the claim is indefinite because the claim is not clear as to how the positioning of the legs in the inward position prevent the mast from moving.
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, 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 1-5, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thorby (WO 93/12029) in view of Hall (US Patent 11,332,208 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Thorby discloses a portable collapsable crane (see figures 1-4) comprising:
A portable lifting machine (see figures 1-4, especially figure 1) for lifting a load, the machine comprising:
a base (2 and/or 3, see figures 1-4, especially figure 1);
a base post (7, see figures 1-4, especially figure 1) extending upward from the base;
a mast (25, see figures 1-4, especially figure 1) pivotally attached to the base post at a pivot point (18, see figures 1-4, especially figure 1); and
a load lifting assembly (20, 28, and 29) attached to the mast (as the rope is connected to the mast 25) or the base post (as at least winch 20 is attached to post 7) and selectively operable to lift the load.
Thorby does not explicitly disclose a plurality of legs selectively rotatable about the base and each of the plurality of legs rotatably coupled to the base and having a distal end with a wheel.
Hall discloses a device for removing, storing and installing convertible SUV hardtops from the rear or side comprising a base (3, 6, 7, 7A, and 12, see figures 3 and 11) comprising a plurality of legs (6, see figures 3 and 11) selectively rotatable about the base (see column 4 lines 53-59) and each of the plurality of legs rotatably coupled to the base and having a distal end with a wheel (7, see figures 3 and 11). Hall teaches that the base is a wheeled base affixed to and supporting a vertical support (see column 4 lines 11-20).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby by providing and attaching a wheeled base to the base post of Thorby, to affix a wheeled base to and supporting a vertical support as taught by Hall, and/or to utilize the portable lifting machine at locations that are not accessible to a motor vehicle (such as inside of buildings or rooftops of buildings).
Regarding claim 2, Thorby further shows wherein the machine has a machine width (see figures 1-4) and a machine height (see figures 1-4).
Thorby does not explicitly disclose 1) wherein the plurality of legs are movable between an inward orientation and an outward orientation, and 2) wherein the machine width when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation is less than the machine width when the plurality of legs is in the outward orientation.
Hall discloses a device for removing, storing and installing convertible SUV hardtops from the rear or side comprising a base (3, 6, 7, and 7A, see figures 3 and 11) further comprising the plurality of legs (6, see figures 3 and 11) are movable between an inward orientation and an outward orientation (as the legs of the base are adjustable using aligning holes/pins, see column 4 lines 53-59). Hall teaches that the base is a wheeled base affixed to and supporting a vertical support (see column 4 lines 11-20).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall above by providing and attaching a wheeled base with a plurality of movable legs to the base post of Thorby, to affix a wheeled base to and supporting a vertical support as taught by Hall, and/or to utilize the portable lifting machine at locations that are not accessible to a motor vehicle (such as inside of buildings or rooftops of buildings).
With the modification above, the machine width when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation is less than the machine width when the plurality of legs is in the outward orientation.
Regarding claim 3, Thorby and Hall discloses the claimed invention except for wherein when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation, the machine width is less than or equal to 36 inches.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the machine width is less than or equal to 36 inches, when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation, 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.
The machine width is less than or equal to 36 inches, when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation, is a result-effective range because the recognized result would be to provide a machine width small enough to fit tight spaces inside of buildings or inside structures. Further, the result expected by one of ordinary skill in the art would be to provide the machine width that is adjustable for the different loads to be supported by the portable crane.
The difference between the claimed invention of dependent claim 3 and the prior art of Thorby and Hall is the machine width is less than or equal to 36 inches, when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation. The discovering of an optimum range of a result effective range would be within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Further regarding claim 3, Thorby and Hall discloses the claimed invention except for wherein when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation, the mast is lowerable from a vertical position such that the machine height is less than or equal to 72 inches.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the machine height is less than or equal to 72 inches, when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation, 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.
The mast is lowerable from a vertical position such that the machine height is less than or equal to 72 inches, when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation, is a result-effective range because the recognized result would be to provide a machine height small enough to fit tight spaces inside of buildings or inside structures. Further, the result expected by one of ordinary skill in the art would be to provide the machine height that is adjustable for the different loads to be supported by the portable crane.
The difference between the claimed invention of dependent claim 3 and the prior art of Thorby and Hall is mast is lowerable from a vertical position such that the machine height is less than or equal to 72 inches, when the plurality of legs are in the inward orientation. The discovering of an optimum range of a result effective range would be within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, Thorby does not explicitly disclose the base includes a receptable configured to receive the base post; and the base post is detachably connected to the base at the receptable.
Hall discloses a device for removing, storing and installing convertible SUV hardtops from the rear or side comprising a base (3, 6, 7, and 7A, see figures 3 and 11) further comprising a single central tube (i.e. receptable) with four tubes extending laterally therefrom (see column 4 lines 53-59). Hall teaches that the base is a wheeled base affixed to and supporting a vertical support (see column 4 lines 11-20).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall above by providing and attaching a wheeled base with a single central tube as a receptable to the base post of Thorby, to affix a wheeled base to and supporting a vertical support as taught by Hall, and/or to utilize the portable lifting machine at locations that are not accessible to a motor vehicle (such as inside of buildings or rooftops of buildings).
Regarding claim 5, Thorby does not explicitly disclose wherein the base has a front end and a rear end; two of the plurality of legs are front legs positioned on opposing sides of the front end of the base; and two of the plurality of legs are rear legs positioned on opposing sides of the rear end of the base.
Hall discloses a device for removing, storing and installing convertible SUV hardtops from the rear or side comprising a base (3, 6, 7, and 7A, see figures 3 and 11) further comprising the base has a front end (see figures 3 and 11) and a rear end (see figures 3 and 11); two of the plurality of legs are front legs (see figures 3 and 11) positioned on opposing sides of the front end of the base; and two of the plurality of legs are rear legs (see figures 3 and 11) positioned on opposing sides of the rear end of the base. Hall teaches that the base is a wheeled base affixed to and supporting a vertical support (see column 4 lines 11-20).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall above by providing and attaching a wheeled base with the base having a front end and a rear end; two of the plurality of legs are front legs positioned on opposing sides of the front end of the base; and two of the plurality of legs are rear legs positioned on opposing sides of the rear end of the base, to affix a wheeled base to and supporting a vertical support as taught by Hall, and/or to utilize the portable lifting machine at locations that are not accessible to a motor vehicle (such as inside of buildings or rooftops of buildings).
Regarding claim 7, Thorby does not explicitly disclose a leg locking assembly selectively engageable with the base and at least one leg of the plurality of legs to fix the at least one leg in either the inward orientation or the outward orientation.
Hall discloses a device for removing, storing and installing convertible SUV hardtops from the rear or side comprising a leg locking assembly (12, see figures 3 and 11, and column 4 lines 53-59) selectively engageable with the base (see column 4 lines 53-59) and at least one leg of the plurality of legs to fix the at least one leg in either the inward orientation or the outward orientation (see column 4 lines 53-59). Hall teaches that the legs are adjustable using aligning holes/pins (see column 4 lines 53-59).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall above by providing a leg locking assembly between a central portion of the base and a legs of the base, to provide a legs that are adjustable as taught by Hall, to provide a machine width small enough to fit tight spaces inside of buildings or inside structures, and/or to provide adjustability of the lifting machine for different sized loads hoisted by the lifting machine.
Regarding claim 9, Thorby further shows a mast orientation locking pin (41, see figure 3) selectively engageable with the base post (see figure 3) and the mast (see figure 3) to fix the mast in either a vertical orientation (see figure 3) or a non-vertical orientation.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thorby (WO 93/12029) in view of Hall (US Patent 11,332,208 B2) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, and 9 above, and further in view of Greenwood (US Patent 2,985,430).
Regarding claim 11, Neither Thorby nor Hall disclose wherein the load lifting assembly includes a lifting cable support assembly coupled to the mast, the lifting cable support assembly including a first cable support member and a second cable support member the second cable support member movably disposed on the first cable support member between a retracted position and an extended position, the second cable support member movable on the first cable support member in a lateral direction with respect to the mast.
Greenwood discloses a winch comprising a load lifting assembly includes a lifting cable support assembly (52, 53, 59, 63, 62, 64, 60, 60, 61, 65 and 66, see figures 1-6, especially figure 3) coupled to a mast (13, see figures 1-3), the lifting cable support assembly including a first cable support member (52, 53, 59, 62, 60, 61, and 66) and a second cable support member (63, 64, 65, and 66, see figure 3), the second cable support member movably disposed on the first cable support member (see figure 3, and see column 4 lines 13-32) between a retracted position (see figure 3) and an extended position (see figure 3), the second cable support member movable on the first cable support member in a lateral direction (see figure 3) with respect to the mast (see figure 3).
Greenwood teaches that the arrangement is particularly desirable where the sleeves must be set to positions to counterbalance angular pulls on the pulleys (see column 4 lines 18-26). Greenwood further teaches that the device is substantially self-balancing under vertical loading conditions (see column 4 lines 27-32).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall above by providing and attaching the load lifting assembly of Greenwood to the end of the mast of Thorby, to provide an arrangement that is particularly desirable where the sleeves must be set to positions to counterbalance angular pulls on the pulleys as taught by Greenwood, and/or to provide a device that is substantially self-balancing under vertical loading conditions.
Regarding claim 12, Thorby further shows a lifting cable (28, see figures 1-4) engageable with the load.
Neither Thorby nor Hall disclose the load lifting assembly further comprises wherein as the second cable support member moves relative to the first cable support member, the lifting cable support assembly is either automatically or selectively configurable to position the first location and the second location substantially equidistant from the mast.
Greenwood discloses a winch comprising a load lifting assembly includes a lifting cable support assembly (52, 53, 59, 63, 62, 64, 60, 60, 61, 65 and 66, see figures 1-6, especially figure 3) coupled to a mast (13, see figures 1-3), the lifting cable support assembly including a first cable support member (52, 53, 59, 62, 60, 61, and 66) and a second cable support member (63, 64, 65, and 66, see figure 3), and wherein as the second cable support member (63, 64, 65, and 66, see figure 3) moves relative to the first cable support member (see figure 3), the lifting cable support assembly is either automatically or selectively (see figure 3) configurable to position the first location and the second location substantially equidistant from the mast (see figure 3).
Greenwood teaches that the arrangement is particularly desirable where the sleeves must be set to positions to counterbalance angular pulls on the pulleys (see column 4 lines 18-26). Greenwood further teaches that the device is substantially self-balancing under vertical loading conditions (see column 4 lines 27-32).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall and Greenwood above by providing and attaching the load lifting assembly of Greenwood to the end of the mast of Thorby, to provide an arrangement that is particularly desirable where the sleeves must be set to positions to counterbalance angular pulls on the pulleys as taught by Greenwood, and/or to provide a device that is substantially self-balancing under vertical loading conditions.
With the modification above, the lifting cable is looped through the first cable support member and the second cable support member, and the lifting cable is applying a lifting force on the first cable support member at a first location and applying the lifting force on the second cable support member at a second location.
Regarding claim 13, Neither Thorby nor Hall disclose wherein the first location at which the lifting cable applies the lifting force on the first cable support member is selectively adjustable.
Greenwood discloses a winch comprising a load lifting assembly includes a lifting cable support assembly (52, 53, 59, 63, 62, 64, 60, 60, 61, 65 and 66, see figures 1-6, especially figure 3) coupled to a mast (13, see figures 1-3), the lifting cable support assembly including a first cable support member (52, 53, 59, 62, 60, 61, and 66) and a second cable support member (63, 64, 65, and 66, see figure 3), and wherein the first location at which the lifting cable applies the lifting force on the first cable support member is selectively adjustable (see figure 3).
Greenwood teaches that the arrangement is particularly desirable where the sleeves must be set to positions to counterbalance angular pulls on the pulleys (see column 4 lines 18-26). Greenwood further teaches that the device is substantially self-balancing under vertical loading conditions (see column 4 lines 27-32).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall and Greenwood above by providing and attaching the load lifting assembly of Greenwood to the end of the mast of Thorby, to provide an arrangement that is particularly desirable where the sleeves must be set to positions to counterbalance angular pulls on the pulleys as taught by Greenwood, and/or to provide a device that is substantially self-balancing under vertical loading conditions.
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thorby (WO 93/12029) in view of Hall (US Patent 11,332,208 B2) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, and 9 above, and further in view of Dirksen (US Patent 4,310,098).
Regarding claim 14, Thorby further shows that the mast is a telescopic mast (see figures 1-4) including two or more telescoping mast portions (see figures 1-4, and page 2 lines 20-28).
Neither Thorby nor Hall disclose wherein the mast comprises one or more mast pulley assemblies operable to extend or retract the telescoping mast portions.
Dirksen discloses a portable boom structure comprising a telescopic mast (18 and 20, see figures 1 and 10-12) further comprising the mast includes two or more telescoping mast portions (18 and 20, see figures 1 and 10-12) further comprising one or more mast pulley assemblies (84, 92 and 96, see figures 10-12) operable to extend or retract the telescoping mast portions (see column 5 line 65 to column 6 line 44).
Dirksen teaches that the mast pulley assemblies move one section (20) of the telescopic mast within another section (18) of the mast (see column 5 line 65 to column 6 line 44, especially column 5 lines 65-68, and figures 1 & 10-12).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify portable lifting machine of Thorby as modified by Hall above by providing one or more mast pulley assemblies between the telescoping mast portions of Thorby, to move one telescopic mast sections with respect to another mast section as taught by Dirksen, and/or to increase the operational range of the portable lifting machine.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8, and 10 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.
Claims 15 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Claims 16-19 depend on claim 15.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Thorby (WO 93/12029), Hall (US Patent 11,332,208 B2), Greenwood (US Patent 2,985,430), and Dirksen (US Patent 4,310,098) are considered the closest prior art references to the claimed invention of dependent claim 6, dependent claim 8, and dependent claim 10.
Claim 6 claims:
“wherein each of the plurality of legs is rotatable on the base along a horizontal reference plane about the base post when the base post is attached to the base, and each front leg is movably connected to a corresponding rear leg on a corresponding side of the base such that rotating either the front or rear leg about the base in a first rotational direction causes the corresponding rear or front leg to rotate about the base in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction.”
Important Note: Underlining is provided to point out the important areas of the bolded limitation above.
None of Thorby, Hall, Greenwood, nor Dirksen disclose nor would be obvious to the limitation of “wherein each of the plurality of legs is rotatable on the base along a horizontal reference plane about the base post when the base post is attached to the base, and each front leg is movably connected to a corresponding rear leg on a corresponding side of the base such that rotating either the front or rear leg about the base in a first rotational direction causes the corresponding rear or front leg to rotate about the base in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction”, in conjunction with the limitations of claim 5 and independent claim 1.
Claim 8 claims:
“wherein when the leg locking assembly is engaged with the base and at least one leg to fix the at least one leg in the outward orientation while the mast is in a vertical orientation, the leg locking assembly prevents the mast from moving out of the vertical orientation.”
Important Note: Underlining is provided to point out the important area of the bolded limitation above.
None of Thorby, Hall, Greenwood, nor Dirksen disclose nor would be obvious to the limitation of “wherein when the leg locking assembly is engaged with the base and at least one leg to fix the at least one leg in the outward orientation while the mast is in a vertical orientation, the leg locking assembly prevents the mast from moving out of the vertical orientation”, in conjunction with the limitations of claim 7 and independent claim 1.
Claim 10 claims:
“a mast strap selectively extendable and retractable to transition the mast between a full vertical orientation and a non-vertical orientation.”
Important Note: Underlining is provided to point out the important areas of the bolded limitation above.
None of Thorby, Hall, Greenwood, nor Dirksen disclose nor would be obvious to the limitation of “a mast strap selectively extendable and retractable to transition the mast between a full vertical orientation and a non-vertical orientation”, in conjunction with the limitations of independent claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN J CAMPOS, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5229. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Anna M. Momper can be reached on phone number 571-270-5788. 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.
/JJC/
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619