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 .
This is a non-final Office action responsive to the reply filed on 03/02/2026.
Claims 1, 5, 11 and 15 have been amended.
Claims 6-8 and 16 have been canceled.
Claim 19 was added.
Claims 1-5, 9-15 and 17-19 are pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/02/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 9-11, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arjomand (US Patent No. 8,978,210 cited by applicant), in view of Cabrele et al. (WO 2012/075034).
Regarding claim 1, Arjomand discloses a cable tie arrangement comprising:
a strap configured to form a looped section, the strap including an end section and a supply section (see annotated Fig. 8B); and
a first locking head defining an opening (see annotated Fig. 8B), the first locking head including:
an outer wall having outer surfaces and inner surfaces, wherein the inner surfaces partially define the opening, the outer wall including a top wall, a bottom wall spaced apart from the top wall, a first side wall connected to the top wall and to the bottom wall, a second side wall connected to the top wall and the bottom wall, the second side wall spaced apart from the first side wall, the outer wall having a first end and a second end facing in an opposite direction as the first end (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B),
a metal first tooth supported by a first supporting portion extending partially along a length of the metal first tooth (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B, and abstract, lines 11-12), and
a metal second tooth supported by a second supporting portion extending partially along a length of the metal second tooth, the second supporting portion extending toward the first supporting portion (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B, and abstract, lines 11-12),
wherein the metal first tooth extends towards the metal second tooth in the opening (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B),
wherein the end section and the supply section of the strap are configured to be inserted into the opening in the first locking head in a first direction such that (see annotated Fig. 8B):
the metal first tooth engages a first surface of the end section of the strap (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal second tooth engages a first surface of the supply section of the strap (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth press the end section and the supply section together in the opening (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth allow movement of the end section and the supply section in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 8B), and
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth prevent movement of the end section and the supply section in a second direction opposite the first direction (see annotated Fig. 8B).
Arjomand does not disclose the first supporting portion extending inwardly from the top wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and the second supporting portion extending inwardly from the bottom wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and wherein the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth are part of a metal locking element that circumscribes the opening.
However, Cabrele et al. teaches the first supporting portion extending inwardly from the top wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and the second supporting portion extending inwardly from the bottom wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and wherein the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth are part of a metal locking element (5) that circumscribes the opening (see annotated Fig. 4 and Fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the locking head from Arjomand
By adding a first and second supporting portions in order to support the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth from a metal locking element to have a stronger support in the second direction and a stronger grip to the strap as taught by Cabrele et al.
PNG
media_image1.png
311
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
401
657
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
253
535
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
370
582
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Arjomand discloses, wherein the first locking head includes one or more shoulders configured to guide the strap through the opening (see annotated Fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 9, Arjomand discloses, wherein the strap has a thickness, and the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth define a gap (see annotated Fig. 8B).
Arjomand does not disclose the gap has a thickness that is twice the thickness of the strap. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the gap is twice the thickness of the strap, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955), and Gardner v. TEC 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984). It is obvious that a relative gap thickness can be modify in order insert the strap thickness.
Regarding claim 10, Arjomand discloses, wherein the strap is mounted on a magazine (see Fig. 10A).
Regarding claim 11, Arjomand discloses a cable tie arrangement comprising:
a strap configured to form a looped section, the strap including an end section and a supply section (see annotated Fig. 8B); and
a first locking head defining an opening (see annotated Fig. 8B), the first locking head including:
an outer wall having outer surfaces and inner surfaces, wherein the inner surfaces partially define the opening, the outer wall including a top wall, a bottom wall spaced apart from the top wall, a first side wall connected to the top wall and to the bottom wall, a second side wall connected to the top wall and the bottom wall, the second side wall spaced apart from the first side wall, the outer wall having a first end and a second end facing in an opposite direction (see annotated Fig. 8B),
a metal first tooth partially supported by a first supporting portion extending partially along part of the first tooth, the metal first tooth extending in the opening (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B, and abstract, lines 11-12),
a metal second tooth partially supported by a second supporting portion extending partially along part of the second tooth, the metal second tooth extending in the opening (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B, and abstract, lines 11-12),
wherein the end section and the supply section of the strap are configured to be inserted into the opening in the first locking head in a first direction such that (see annotated Fig. 8B):
the metal first tooth engages a first surface of the end section of the strap (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal second tooth engages a first surface of the supply section of the strap (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth allow movement of the end section and the supply section in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 8B), and
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth prevent movement of the end section and the supply section in a second direction opposite the first direction (see annotated Fig. 8B).
Arjomand does not disclose a metal locking element that circumscribes the opening, the first supporting portion extending inwardly from the top wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, the second supporting portion extending inwardly from the bottom wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and the second supporting portion extending toward the first supporting portion
However, Cabrele et al. teaches a metal locking element (5) that circumscribes the opening, the first supporting portion extending inwardly from the top wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, the second supporting portion extending inwardly from the bottom wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and the second supporting portion extending toward the first supporting portion (see annotated Fig. 4 and Fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the locking head from Arjomand by adding a first and second supporting portions in order to support the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth from a metal locking element to have a stronger support in the second direction and a stronger grip to the strap as taught by Cabrele et al.
Regarding claim 17, Arjomand discloses, wherein the strap has a thickness, and the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth define a gap (see annotated Fig. 8B).
Arjomand does not disclose the gap has a thickness that is twice the thickness of the strap. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the gap is twice the thickness of the strap, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955), and Gardner v. TEC 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984). It is obvious that a relative gap thickness can be modify in order insert the strap thickness.
Regarding claim 18, Arjomand discloses, wherein the strap is mounted on a magazine (see Fig. 10A).
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arjomand (US Patent No. 8,978,210 cited by applicant), in view of Cabrele et al. (W0O2012/075034) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lichtenberg (US Patent No. 4,862,561 cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 2, Arjomand discloses the claimed invention except for the strap includes a first raised central portion on a first side of the strap. However, Lichtenberg teaches the strap includes a first raised central portion on a first side of the strap (top side, see Fig. 7e). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first raised central portion on the strap surface for a stronger grip with the strap top surface and the tooth.
Regarding claim 3, Arjomand discloses the claimed invention except for the strap includes a second raised central portion on a second side of the strap, the second side be an opposite side of the strap relative to the first side of the strap. However, Lichtenberg teaches the strap includes a second raised central portion on a second side of the strap, the second side be an opposite side of the strap relative to the first side of the strap (bottom side, see Fig. 7e). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a second raised central portion on the strap surface for a stronger grip with the strap bottom surface and the tooth.
Regarding claim 4, Arjomand discloses, wherein the metal first tooth is configured to engage the first raised central portion of the end section of the strap, and the metal second tooth is configured to engage the second raised central portion of the end section of the strap (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arjomand (US Patent No. 8,978,210 cited by applicant), in view of Cabrele et al. (W0O2012/075034) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Lichtenberg (US Patent No. 4,862,561 cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 12, Arjomand discloses the claimed invention except for the strap includes a first raised central portion on a first side of the strap. However, Lichtenberg teaches the strap includes a first raised central portion on a first side of the strap (top side, see Fig. 7e). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first raised central portion on the strap surface for a stronger grip with the strap top surface and the tooth.
Regarding claim 13, Arjomand discloses the claimed invention except for the strap includes a second raised central portion on a second side of the strap, the second side be an opposite side of the strap relative to the first side of the strap. However, Lichtenberg teaches the strap includes a second raised central portion on a second side of the strap, the second side be an opposite side of the strap relative to the first side of the strap (bottom side, see Fig. 7e). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a second raised central portion on the strap surface for a stronger grip with the strap bottom surface and the tooth.
Regarding claim 14, Arjomand discloses, wherein the metal first tooth is configured to engage the first raised central portion of the end section of the strap, and the metal second tooth is configured to engage the second raised central portion of the end section of the strap (see annotated Figs. 5B and 8B).
Regarding claim 15, Arjomand discloses, wherein the first locking head includes one or more shoulders configured to guide the strap through the opening (see annotated Fig. 5B).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arjomand (US Patent No. 8,978,210 cited by applicant), in view of Cabrele et al. (WO 2012/075034) and Kurmis (US Patent No. 7,082,968).
Regarding claim 19, Arjomand discloses a cable tie arrangement comprising:
a strap configured to form a looped section, the strap including an end section and a supply section (see annotated Fig. 8B); and
a first locking head defining an opening (see annotated Fig. 8B), the first locking head including:
an outer wall having outer surfaces and inner surfaces, wherein the inner surfaces partially define the opening, the outer wall having a first end and a second end facing in an opposite direction as the first end (see annotated Fig. 8B),
a metal first tooth supported by a first supporting portion extending partially along a length of the metal first tooth (see annotated Fig. 8B),
a metal second tooth supported by a second supporting portion extending partially along a length of the metal second tooth, wherein the metal first tooth extends towards the metal second tooth in the opening (see annotated Fig. 8B),
wherein the end section and the supply section of the strap are configured to be inserted into the opening in the first locking head in a first direction such that (see annotated Fig. 8B):
the metal first tooth engages a first surface of the end section of the strap (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal second tooth engages a first surface of the supply section of the strap (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth press the end section and the supply section together in the opening (see annotated Fig. 8B),
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth allow movement of the end section and the supply section in the first direction (see annotated Fig. 8B), and
the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth prevent movement of the end section and the supply section in a second direction opposite the first direction (see annotated Fig. 8B).
Arjomand does not disclose the first supporting portion extending inwardly from a first one of the inner surfaces of the outer wall, the second supporting portion extending inwardly from a second one of the inner surfaces of the outer wall, the second supporting portion extending toward the first supporting portion, wherein the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth are part of a metal locking element that circumscribes the opening, a first protrusion extending from the first end of the outer wall and positioned above the opening to engage a first tab of an adjacent second locking head, and a second tab extending from the second end of the outer wall and positioned above the opening to engage a second protrusion of an adjacent third locking head,
However, Cabrele et al. teaches the first supporting portion extending inwardly from a first one of the inner surfaces of the outer wall, the second supporting portion extending inwardly from a second one of the inner surfaces of the outer wall, the second supporting portion extending toward the first supporting portion, wherein the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth are part of a metal locking element (5) that circumscribes the opening (see annotated Fig. 4 and Fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the locking head from Arjomand
By adding a first and second supporting portions in order to support the metal first tooth and the metal second tooth from a metal locking element to have a stronger support in the second direction and a stronger grip to the strap as taught by Cabrele et al.
Also, Kurmis teaches a first protrusion (10a) extending from the first end of the outer wall and positioned above the opening to engage a first tab (12) of an adjacent second locking head (see Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the locking head from Arjomand by connecting each locking head to one another with a protrusion engaging to a tab during production, in order to make one strip magazine as taught by Kurmis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 8 and 9, filed 03/02/2026. have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, the combination Arjomand, in view of Cabrele et al. discloses the first supporting portion extending inwardly from the top wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and the second supporting portion extending inwardly from the bottom wall of the outer wall and toward the first end, and the second supporting portion extending toward the first supporting portion (see annotated Fig. 4 from Cabrele). Applicant's arguments, are more limiting than the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUIS A MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-5388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jason W. San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/LOUIS A. MERCADO/
Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/SPE, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights