DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action in response to the above identified patent
application filed on June 20, 2024.
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 legal phraseology “means” should be deleted. 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).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Each section of the specification must have a heading (i.e. “Brief Summary of the Invention”, “Brief Description of the Drawings”, and “Detailed Description of the Invention”). Appropriate
correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “force measuring device” (claim 24) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
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 17, 18, 22, 28, and 29 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.
Claim 17, the terminology “preferably” and “in particular” fails to clearly define the metes and bounds of the desired patent protection.
Claim 18, the addition of the word “type” to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite.
Claim 22, the limitation “reversibly accessible chain link” is not fully understood. Is applicant attempting to define the link as being accessible from different sides? The claims must clearly define the metes and bounds of the desired patent protection.
Claim 28, the limitation “90?” is not fully understood.
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 15-18, 21-24, 26-29, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhuo et al. (CN 210858019).
Zhou teaches a connection apparatus for connecting at least two components (two nuts 3 at each end of chain 1, or alternatively, two construction components described in the written description but not illustrated) spaced apart along an axial direction of the connection apparatus, the connection apparatus comprising: at least two connecting devices (2) via which the connection apparatus can be attached to one of the at least two components, respectively; and a coupling device (1) which couples the at least two connecting devices to one another at least for transmission of tensile forces; at least one of the connecting devices being coupled to a coupling section (end section) of the coupling device so as to be fixed at least with respect to the axial direction; wherein the at least one connecting device is formed by a threaded device (threaded rod) which is screwable to a respective one of the at least two components; and the coupling device comprises at least three chain links (Fig. 1), wherein a first one of the at least three chain links comprises the coupling section, and the at least three chain links are connected directly in series.
Claim 16: Zhou teaches the at least two connecting devices are each coupled to the coupling section of the coupling device so as to be fixed at least with respect to the axial direction.
Claim 17: Zhou teaches the at least one connecting device is movably coupled to the coupling section at least for attachment to the respective one of the at least two components.
Claim 18: Zhou teaches the at least two connecting devices have a threaded device of a same type of pitch.
Claim 21: Zhou teaches the at least two connecting devices are movable relative to one another.
Claim 22: Zhou teaches the at least three chain links comprise at least one reversibly accessible chain link into which at least a further chain link can be coupled. For example, the center link can be cut, an additional link can be added (or removed) to (from) the center link, and then the cut portion of the center link can be welded together.
Claim 23: Zhou teaches the connection apparatus can be tensioned by screwing the respective one of the at least two connecting devices to the respective one of the at least two components.
Claim 24: Zhou teaches the coupling device comprises a force measuring device (the torque required to rotate the nut 3) which can measure a force (the rotation torque of the nut corresponds to the axial force acting on the coupling device).
Claim 26: Zhou teaches a first one of the at least two connecting devices is screwed to a first one of the at least two components, and a second one of the at least two connecting devices is attached to a second one of the at least two components.
Claim 27: Zhou teaches moving the at least two components by an actuation on the coupling device.
Claim 28: Zhou teaches the at least one connecting device is movably coupled to the coupling section at least for attachment to the at least two components.
Claim 29: Zhou teaches the at least one connecting device is movably coupled to the coupling section at least for attachment to the at least two components to be freely rotatable about the axial direction.
Claim 31: Zhou teaches the at least two components are freely movably supported on one another.
Claims 15-24, and 26-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawakatsu et al. (JP 2003-81589).
Kawakatsu teaches a connection apparatus for connecting at least two components (5,23) spaced apart along an axial direction of the connection apparatus, the connection apparatus comprising: at least two connecting devices (17,18) via which the connection apparatus can be attached to one of the at least two components, respectively; and a coupling device (12) which couples the at least two connecting devices to one another at least for transmission of tensile forces; at least one of the connecting devices being coupled to a coupling section (end section 30,31,44) of the coupling device so as to be fixed at least with respect to the axial direction; wherein the at least one connecting device is formed by a threaded device (threaded rod) which is screwable to a respective one of the at least two components (via nuts 25-27); and the coupling device comprises at least three chain links (Fig. 6), wherein a first one of the at least three chain links comprises the coupling section, and the at least three chain links are connected directly in series.
Claim 16: Kawakatsu teaches the at least two connecting devices are each coupled to the coupling section of the coupling device so as to be fixed at least with respect to the axial direction.
Claim 17: Kawakatsu teaches the at least one connecting device is movably coupled to the coupling section at least for attachment to the respective one of the at least two components.
Claim 18: Kawakatsu teaches the at least two connecting devices have a threaded device of a same type of pitch.
Claim 19: Kawakatsu teaches the coupling section (31) has an opening section (Fig. 4) which extends along the axial direction and through which at least a part of the respective one of the at least two connecting devices (40,42) passes.
Claim 20: Kawakatsu teaches a first lock section (33) on a first side facing away from the respective one of the at least two components with respect to the opening section, which at least prevents displacement of the at least one connecting device (40,42) towards the respective one of the at least two components; and/or a second lock section on a second side facing the respective one of the at least two components with respect to the opening section, which at least prevents displacement of the at least one connecting device away from the respective one of the at least two components.
Claim 21: Kawakatsu teaches the at least two connecting devices are movable relative to one another.
Claim 22: Kawakatsu teaches the at least three chain links comprise at least one reversibly accessible chain link into which at least a further chain link can be coupled. For example, an additional link can be added (or removed) to (from) the center link.
Claim 23: Kawakatsu teaches the connection apparatus can be tensioned by screwing the respective one of the at least two connecting devices to the respective one of the at least two components.
Claim 24: Kawakatsu teaches the coupling device comprises a force measuring device (the torque required to rotate the nut 25-27) which can measure a force (the rotation torque of the nut corresponds to the axial force acting on the coupling device).
Claim 26: Kawakatsu teaches a first one of the at least two connecting devices is screwed to a first one of the at least two components, and a second one of the at least two connecting devices is attached to a second one of the at least two components.
Claim 27: Kawakatsu teaches moving the at least two components by an actuation on the coupling device.
Claim 28: Kawakatsu teaches the at least one connecting device is movably coupled to the coupling section at least for attachment to the at least two components.
Claim 29: Kawakatsu teaches the at least one connecting device is movably coupled to the coupling section at least for attachment to the at least two components to be freely rotatable about the axial direction.
Claim 30: Kawakatsu teaches the first lock section and/or the second lock (40,42) section is formed by a shoulder section for actuating the respective one of the at least two connecting devices.
Claim 31: Kawakatsu teaches the at least two components are freely movably supported on one another.
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(s) 18 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over either one of Zhuo et al. (CN 210858019) or Kawakatsu et al. (JP 2003-81589), as applied above.
Claim 18: In the event applicant argues neither Zhuo nor Kawakatsu specifically disclose the thread pitch, the claims are alternatively rejected. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to configure the at least two connecting devices of Zhou or Kawakatsu, with a threaded device of a same type of pitch, motivation being to reduce the cost of the device by making the components interchangeable.
Claim 25: Neither Zhuo nor Kawakatsu teach the connection apparatus being made of metal. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed device to make the connection apparatus of Zhuo or Kawakatsu from metal, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the connection apparatus having threaded connecting devices of CN 212505964; CN 214527880; CN 214620855; CN206544804; and JP 2003/73087.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C JOYCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-270-7778. 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.
/WILLIAM C JOYCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights