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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-13, in the reply filed on 7/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the figures are scanned photographs of the invention and the numbers are handwritten over it in which the figures are hard to discern particular components of the invention and hard to read what each reference number is referring to.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 7, 10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the second outrigger arm" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The second outrigger arm was introduced in claim 4 but claim 7 does not depend upon claim 4.
Claim 10 recites” wherein a rotation axis of the outrigger arm is substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of each of the opposing side rails” but it seems to be referring to the wrong axis. Referring to the annotated fig. 1 below, the longitudinal axis of each of the opposing side rails 30, 32 would be referring to the z-axis and the rotation axis would be the spinning arrow around the z-axis. However, when looking at fig. 5, the rotation of outrigger arms 60, 62 does not seem to be rotating around the z-axis and rather be rotating outwards to the sides, following the x-axis, which is perpendicular to the z-axis. The outrigger arms do not seem to be able to rotate around the z-axis. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner interprets either rotation axis to applied to claim 10.
PNG
media_image1.png
614
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1: Applicant’s Fig. 4
Claim 12 recites “the outrigger arm” but it is inconsistent with “a pair of outrigger arms”. It is unclear if it means to refer to just one of the pair or the whole pair.
Dependent claim 13 fail to solve the deficiency.
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 1-4, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Spengler (US 20080185225).
Regarding claim 1, Spengler teaches of (fig. 11) an apparatus (stabilizer 100) for stabilizing a ladder (ladder 102) having rung steps (steps 110, 111) extending between opposing side rails (opposing side rails 101, 101a), the apparatus comprising:
a support member (U-shaped guard 116) configured to mount to at least one of the side rails of the ladder (seen in fig. 11); and
an outrigger arm (extending leg 112) mounted to the support member (116) (seen in fig. 11), wherein the outrigger arm is extendable between a storage position (fig. 12, ¶0060, storage position as seen in the left side when the outrigger arm is folded inwards toward the side rail 101a) and an extended outrigger position (position seen in fig. 11).
Regarding claim 2, Spengler teaches of claim 1, and (figs. 11-12) wherein the outrigger arm (112) is rotatably mounted to the support member (116) (¶0059, The extending leg 112 is able to rotate about bolt 119 for positioning purposes), wherein the outrigger arm is rotatable between a storage position (fig. 12, position seen for the left leg 112) and an extended outrigger position (seen in fig. 11).
Regarding claim 3, Spengler teaches of claim 1, and wherein in the storage position the outrigger arm is substantially parallel to and/or disposed between the opposing side rails of the ladder (fig. 12, in the storage position, the outrigger arm 112 is substantially parallel to the opposing side rails 101, 101a of the ladder).
Regarding claim 4, Spengler teaches of claim 1, and further comprising a second outrigger arm rotatably mounted to the support member or a second support member (fig. 11, two outrigger arms 112 and two support members 116).
Regarding claim 8, Spengler teaches of claim 1, and (fig. 12) wherein the outrigger arm (112) is connected to the support member (116) by and rotatable about a bolt, rivet, or rotatable hinge (fig. 12, ¶0059, The extending leg 112 is able to rotate about bolt 119).
Regarding claim 10, Spengler teaches of claim 1, and wherein a rotation axis of the outrigger arm is substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of each of the opposing side rails (as best understood by the 112b rejection above, the outrigger arms 112 rotate along the axis perpendicular to the opposing side rails, rotating laterally outwards from the side rails).
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 5-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spengler in view of Moss et al. (US 20150267468), hereinafter Moss.
Regarding claim 5, Spengler teaches of claim 1, but does not appear to teach of wherein the support member extends between the opposing side rails.
Moss teaches of (fig. 5) wherein the support member (brackets 134) extends between the opposing side rails (rails 106A, 106B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spengler to incorporate the teachings of Moss of wherein the support member extends between the opposing side rails in order to compact the device into the space between the side rails and decrease how wide the apparatus would make the ladder.
Regarding claim 6, Spengler as modified teaches of claim 5, and (figs. 11-12) further comprising a second outrigger arm (112) rotatably mounted to the support member (116) (¶0059, The extending leg 112 is able to rotate about bolt 119 for positioning purposes), wherein the second outrigger arm (112) is rotatable between the storage position (fig. 12, position seen for the left leg 112 can be applied to both legs) and a second extended outrigger position (seen in fig. 11).
Regarding claim 7, Spengler teaches of claim 1, but does not appear to teach of wherein in the storage position, the outrigger arm and the second outrigger arm are disposed between the opposing side rails along a longitudinal axis of the ladder.
Moss teaches of (fig. 4) wherein in the storage position (arms 132 are placed in a storage position), the outrigger arm and the second outrigger arm (pair of arms 132) are disposed between the opposing side rails (106A, 106B) along a longitudinal axis of the ladder (seen in fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spengler to incorporate the teachings of Moss of wherein in the storage position, the outrigger arm and the second outrigger arm are disposed between the opposing side rails along a longitudinal axis of the ladder in order to compact the device into the space between the side rails and decrease how wide the apparatus would make the ladder.
Regarding claim 12, Spengler teaches of (fig. 11) an apparatus (stabilizer 100) for stabilizing a ladder (ladder 102) having rung steps (steps 110, 111) extending between opposing side rails (opposing side rails 101, 101a), the apparatus comprising:
a support member (U-shaped guard 116) having opposing ends each adapted to connect to one of the opposing side rails (opposing top and bottom ends of support member 116 each adapted to connect to one of the opposing side rails 101, 101a); and
a pair of outrigger arms (extending legs 112) each rotatably mounted at a first end to the support member (fig. 11, ¶0059, mounted to an end of support member 116 and able to rotate outwards), wherein the outrigger arm (112) is rotatable between a storage position (fig. 12, ¶0060, storage position as seen in the left side when the outrigger arm is folded inwards toward the side rail 101a) and a radially extended outrigger position (seen in fig. 11).
Spengler does not appear to teach of wherein the outrigger arm is rotatable between a storage position between the opposing side rails and a radially extended outrigger position.
Moss teaches of (fig. 4) wherein the outrigger arm (arms 132) is rotatable between a storage position between the opposing side rails (106A, 106B) (position seen in fig. 4) and a radially extended outrigger position (seen in fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spengler to incorporate the teachings of Moss of wherein the outrigger arm is rotatable between a storage position between the opposing side rails and a radially extended outrigger position in order to compact the device into the space between the side rails and decrease how wide the apparatus would make the ladder.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spengler.
Regarding claim 9, Spengler teaches of claim 1, and wherein the support member is a support plate (fig. 13, support member 116 is composed of plate walls. Each plate wall is a support plate) and a possible attachment at the base of the opposing side rails and bottom rung step (figs. 11-12, ¶0059, the support member 116 and its components are attached to the side rails 101, 101a by means of a first expansion insert 144. The bottom rung step has expansion inserts 144, 144a).
The embodiment in figs. 11-12 does not appear to teach of wherein the support member is a support plate that reinforces the base of the opposing side rails and a bottom rung step.
However, the embodiment in fig. 1 teaches of wherein the support member is a support plate (clamp 45 has support plates) that reinforces the base of the opposing side rails and a bottom rung step (clamps the bottom rung step to reinforce the base of the opposing side rails and reinforces the bottom rung step).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the embodiment of Spengler in fig. 11 to incorporate the teachings of the embodiment of fig. 1 of wherein the support member is a support plate that reinforces the base of the opposing side rails and a bottom rung step, such as by attaching the support member to the base of the opposing side rails and a bottom rung step, in order to further stabilize the base by providing more structure and rigidity.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spengler in view of Neubauer (US 20240295145).
Regarding claim 11, Spengler teaches of claim 1, but does not appear to teach of further comprising an alarm mechanism in combination with the outrigger arm and configured to alert if the arms are not in the proper position.
Neubauer teaches of (figs. 18-19) an alarm mechanism (¶0056, warning message as shown by the exclamation symbol plate) in combination with the ladder extension device (engagement lever 51) and configured to alert if the device is not in the proper position (¶0056, the warning message is seen by the user of the device 51 not being in the proper position for climbing the ladder).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spengler to incorporate the teachings of Neubauer of further comprising an alarm mechanism in combination with the outrigger arm and configured to alert if the arms are not in the proper position in order to prevent the user from using the ladder in a dangerous way and to ensure the proper positioning of the outrigger arm before the user use the ladder.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spengler, as applied to claim 12, and further in view of Neubauer (US 20240295145).
Regarding claim 13, Spengler as modified teaches of claim 12, but does not appear to teach of further comprising an alarm mechanism in combination with the outrigger arm and configured to alert if the arms are not in the proper position.
Neubauer teaches of (figs. 18-19) an alarm mechanism (¶0056, warning message as shown by the exclamation symbol plate) in combination with the ladder extension device (engagement lever 51) and configured to alert if the device is not in the proper position (¶0056, the warning message is seen by the user of the device 51 not being in the proper position for climbing the ladder).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Spengler to incorporate the teachings of Neubauer of further comprising an alarm mechanism in combination with the outrigger arm and configured to alert if the arms are not in the proper position in order to prevent the user from using the ladder in a dangerous way and to ensure the proper positioning of the outrigger arm before the user use the ladder.
Conclusion
The cited references made of record in the contemporaneously filed PTO-892 form and not relied upon in the instant office action are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and may have one or more of the elements in Applicant’s disclosure and at least claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOE TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8530. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-6pm EST.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/ZOE TAM TRAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights