Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because
The abstract contains more than 150 words in length.
In line 1, “Disclosed is” should be removed.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 11-16 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.
Claims 11 and 15 recites the limitation "the axis" in line 7 of claim 11 and line 9 of claim 15. Furthermore, the phrase “bridging portion shaped to extend about the axis” in line 7 of claim 11 and line 9 of claim 15, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear as to what part of the assembly the axis is referring too. Suggestion to change “defining a central aperture” to read ---defining a central aperture having an axis---, in line 2 of claim 11 and line 4 of claim 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 12-14 are rejected because they are dependents of claim 11.
Claim 16 is rejected because it is a dependent of claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Maire (US7735809B2).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Maire discloses an assembly (10; Figures 1-5) for carrying a winch cable (412), the assembly (10) including: a housing (15) for a winch ring (25) carrying a cable (412), the winch ring (25) defining a central aperture (63) having an axis, and a peripheral region (64) defining an annular groove for receiving the cable (412), the housing (15) including: opposed gripping members (27, 30) joined by at least one bridging portion (32; 34), each gripping member (27, 30) configured to be releasably mountable to a side of the winch ring (25) to position the at least one bridging portion (32; 34) across the annular groove, the at least one bridging portion (32; 34) shaped to extend about the axis to enclose a portion of the annular groove to inhibit removal of the cable (412) from the winch ring (25), the gripping members (27, 30) being mountable to the winch ring (25) to permit relative rotation of the peripheral region (64) and the housing (15) about the axis, and at least one of the gripping members (27, 30) shaped to at least partially surround the central aperture (63) to allow access through the central aperture (63).
Regarding claims 2-5, Maire discloses wherein the gripping members (27, 30) are biased towards each other;
wherein the gripping members (27, 30) and the at least one bridging portion (32; 34) are integrally formed such that the gripping members (27, 30) are resiliently pivotable relative to the at least one bridging portion (32);
wherein each gripping member (27, 30) defines a free end (34) extending away from the at least one bridging portion (32), and a portion (bent portion at end 34) of each gripping member (27, 30) adjacent the free end (34) is arranged to diverge away from the corresponding portion of the other gripping member (27; 30);
wherein the at least one of the gripping members (27, 30) is shaped to encircle (circular cutouts on gripping members 27,30) the central aperture (63).
Regarding claim 7, Maire discloses wherein the at least one bridging portion (32; 34) is arranged to extend around at least 90 degrees about the axis of the winch ring (25).
Regarding claims 12-13, Maire discloses wherein the winch ring (25) includes a body (25, 63, 64; Figures 1-5) defining the annular groove (surface 64) and the central aperture (63), and a hub (cylindrical portion surrounding central aperture 63; Figure 2) mounted to the body in the central aperture (63), and wherein the gripping members (27, 30) are mountable to the hub;
wherein the hub is fixedly secured to the body (25, 63, 64) such that the hub is rotatably locked to the body (25, 63, 64).
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gazit (WO2022190092A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Gazit discloses an assembly (10; Figures 1A-1F) for carrying a winch cable (40), the assembly (10) including: a housing (20) for a winch ring (30) carrying a cable (40), the winch ring (30) defining a central aperture (central hole of hub 110) having an axis, and a peripheral region (90) defining an annular groove (93) for receiving the cable (40), the housing (20) including: opposed gripping members (80 of housing members 20, both sides) joined by at least one bridging portion (60), each gripping member (80 of housing members 20) configured to be releasably mountable to a side of the winch ring (30) to position the at least one bridging portion (60) across the annular groove (93), the at least one bridging portion (60) shaped to extend about the axis to enclose a portion of the annular groove (93) to inhibit removal of the cable (40) from the winch ring (30), the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) being mountable to the winch ring (30) to permit relative rotation of the peripheral region (90) and the housing (20) about the axis, and at least one of the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) shaped to at least partially surround the central aperture to allow access through the central aperture.
Regarding claims 2-3, Gazit discloses wherein the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) are biased towards each other (¶0042, gripping members 80 return closer to each other when the ring 30 is not inserted);
wherein the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) and the at least one bridging portion (60) are integrally formed such that the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) are resiliently pivotable relative to the at least one bridging portion (60; ¶0042, gripping members 80 are pushed outwards in relation to the bridging portion 60 when the ring 30 is inserted).
Regarding claims 5-7, Gazit discloses wherein the at least one of the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) is shaped to encircle the central aperture;
wherein each gripping member (80 of housing members 20) defines an aperture (85) dimensioned to surround a hub (110; Figures 1A-1F) arranged through the central aperture, and each gripping member (80 of housing members 20) defines at least one cut out arranged to centralise the aperture (85) on the hub (110);
wherein the at least one bridging portion (60) is arranged to extend around at least 90 degrees (120-180 degrees) about the axis of the winch ring (30).
Regarding claims 12-13, Gazit discloses wherein the winch ring (30) includes a body (91, 92) defining the annular groove (93) and the central aperture (central hole of hub 110), and a hub (110) mounted to the body (91, 92) in the central aperture, and wherein the gripping members (80 of housing members 20) are mountable to the hub (110).
wherein the hub (110) is fixedly secured to the body (91, 92) such that the hub (110) is rotatably locked to the body (91, 92).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8, 10, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maire in view of Olinger (US1627572A).
Regarding claims 8 and 10, Maire discloses the housing, but fails to teach a central bridging portion interposed between a pair of spaced side bridging portions, and wherein the bridging portions are arranged to extend about more than 90 degrees about the axis of the winch ring; wherein each side bridging portion defines a flared outer edge section.
Olinger teaches a similar housing and further teaches a central bridging portion (7) interposed between a pair of spaced side bridging portions (SBP; see Olinger annotated Figure 1 below), and wherein the bridging portions (SBP) are arranged to extend about more than 90 degrees about the axis of the winch ring (1); wherein each side bridging portion (SBP) defines a flared outer edge section (FES). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of Maire to include the side bridging portions as taught by Olinger in order to further inhibit removal of the cable across a greater radius of the winch ring while preventing damage to the cable by reducing sharp edges.
PNG
media_image1.png
250
307
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Olinger, Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 14, Maire discloses the housing, but fails to teach wherein the hub defines a rounded entrance and exit to the central aperture.
Olinger teaches a similar housing and further teaches wherein the hub (3; Figure 5) defines a rounded entrance and exit to the central aperture (inner edge at hub ends 4 include a rounded portion, both sides). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of Maire to include the winch ring hub as taught by Olinger in order to provide easier and smoother access of an axle or shackle into the central aperture of the winch ring.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maire in view of Hancock (US10029893B2).
Regarding claims 15-16, Maire discloses a winch assembly (10; Figures 1-5) including: a winch ring (25) defining a central aperture (63), and a peripheral annular groove (64) for receiving the cable (412); and a housing (15) having opposed gripping members (27, 30) joined by at least one bridging portion (32; 34), each gripping member (27, 30) configured to be releasably mountable to a side of the winch ring (25) to position the at least one bridging portion (32; 34) across the annular groove, the at least one bridging portion (32; 34) shaped to extend about the axis to enclose a portion of the annular groove to inhibit removal of the cable (412) from the winch ring (25), the gripping members (27, 30) being mountable to the winch ring (25) to permit relative rotation about the axis, and at least one of the gripping members (27, 30) shaped to at least partially surround the central aperture (63) to allow access through the central aperture (63); a shackle (20) releasably securable through the central aperture (63), but fails to teach an electrically powered winch connected to a cable and operable to wind the cable to adjust its effective length.
Hancock teaches a similar winch assembly and further teaches an electrically powered winch (52; Figure 1; column 2, lines 45-50) connected to a cable (54) and operable to wind the cable (54) to adjust its effective length. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of Maire to include the electrically powered winch as taught by Hancock in order to provide easier operation and reduce effort by the operator and enable greater loads to be lifted or pulled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the entire combination of elements set forth including for disclosing wherein each side bridging portion defines a split extending perpendicular to the axis to divide the side bridging portion into two sections, whereby the two sections are separable when the gripping members are urged apart when being mounted on the winch ring.
Olinger is the closest prior art and further teaches side bridging portions, but fails to teach wherein each side bridging portion defines a split extending perpendicular to the axis to divide the side bridging portion into two sections, whereby the two sections are separable when the gripping members are urged apart when being mounted on the winch ring.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references listed on form PTO-892 are cited for their relevance to the disclosed invention and demonstration of the state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anna Momper can be reached at 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 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619