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 Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: it depends from cancelled Claim 17. For the purposes of examination, Claim 18 will be treated as depending from Claim 16. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 11,12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tseng in US Patent 9091293.
Regarding Claim 1, Tseng teaches a ladder rail lock comprising: a base (1/31) comprising: a main body having (31) a length and a width forming a footprint (the bottom of 132), and a height (see Fig. 4); a cylinder (1) having a height and diameter; a cylinder plug (10) orifice having a channel with a channel diameter; a plug stop (111); a handle crevice (332); a handle notch (331); and a rampart (333) between the handle crevice and the handle notch; a handle (32) having a locked (Fig. 1) and an unlocked (Fig. 6) position comprising; a pair of wings (A and B, see below) with a wing end (toward 335) wherein both wings extend beyond the main body foot print in both the locked and unlocked positions (the outer surfaces of A and B extend outward of the outer surface of footprint 132); a cylinder channel (320); and a base contact surface (335); a plug (2) comprising; a shaft (21); a head (211); and a shoulder (the top of 211); and a biasing member (23) coaxial with the plug shaft.
PNG
media_image1.png
368
402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Tseng teaches that the handle base contact surface is abutting the base handle crevice when the rail lock is in the locked position.
Regarding Claim 3, Tseng teaches that the handle base contact surface is abutting the base handle notch when the rail lock is in the unlocked position.
Regarding Claim 4, Tseng teaches that the handle can rotate coaxially with the base cylinder and wherein when the handle rotates coaxially with the base cylinder the handle base contact surface contacts the rampart (see Figs. 4-6).
Regarding Claim 5, Tseng teaches that the main body length and width are substantially equal.
Regarding Claim 6, Tseng teaches that the base cylinder is at least partially within the handle cylinder channel.
Regarding Claim 11, Tseng teaches that the biasing member is a spring and the spring rests between the plug shoulder and the base plug stop.
Regarding Claim 12, Tseng teaches that the handle base contact surface is non-planar (it is curved).
Regarding Claim 20, Tseng teaches a ladder rail lock comprising: a base (1/31) comprising: a main body comprising a footprint (the bottom of 132); a cylinder (1); a cylinder plug orifice (10) having a channel (within 10); a plug stop (111); a handle crevice (332); a handle notch (331); a rampart (333) between the handle crevice and the handle notch; and a lip (334); a handle (32) having a locked (Fig. 1) and an unlocked (Fig. 6) position comprising; a pair of wings (A and B, see above) comprising a wing end (toward 335) wherein each wing end extends beyond the main body footprint in both the locked and unlocked positions (the outer surface of 32 extends outward of the outer surface of 132); a cylinder channel (320); and a non-linear base contact surface (the base surface is curved); a plug (2) comprising; a shaft (21); a head (211); and a shoulder (the upper surface of 211); and a spring (23) coaxial to the plug shaft located between the plug shaft shoulder and the base plug stop.
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 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng as applied to Claim 4 above in view of Kieffer et al. in US Publication 2008/0000723. Tseng teaches that the base main body has sides (the side surface below the handle notch) on the base main body with handle notches but is silent on the use of a base main body with a lip. Kieffer teaches a ladder rail lock including a base main body (20A/20B) wherein the base main body comprises a lip (220) on the sides of the base main body and wherein the base main body comprises a bolt head slot (221) and bolt shaft orifice (222). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base of Tseng by using a base as taught by Kieffer in order to allow the user to mount he device on a round ladder rail.
Claims 13-16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kieffer et al. in US Publication 2008/0000723 in view of Tseng in US Patent 9091293.
Kieffer teaches an extension ladder comprising: an outer rail (12) having an outer surface and corner (the outer surfaces of 12 - see Fig. 3); an inner rail (11) slidable in relation to the outer rail; a ladder rail lock (30) mounted to the outer surface, the outer rail lock including a base (22A) with lip (222) that wraps at least partially around the corner of the outer rail and a base contact surface (220).
Kieffer is silent on the details of the ladder rail lock. Tseng teaches a ladder rail lock comprising: a base (1/31) comprising: a main body (31) comprising a footprint (the bottom of 132); a cylinder (1); a cylinder plug orifice (10) having a channel (within 10); a plug stop (111); a handle crevice (332); a handle notch (331); a rampart (333) between the handle crevice and the handle notch; a handle (32) having a locked (Fig. 1) and an unlocked (Fig. 6) position comprising; a pair of wings (A and B, see above), each wing with a wing end (the outer surface of the wings); a cylinder channel (320); and a base contact surface 335); a plug (2) comprising; a shaft (21); a head (211); and a shoulder (at the upper end of 211); and a biasing member (23). Tseng further teaches that the handle base contact surface is abutting the base handle crevice when the rail lock is in the locked position (See Fig. 1), that the handle base contact surface is abutting the base handle notch when the rail lock is in the unlocked position (see Fig. 6), that the biasing member is a spring, and the spring is coaxial to the plug shaft and rests between the plug shoulder and the base plug stop (See Fig. 4), that the wing comprises a wing end (the outer surface of 32) and the wing end extends beyond the footprint of the base main body in both the locked and unlocked positions (the outer surface of 32 extends outward of the outer surface of 132), that the handle base contact surface is non-planar (it is curved), and that the main body comprises a length and a width and the length and width are substantially equal. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kieffer by using a ladder lock as taught by Tseng in order to provide a more easily locked and unlocked device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant alleges that the base cannot have a length and a width because it is circular. While a circle is not defined by a length and a width, a circle defines a length and a width. The length is the distance from a left boundary along the diameter to the opposite right boundary so that the length is the same as the diameter. The width is the distance from an upper boundary to a lower boundary along the diameter so that the width is also the diameter. As clearly can be seen in Fig. 4, the wings both extend outward of the footprint of the base as defined by the area covered by 132 which is the only portion of the base that is in contact with the surface onto which it is installed. As such , the device is considered sufficient to meet the limitation in the claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
NOAH C. HAWK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/Noah C. Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights