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 § 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 10-11, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blodgett US 762875 (hereinafter Blodgett).
PNG
media_image1.png
548
372
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re. Cl. 10, Blodgett discloses: A lifting device (Fig. 1), comprising: a rectilinear frame assembly (1,s Fig. 1), wherein the rectilinear frame assembly circumscribes a payload region at least from a top-down view of the lifting device (see Fig. 1, vertically under 1s), and wherein the payload region is configured to receive a payload (see Fig. 1, receives payload lumber); padeyes (2, Fig. 1, 3) protruding from a top portion of the rectilinear frame assembly at each corner of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 1 and 3-4, the padeyes 2 protrude outward laterally from a top surface of 1’s); a plurality of hooks (see Fig. 3-4, hooks attached to the end of 3 as shown in Fig. 3 more closely) attached to an interior surface of the rectilinear frame assembly and adjacent to each corner of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 2-4), wherein first ones of the plurality of hooks are configured to support the payload (see Fig. 1, using 10-11); and an upper sling set (3, Fig. 1) attached to respective ones of the padeyes, wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the payload are configured to be lifted using the upper sling set (see Fig. 1, via 5-6).
Re. Cl. 11, Blodgett discloses: each sling of the upper sling set has an equal length (see Fig. 1-2, as having 1s and 11s lie flat and horizontal).
Re. Cl. 13, Blodgett discloses: a first lifting bar (11, Fig. 1) suspended from first and second vertical slings (8, Fig. 1) coupled to first and second hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 3), the first and second hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 3); and a second lifting bar (other 11, Fig. 1) suspended, parallel to the first lifting bar, from third and fourth vertical slings coupled to third and fourth hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1), the third and fourth hooks attached to the opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly; wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the first and second lifting bars are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the payload (see Fig. 1).
Re. Cl. 18, Blodgett discloses: one or more handles attached to a top side of the rectilinear frame assembly (see annotated figure 4).
Claims 19-21 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fitch US 1953957 (hereinafter Fitch).
Re. Cl. 19, Fitch discloses: A lifting device (Fig. 1), comprising: a rectilinear lifting frame (10, 11, Fig. -2) having plural sides (10s and 11s, Fig. 1-2), wherein each of the plural sides includes an interior surface that faces an opposing interior surface of another one of the plural sides (see Fig. 2); a first set of inward facing hooks (36, Fig. 3) attached to the interior surface at lateral ends of a first one of the plural sides adjacent to first and second corners of the rectilinear lifting frame (see Fig. 2-4, the hooks 36 are attached to interior surface by assembly and have their openings face inward); and a second set of inward facing hooks (35, Fig. 2) attached to the interior surface at lateral ends of a second one of the plural sides adjacent to third and fourth corners of the rectilinear lifting frame (see Fig. 2-4, the hooks 35 are attached to interior surface by assembly and have their openings face inward), wherein the first one of the plural sides faces the second one of the plural sides (see Fig. 3).
Re. Cl. 20, Fitch discloses: a region circumscribed by the rectilinear lifting frame is configured to receive a payload (see Fig. 1, payload B), and wherein the plural sides of the rectilinear lifting frame are configured to laterally contain the payload (see Fig. 1, the frame is rectangular and has an open space between bars 11 and 12, thus configured to prevent a payload protecting into the space from swaying laterally).
Re. Cl. 21, Fitch discloses: a radiused padeye (20, Fig. 3) extending from a top side of the rectilinear lifting frame at each of the first, second, third, and fourth corners (see Fig. 1-2), wherein the radiused padeyes are configured for attachment of a set of slings (25, 26 Fig. 1) by which the rectilinear lifting frame and a payload are lifted, and wherein each sling of the set of slings has an equal length (see Fig. 1, lifted via A and the same length so 11, 12 and B remains horizontal at rest).
Re. Cl. 25, Fitch discloses: a handle (39, Fig. 3) attached to a top side of the rectilinear frame and adjacent to each inward facing hook of the first and second sets of inward facing hooks (see Fig. 3, the structures 39 are handles since they are projecting members which can function to be gripped by a user to manipulate the frame).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blodgett in view of Town US 2007/0127852 (hereinafter Town).
Re. Cl. 14, Blodgett does not disclose a first polyester sling coupled to first and second hooks of the plurality of hooks, the first and second hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly; and a second polyester sling coupled to third and fourth hooks of the plurality of hooks, the third and fourth hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly; wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the first and second polyester slings are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the payload. Town discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1) which includes a first polyester sling (60, Fig. 1 crossing from one side of 5 and connected to an aligned 60 on the other side of 5) coupled to first and second hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1, via 61), the first and second hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 1 and 1a, aligned 60s on opposing sides of 5 would be able to be attached to first and second hooks on frame assembly using 61 in the manner shown in Fig. 14); and a second polyester sling (a different 60, Fig. 1 crossing from one side of 5 and connected to an aligned 60 on the other side of 5) coupled to third and fourth hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1, via 61),, the third and fourth hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 1 and 1a, aligned 60s on opposing sides of 5 would be able to be attached to first and second hooks on frame assembly using 61 in the manner shown in Fig. 14); wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the first and second polyester slings are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the payload (see Fig. 14).
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 Blodgett device to be used with the lifting bag of Town with reasonable expectation of success since Town states that such a modification enables for the transport of hazardous or radioactive materials (Paragraph 0002).
Claim 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blodgett in view of Hammond US 3765711 (hereinafter Hammond).
Re. Cls. 15-16, Blodgett does not disclose a cargo net coupled to and suspended from second ones of the plurality of hooks adjacent to each corner of the rectilinear frame assembly, wherein the cargo net is configured to surround and contain the payload (Cl. 15) or the cargo net includes an opening aligned with a bottom portion of the payload (Cl. 16). Hammond discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1) which includes a cargo net (13) capable of being coupled to and suspended from hooks (22, Fig. 4), wherein the cargo net is configured to surround and contain the payload (see Fig. 2); the cargo net includes an opening aligned with a bottom portion of the payload (see Fig. 2 and 4, at 18a, b,).
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 Blodgett device to use the cargo net of Hammond with reasonable expectation of success since Hammond states that such a modification would enable for the device to support cargo and allow the cargo to be discharged on the ground using a trip mechanism (Col. 3, Lines 5-11). Such a modification would not require a human to release the cargo from the ground making the discharge easier and quicker.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blodgett in view of Hammond as applied to claims 15-16 above, and further in view of Toffolon US 2696317 (hereinafter Toffolon).
Re. Cl. 17, Blodgett discloses the payload includes a flexible container having lifting handles (see Fig. 1, the Blodgett device is capable of being used with a flexible container resting on 11s, the Examiner notes that the claimed invention is drawn towards the lifting device rather than a combination of the lifting device and the container/payload, therefore the limitation dealing with the payload is functional), but does not disclose the lifting device further comprises spacer slings having first ends coupled to the first ones of the plurality of hooks adjacent to each corner of the rectilinear frame assembly, the spacer slings further having second ends coupled to both the handles of the flexible container and the cargo net. Toffolon discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1) which includes a frame (16, Fig. 1-2) and spacer slings (18, Fig. 1) having first ends coupled to the first ones of the plurality of hooks adjacent to each corner of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 1, at 20), the spacer slings further having second ends coupled to both the handles of the flexible container and the cargo net (see Fig. 1, at 22).
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 combination of Blodgett and Hammon to employ the spacer slings of Toffolon with reasonable expectation of success to lower the position of the payload, thus locating them closer to the ground and not requiring much movement to place the payload on the ground.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fitch in view of Blogdett.
Re. Cl. 23, Fitch discloses a first lower lifting bar suspended from first and second slings coupled to first and second inward facing hooks of respective ones of the first and second sets of inward facing hooks (see Fig. 1, the horizontal member under B secured to b’s) but does not disclose a second lower lifting bar suspended, parallel to the first lower lifting bar, from third and fourth slings coupled to third and fourth inward facing hooks of respective ones of the first and second sets of inward facing hooks. Blodgett discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1), comprising: a frame assembly (1,s Fig. 1), a first lifting bar (11, Fig. 1) suspended from first and second vertical slings (8, Fig. 1) coupled to first and second hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 3), the first and second hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 3); and a second lifting bar (other 11, Fig. 1) suspended, parallel to the first lifting bar, from third and fourth vertical slings coupled to third and fourth hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1), the third and fourth hooks attached to the opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly; wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the first and second lifting bars are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the payload (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the supporting structure under B of Fitch with the two lower lifting bars of Blodgett with reasonable expectation of success to provide an open undersurface of the payload where a user may inspect the quality of the payload for damage, or other conditions during movement.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fitch in view of Blodgett as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Hammond.
Re. Cl. 24, the combination of Fitch in view of Blodgett does not disclose a cargo net coupled to and suspended from inward facing hooks next to each of the first, second, third, and fourth inward facing hooks and adjacent to each of the first, second, third, and fourth corners, wherein the cargo net is configured to surround and contain the first and second lower lifting bars and a payload received within a region circumscribed by the rectilinear lifting frame. Hammond discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1) which includes a cargo net (13) capable of being coupled to and suspended from hooks (22, Fig. 4), wherein the cargo net is configured to surround and contain the payload (see 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 modify the Fitch in view of Blodgett device to use the cargo net of Hammond with reasonable expectation of success since Hammond states that such a modification would enable for the device to support cargo and allow the cargo to be discharged on the ground using a trip mechanism (Col. 3, Lines 5-11). Such a modification would not require a human to release the cargo from the ground making the discharge easier and quicker.
Claims 1 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fitch in view of Blodgett in view of Hammond.
Re. Cl. 1, Fitch discloses: An offshore lifting system (Fig. 1), comprising: an upper lifting frame (10s, 11s, Fig. 1-3); a radiused lifting lug (20, Fig. 1) disposed at each corner of the upper lifting frame and along a top surface of the upper lifting frame (see Fig. 1-3); and a plurality of weld-on hooks (35, 36, Fig. 3, as shown the hooks can be welded onto one another to form their integral connection or otherwise welded to other parts as so desired, thus being “weld-on” hooks) attached to opposing interior surfaces of the upper lifting frame and adjacent to corners of the upper lifting frame (see Fig. 3); wherein, in a first configuration of a first mode of operation (Fig. 1), and wherein, in a second mode of operation, lifting handles of a flexible container are configured for attachment to respective first ones of the plurality of weld-on hooks at each corner of the upper lifting frame, (it is the Examiner’s position that the flexible container is claimed functionally in this instance, therefore the Examiner is of the position that hooks provide a structure which is configured for a flexible container to be attached thereto, by hooking tying, etc onto the hooks 35, 36 if so desired).
Re. Cl. 5, Fitch discloses: the upper lifting frame has a substantially square shape from a top view (Lines 101-105, as being rectangular, the frame has a substantially square shape since it has four sides with right angles).
Re. Cl. 6, Fitch discloses: the rigid container includes an intermediate bulk container (IBC) and the flexible container includes a flexible IBC (FIBC) (see Fig. 1, the device is capable of being used with the particular payloads as claimed in the claimed intended use).
Re. Cl. 7, Fitch discloses: each of the radiused lifting lugs are configured for attachment of a respective sling (25, 26, Fig. 1) for coupling the upper lifting frame to a master link assembly (see A, Fig. 1), and wherein each of the respective slings configured for attachment to each of the radiused lifting lugs has an equal length (see Fig. 1 as having 10, 11 and B located horizontally balanced).
Re. Cl. 8, Fitch discloses: the upper lifting frame includes one or more handles (39, Fig. 3) coupled to a top surface of the upper lifting frame (see Fig. 3, the structures 39 are handles since they are projecting members which can function to be gripped by a user to manipulate the frame).
Re. Cl. 1, Fitch does not disclose a pair of lower lifting bars are suspended from slings of a first length coupled to respective ones of the plurality of weld-on hooks along the opposing interior surfaces of the upper lifting frame, and wherein the upper lifting frame and the lower lifting bars are configured for lateral and vertical containment of a rigid container; in the second mode of operation…wherein a cargo net is attached to respective second ones of the plurality of weld-on hooks at each corner of the upper lifting frame, and wherein the cargo net surrounds and contains the flexible container. Blodgett discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1), comprising: a frame assembly (1,s Fig. 1), wherein in a first configuration of a first mode of operation, a first lifting bar (11, Fig. 1) suspended from first and second vertical slings (8, Fig. 1) coupled to first and second hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 3), the first and second hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 3); and a second lifting bar (other 11, Fig. 1) suspended, parallel to the first lifting bar, from third and fourth vertical slings coupled to third and fourth hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1), the third and fourth hooks attached to the opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly; wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the first and second lifting bars are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the payload (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the supporting structure under B of Fitch with the two lower lifting bars of Blodgett with reasonable expectation of success to provide an open undersurface of the payload where a user may inspect the quality of the payload for damage, or other conditions during movement.
Re. Cl. 1, the combination of Fitch in view of Blodgett does not disclose in the second mode of operation…wherein a cargo net is attached to respective second ones of the plurality of weld-on hooks at each corner of the upper lifting frame, and wherein the cargo net surrounds and contains the flexible container. Hammond discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1) in a second mode of operation (see Fig. 1) where a cargo net (13) capable of being coupled to and suspended from hooks (22, Fig. 4), wherein the cargo net is configured to surround and contain the payload (see 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 modify the Fitch in view of Blodgett device to use the cargo net of Hammond with reasonable expectation of success since Hammond states that such a modification would enable for the device to support cargo and allow the cargo to be discharged on the ground using a trip mechanism (Col. 3, Lines 5-11). Such a modification would not require a human to release the cargo from the ground making the discharge easier and quicker.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fitch in view of Blodgett in view of Hammond as applied to claims 1 and 5-8 above, and further in view of Town.
Re. Cl. 2, Blodgett does not disclose a pair of polyester slings are coupled to the respective ones of the plurality of weld-on hooks along the opposing interior surfaces of the upper lifting frame, and wherein the upper lifting frame and the pair of polyester slings are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the rigid container.. Town discloses a lifting device (Fig. 1) which includes a first polyester sling (60, Fig. 1 crossing from one side of 5 and connected to an aligned 60 on the other side of 5) coupled to first and second hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1, via 61), the first and second hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 1 and 1a, aligned 60s on opposing sides of 5 would be able to be attached to first and second hooks on frame assembly using 61 in the manner shown in Fig. 14); and a second polyester sling (a different 60, Fig. 1 crossing from one side of 5 and connected to an aligned 60 on the other side of 5) coupled to third and fourth hooks of the plurality of hooks (see Fig. 1, via 61),, the third and fourth hooks attached to opposing interior surfaces of the rectilinear frame assembly (see Fig. 1 and 1a, aligned 60s on opposing sides of 5 would be able to be attached to first and second hooks on frame assembly using 61 in the manner shown in Fig. 14); wherein the rectilinear frame assembly and the first and second polyester slings are configured for lateral and vertical containment of the payload (see Fig. 14).
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 Fitch, Blodgett and Hammond system to be used with the lifting bag of Town with reasonable expectation of success since Town states that such a modification enables for the transport of hazardous or radioactive materials (Paragraph 0002).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fitch in view of Blodgett in view of Hammond as applied to claims 1 and 5-8 above, and further in view of Nielsen US 2019/0330029 (hereinafter Nielsen).
Re. Cls. 3-4, the combination discussed above does not disclose in a third mode of operation, the pair of lower lifting bars are suspended from slings of a second length coupled to respective ones of the plurality of weld-on hooks along the opposing interior surfaces of the upper lifting frame, wherein the second length is longer than the first length, and wherein the upper lifting frame and the lower lifting bars are configured for containment of a palleted load (Cl. 3) or the pair of lower lifting bars used in the third mode of operation are longer than the pair of lifting bars used in the first configuration of the first mode of operation (Cl. 4). Nielsen discloses a lifting system (Fig. 1) which includes lower lifting bars (4, Fig. 2) suspended from slings (2, Fig. 2) which are adjustable in length (see Claim 4, since they are adjustable, they could be adjusted to be longer than the first length from Fitch) and the lifting bars are configured for containment of a palleted load (see Fig. 1).
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 Fitch, Blodgett and Hammond device to have adjustable straps as disclosed by Nielsen with reasonable expectation of success since Nielsen states that such a modification allows for optimization of the suspension device depending on the load lifted (Paragraph 0014).
Re. Cl. 4, the combination discussed above discloses that the lifting bars are for different purposes (see lumber in Fitch and the pallet in Nielsen). However, they do not explicitly disclose their relative lengths. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify their lengths to be as claimed, since it has been held obvious to modify the lengths of the lower lifting bars to be as claimed as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 12 and 22 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Piasecki US 3661415 and Pugh US 3827745 disclose lifting systems which include bumpers and are relevant to claims 9, 12 and 22 but do not amount to anticipation or obviousness of the current claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at (571)272-4797. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights