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.
(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, 2, 4-12, 14-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 2962591 (Gallay).
Regarding Claim 1, Gallay teaches a tip for an ambulatory stability pole (1) having an anterior side (toward 3a) and a posterior side (toward 3e), comprising: a single base member (5) extending for a first dimension along a first direction that is parallel to a longitudinal axis (X-X’) of the ambulatory stability pole; and a plurality of extension members (3a-3e) extending from the single base member along the first direction, wherein the plurality of extension members terminate in contact regions (the bottom surfaces thereof), wherein the contact regions of the plurality of extension members define a first plane (P-P) that is inclined relative to a second plane (T-T) that is orthogonal to the first direction, wherein the plurality of extension members are separated from each other by slits (the spaces between adjacent extensions), wherein at least one of the slits (such as between 3a and 3b) is a different depth than another one (such as between 3d and 3e) of the slits, and wherein the plurality of extension members comprise: one or more first extension members (3a) that are located proximate to the rear side of the tip, the one or more first extension members having a second dimension along the first direction; and one or more second extension members (3e) that are located proximate to the front side of the tip, the one or more second extension members having a third dimension along the first direction, wherein the second dimension is greater than the third dimension (see Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 2, Gallay teaches that the one or more first extension members have a fourth dimension along a second direction that is orthogonal to the first direction and the one or more second extension members have a fifth dimension along the second direction, and the fourth dimension is greater than the fifth dimension (See fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 4, Gallay teaches (See Fig. 1) that when attached to the ambulatory stability pole and the ambulatory stability pole being in a slanted position relative to a vertical line extending from a surface, each of the one or more first extension members and the one or more second extension members contact the surface.
Regarding Claim 5, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members further comprises: one or more third extension members (3c) that are located between the one or more first extension members and the one or more second extension members along a second direction from the anterior side to the posterior side.
Regarding Claim 6, Gallay teaches that the one or more third extension members have a sixth dimension along the first direction, and wherein the sixth dimension is less than the second dimension and greater than the third dimension (see Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 7, Gallay teaches that the single base member has a seventh dimension (the width seen in Fig. 10) along a second direction (along P-P’ in Fig. 10) that is orthogonal to the first direction, and the plurality of extension members have an eighth dimension along the second direction at the contact regions, and wherein the eighth dimension is greater than the seventh dimension (See Fig. 10).
Regarding Clam 8, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members lack radial symmetry (see Fig. 5 – some members extend radially and some extend at an angle to a radial line).
Regarding Claim 9, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members lack dihedral symmetry (See Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 10, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members are formed from a compliant material (see Paragraph 0038 – “caoutchouc”).
Regarding Claim 11, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members are formed from an elastomeric material (“caoutchouch” is rubber).
Regarding Claim 12, Gallay teaches that the single base member comprises a cavity (6) configured to receive a pole tip of the ambulatory stability pole.
Regarding Claim 14, Gallay teaches a tip for an ambulatory stability pole (1), comprising: a single base member (5) extending for a first dimension along a first direction (X-X’) that is parallel to a longitudinal axis of the ambulatory stability pole; and a plurality of extension members (3a-3e) extending from the single base member along the first direction and being separated from each other by slits (the spaces between adjacent extensions), the plurality of extension members terminating in contact regions (the bottom surfaces thereof), wherein the tip comprises a cavity (within the center of the ring connecting all of the extensions - see Fig. 5) between the plurality of extension members that extends to a depth that is deeper than each of the slits separating the plurality of extension members.
Regarding Claim 15, Gallay teaches that the single base member comprises a cavity (6) configured to receive a pole tip of the ambulatory stability pole.
Regarding Claim 16, Gallay teaches that at least one of the slits (between 3a and 3b) is a different depth than another one of the slits (between 3d and 3e).
Regarding Claim 18, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members lack radial symmetry (see Fig. 5 – some members extend radially and some extend at an angle to a radial line).
Regarding Claim 19, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members lack dihedral symmetry (See Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 20, Gallay teaches that the plurality of extension members are formed from a compliant material (see Paragraph 0038 – “caoutchouc”).
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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by EP 2962591 (Gallay) in view of Edwards in US Patent 4708154.
Gallay teaches a tip for an ambulatory stability pole (1) having an anterior side (toward 3a) and a posterior side (toward 3e), comprising: a single base member (5) extending for a first dimension (along X-X’) along a first direction that is parallel to a longitudinal axis of the ambulatory stability pole; and a plurality of extension members (3a-3e) extending from the single base member along the first direction, wherein the plurality of extension members terminate in contact regions (the bottom surfaces thereof), wherein the contact regions of the plurality of extension members define a first plane (P-P) that is inclined relative to a second plane (T-T) that is orthogonal to the first direction, and wherein the plurality of extension members comprise: one or more first extension members (3a) that are located proximate to the rear side of the tip, the one or more first extension members having a second dimension along the first direction; and one or more second extension members (3e) that are located proximate to the front side of the tip, the one or more second extension members having a third dimension along the first direction, wherein the second dimension is greater than the third dimension.
Gallay is silent on the use of convex contact regions. Edwards teaches a tip with extension members (56) having a convex shaped contact region (the rounded lower surface, see Figs. 3 and 4). 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 Gallay by using convex-shaped contact regions as taught by Edwards in order to provide a strong grip.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by EP 2962591 (Gallay) as applied to Claim 14 above in view of Edwards in US Patent 4708154. Gallay is silent on the use of convex contact regions. Edwards teaches a tip with extension members (56) having a convex shaped contact region (the rounded lower surface, see Figs. 3 and 4). 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 Gallay by using convex-shaped contact regions as taught by Edwards in order to provide a strong grip.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reitano et al., Dean, Moulton III et al., Lipman, and Hunter et al. teach pole tips.
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 Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636