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 the first office action for application number 18/723,570, Systems and Methods for Tensioning a Lifeline, filed on June 24, 2024.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: "314". 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: "224" in Fig. 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0033] in line 4, "rode" should be --rod--; on page 10, paragraph [0031] reference number "716" is used for a tensioning handle in line 1 and a tensioning base segment in line 5; and paragraph [0031] reference number "718" is used for a magnet in line 1 and a connecting rod in line 6.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 of both claims, "a line" should be changed to --the line--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a lever mechanism in claim 3, line 2.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-12, 14-16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0209878 to Newing et al., hereinafter, Newing. Newing discloses a tensioning device (10) configured for increasing tension in a line (paragraph [0052]), comprising: a rotating member (14) configured to support the line, the rotating member being configured to rotate around a shaft (28); a locking member (38) configured to limit movement of the line when the line is supported by the rotating member; and a tensioning handle (18) configured to have a closed position (Figs. 5, 6, & 13) and an open position (Figs. 7, 8, & 14), wherein the tensioning handle is disengaged (paragraph [0088]) from the shaft when in the closed position, and wherein the tensioning handle is configured to be engaged (paragraphs [0086]-[0087]) with the shaft when the tensioning handle is in the open position; wherein the tensioning handle in the open position extends further from the shaft than the tensioning handle extends in the closed position thereby increasing leverage for rotating the shaft when the tensioning handle is engaged with the shaft; wherein the tensioning handle is configured to be rotated when in the open position, wherein rotation of the tensioning handle in the open position provides a corresponding rotation of the shaft, the rotating member, and the line supported thereon; wherein the locking member is configured to allow rotation of the rotating member supporting the line in only one direction when the locking member is fully engaged with the line; wherein rotation of the rotating member in the one direction increases tension in the line; wherein the locking member comprises a locking cam (40 & 42) that is connected to a rigid structure or a component that is configured to move as tension of the line is increased, wherein the locking cam is configured to increase a force applied to the line as tension of the line is increased; wherein the device further comprises a release handle (64), wherein the release handle is configured to interface with the locking cam when operated to at least partially disengage the locking cam so as to relieve the force applied to the line; wherein the device includes an entry point configured to accept the line and guide the line around the rotating member, wherein the device includes an exit point for accommodating an excess portion of the line after the line has traversed the rotating member; wherein the device is configured to facilitate an initial tensioning of the line via hand pulling of the excess portion of the line; wherein the device is configured for additional tensioning of the line via the tensioning handle after initial tensioning; and wherein the device is configured to provide the additional tensioning without use of tools external to the device.
In regards to claim 18, Newing discloses a tensioning line system, comprising: a line (paragraph [0052]) configured for connection to a first rigid structure; a tensioning device (10), comprising: a rotating member (14) configured to rotate around a shaft (28); a locking member (38) configured to limit movement of the line; and a tensioning handle (18) configured to have a closed position and an open position, wherein the tensioning handle is disengaged from the shaft when in the closed position, and wherein the tensioning handle is configured to be engaged with the shaft when the tensioning handle is in an open position; wherein the tensioning device is configured to be directly or indirectly connected to a second rigid structure.
In regards to claim 20, Newing inherently discloses a method of increasing tension in a line, comprising: accepting the line at an entry point of a tensioning device (10) such that the line is guided around a rotating member (14) and exits the tensioning device at an exit point, wherein initial tensioning of the line is provided via hand pulling of the line through the exit point; engaging a locking member (38) against the line, wherein the locking member is configured to limit movement of the line such that the line can only be rotated around the rotating member in one direction; engaging a tensioning handle (18) with a shaft (28) of the rotating member when the tensioning handle is transitioned from a closed position to an open position; and providing additional tensioning of the line when the handle is rotated via corresponding rotation of the shaft and the rotating member.
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) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newing in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,446,936 to Ostrobrod. Newing discloses the claimed invention except for the limitation of wherein the rotating member is a drum.
Ostrobrod teaches a safety apparatus (Figs. 10-15), having a rotating member (262), and wherein the rotating member is a drum.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rotating member in Newing to have been a drum as taught by Ostrobrod for the purpose of providing a mechanically, equivalent means for wounding the line around the drum during usage.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newing in view of U.S. Patent No. 10,413,762 to Patton et al., hereinafter, Patton. Newing discloses the claimed invention except for the limitations of one or more connectors configured to slide along the line; and one or more energy absorbers configured for connection to the tensioning device or the line.
Patton teaches a lifeline system having one or more connectors (Fig. 1) and one or more energy absorbers (100).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system in Newing to have included one or more connectors as taught by Patton for the purpose of tethering a worker from the line and to have included one or more energy absorbers as taught by Patton for the purpose of engage a tensioning device to reduce the forces applied to a worker in the case of a fall.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the limitations of a locking pin that is configured to extend into a receptacle of the shaft of the tensioning device when the tensioning handle is engaged with the shaft, essentially cited in claim 2 and in combination with the other elements recited in claim 1, the base claim, which is not found in the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent No. 12,128,258 to Stroshane is directed to a descent device for controlling descent on a rope having a housing, a cam, a lever, a linkage, a brake, and an eye. U.S. Patent No. 11,660,475 to Malcolm is directed to a high load descender for rope access and rescue having a ratcheting sheave mounted to a pivoting arm, which translate with rope tension. U.S. Patent No. 11,065,477 to Ratalino is directed to a fall-protection apparatus with a friction-braking system comprising a handle. U.S. Patent No. 8,733,504 to Mauthner is directed to a method and apparatus for a compact descender used with a rope. U.S. Patent Nos. 8,100,231 and 5,577,576 to Petzl et al. are both directed to a self-locking descender with a pulley in the form of a rotary cam, a brake shoe, and an actuating handle. U.S. Patent No. 5,358,068 to Whitmer is directed to a removable safety system for construction workers. U.S. Patent No. 2,321,248 to Rose et al. is directed to a safety apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANITA M KING whose telephone number is (571)272-6817. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4:00pm.
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.
/ANITA M KING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 December 27, 2025