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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites “two transverse bas” which the examiner believes was meant to be “two transverse bars.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 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 1 recites multiple instances of positioning holes related to a variety of features which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the positioning holes are the same or different. For the purpose of this Office Action the examiner assumes the positioning holes are different.
Claims 2-10 are rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
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 1-2 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lensing (6,105,719) in view of Reese (2003/0098559).
Lensing discloses:
Claim 1 as best understood by the examiner: A dual-purpose folding ladder, comprising:
a base (Fig. 1; 30) with a plurality of casters (Fig. 1; 39) provided under the base, wherein the base is provided with a positioning mount (Fig. 2; 120) and has a side provided with two supporting rods (Fig. 3; see detail);
PNG
media_image1.png
615
524
media_image1.png
Greyscale
two guide rails (Fig. 4; 55 and 56) each pivotally provided at, and rotatable with respect to (Fig. 7; Col. 6, Lines 2-4), a corresponding one of the two supporting rods (Fig. 4; 55 and 56 are rotatable relative to the two supporting rods), wherein each said guide rail is provided with a positioning hole (Fig. 6; 85 left and right), and a connecting plate (Fig. 4; 60) is provided between the two guide rails;
a supporting post (Fig. 2; 112) having an end pivotally connected to the connecting plate (Col. 6, Lines 63-67) and an opposite end connected to the positioning mount (Fig. 5; via 116) of the base;
two supporting arms (Fig. 4; 75 and 76) each mounted in, and movable in an axial direction with respect to (Col. 6, Lines 27-37), a corresponding one of the two guide rails, wherein each of the two supporting arms is provided with a plurality of positioning holes (Fig. 2; 80) and is secured in position to the positioning hole (Fig. 6; 85 left and right) of the corresponding one of the two guide rails by a pin (Fig. 6; 84), and a plurality of rungs (Fig. 2; 78 and 79) are provided between the two supporting arms to connect the two supporting arms such that the two supporting arms and the rungs form a ladder (Col. 6, Lines 27-37);
two extension arms (Fig. 2; 100 and 102) each provided at an end of a corresponding one of the supporting arms such that each said extension arm and the corresponding one of the supporting arms form an angle greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees (Fig. 7; 76 and 102 are depicted at an angle greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees); and
a first pad (Fig. 2; 103), but fails to disclose the pad being pivotally connected to the two supporting arms, wherein the first pad has a side provided with an arc-shaped positioning plate, the arc-shaped positioning plate is provided with a plurality of positioning holes, and the first pad is able to be adjusted in angle and secured in position by inserting a pin selectively through a said positioning hole of the arc-shaped positioning plate and a said positioning hole of a corresponding one of the extension arms.
However, Reese discloses a pivotal connection (Para. [0053]), provided with an arc-shaped positioning plate (Fig. 6A; 33), the arc-shaped positioning plate is provided with a plurality of positioning holes (Fig. 10; 34), and is able to be adjusted in angle and secured in position by inserting a pin (Fig. 10; Para. [0060]) selectively through a said positioning hole of the arc-shaped positioning plate and a said positioning hole (Fig. 10; 35).
Therefore, 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 extension arms of Lensing to include the pivotal connections, as taught by Reese, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow the pad to be adjusted for the user’s comfort.
Thus, in combination Lensing and Reese disclose the pad, of Lensing, being pivotally connected, as taught by Reese, to the two supporting arms of Lensing, wherein the first pad has a side provided with an arc-shaped positioning plate, of Reese, the arc-shaped positioning plate is provided with a plurality of positioning holes, as taught by Reese, and the first pad is able to be adjusted in angle and secured in position by inserting a pin selectively through a said positioning hole of the arc-shaped positioning plate and a said positioning hole, as taught by Reese, of a corresponding one of the extension arms, of Lensing.
Claim 2: Lensing and Reese disclose the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 1, wherein the first pad is provided with two pivotal (once combined with Reese) connection rods (Lensing – Fig. 2; 92 and 98), the first pad is pivotally connected to the two supporting arms (Lensing – Fig. 4; 75 and 76) through the two pivotal connection rods, and each said pivotal connection rod has a side provided with a said arc-shaped positioning plate (Reese - Fig. 6A; 33).
Claim 8: Lensing discloses the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 1, wherein the ladder formed of the two supporting arms and the rungs is convertible into a main supporting section of a creeper (Fig. 7).
Claim 9: Lensing discloses the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 8, wherein the main supporting section is able to be provided thereon with two pads (Fig. 2; 61 and 68).
Claim 10: Lensing discloses the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 9, wherein the base is provided thereunder with a pad storage area (Fig. 7; pads 68 and 111 are depicted as below when stowed).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lensing (6,105,719) in view of Reese (2003/0098559) and further in view of Obitts et al. (10,933,523) hereinafter Obitts.
Claim 3: Lensing discloses the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the base is composed of a longitudinal bar and two transverse bas, and each of the two transverse bars is provided at one of two ends of the longitudinal bar.
However, Obitts discloses a base (Fig. 1; 11) composed of a longitudinal bar (Fig. 1; 16) and two transverse bas (Fig. 1; 17 and 18), and each of the two transverse bars is provided at one of two ends of the longitudinal bar (Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the base of Lensing with the base, as taught by Obitts, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide a stable base with a smaller profile making it lighter in weight and easier to transport.
Claim 4: Lensing and Obitts disclose the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 3, wherein the positioning mount is provided on the longitudinal bar (Obitts - Fig. 1; 23, once combined where the base of Obitts replaces the base of Lensing the positioning mount (120) of Lensing is replaced with the positioning mount (23) of Obitts).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lensing (6,105,719) in view of Reese (2003/0098559) and further in view of Obitts et al. (10,933,523) hereinafter Obitts, and still further in view of Lo (2016/0319600).
Claim 5: Lensing and Obitts disclose the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 3, but fail to disclose wherein one of the two transverse bars is provided with two positioning stop blocks and each said positioning stop block is provided with a positioning hole.
However, Lo discloses two stop blocks (Fig. 9; see detail - Fig. 1 depicts two stop blocks) with positioning holes (Fig. 9; where the springs attach - see detail).
PNG
media_image2.png
610
519
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, 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 transverse bar of Obitts to include the stop blocks, as taught by Lo, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide a bumper when positioning the ladder device against an object.
Claim 6: Lensing, Obitts and Lo disclose the dual-purpose folding ladder of claim 5, wherein the supporting rods (Lensing - Fig. 4; 55 and 56 are rotatable relative to the two supporting rods) are provided on a said transverse bar (Obitts - Fig. 1; 17) different from the transverse bar (Obitts - Fig. 1; 18) provided with the positioning stop blocks (Lo - Fig. 9; see detail - Fig. 1 depicts two stop blocks).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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.
Claim 7 is considered allowable due to the recitation of the positioning holes of the extension arms are able to be brought close to the positioning holes of the positioning stop blocks so that a pin is able to be inserted through a said positioning hole of each said extension arm and the positioning hole of a corresponding one of the positioning stop blocks to produce a positioning effect.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kathleen M. McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-9139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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.
/Kathleen M. McFarland/Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Kathleen M. McFarland
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights