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 .
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 “twist lock mechanism” recited in Claim 3, the “adjustment mechanism … configured to adjust the positioning of the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft from a parallel state to an angled state” and the “angled state” of the two elongated shafts recited in Claim 4, the adjustability of the top grip, middle grip, and hooking mechanism recited in Claim 6, the detachability of the top grip, middle grip, and hooking mechanism recited in Claim 7, the gripping mechanism” recited in Claim 11, the “lighting mechanism” recited in Claim 12, the “angle adjustment mechanism” and “angled state” of the two elongated shafts recited in Claim 16, and the “lighting mechanism” recited in Claim 18 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.
Claim 20 is 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 20 recites “a middle grip and a top grip of a multifunctional mobility apparatus” which renders the claim indefinite. These three elements (the middle grip, the top grip, and the multifunctional mobility apparatus) are previously recited in Claim 19. It is unclear if Claim 20 refers to those elements already present in the method as recited in Claim 19, or if Claim 20 refers to a separate set of elements. If the claim refers to the same elements as those in Claim 19, it is unclear that Claim 20 further limits the claim, as these steps appear to be substantially recited in the parent claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Parry in US Patent 8047216.
Regarding Claim 19, Parry teaches a method for transfer assistance from an immobile position to a mobile position, the method comprising: hooking a solid object (404, see Fig. 7A-C) with a multifunctional mobility apparatus (100) configured with a hooking mechanism (110); pulling the multifunctional mobility apparatus to reposition the user in a position suitable for transfer assistance (Fig. 7B); gripping a middle grip (106) of the multifunctional mobility apparatus to reposition to reach and grip a top grip (104) of the multifunctional mobility apparatus; applying pressure to the middle grip and top grip of the multifunctional mobility apparatus to move a user of the multifunctional mobility apparatus from an immobile position to a mobile position (Figs 7C-G).
Regarding Claim 20, Parry teaches gripping (with the knee) a middle grip (106) and a top grip (104, gripped with the hand) of a multifunctional mobility apparatus; applying pressure to the middle grip and top grip of the multifunctional mobility apparatus to move a user of the multifunctional mobility apparatus from a sedentary position (Fig. 7C) to a standing position (Fig. 7G).
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 1, 2, 5, 7-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geary in US Patent 6085766 in view of Montanti in US Patent 8215325.
Regarding Claims 1 and 8, Geary teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (20) comprising a first elongated shaft (22) and a second elongated shaft (23); wherein the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft are configured to be connected via an adjustment mechanism (25B); a top grip (30) connected to a top end of the elongated shaft; wherein the top grip is a handle positioned perpendicular to the elongated shaft; a middle grip (32) connected to the elongated shaft positioned below the position of the top grip on the elongated shaft; wherein the middle grip is a handle positioned perpendicular to the elongated shaft; and a stabilizer (34) connected to the bottom end of the elongated shaft; wherein the stabilizer has a width (at the wide bottom) that is wider than the width of the elongated shaft.
Geary is silent on the use of a hooking mechanism. Montanti teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (2) and a hooking mechanism (17) connected (via 16) to the elongated shaft positioned near a bottom end of the elongated shaft; wherein the hooking mechanism extends substantially perpendicular from the elongated shaft; the hooking mechanism configured to be adjustable in both rotational and lateral directions (when loosened, the mechanism can both slide along and about the shaft) and detachably connected to the elongated shaft (the mechanism can be removed when the wingnuts are loosened) and wherein the hooking mechanism is configured with a rubberized coating (such as the padding 12, which is “foam rubber”) to enhance grip and prevent slippage during pulling operations. 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 device of Geary by adding a hooking mechanism as taught by Montanti in order to allow the user to rest their leg on the device.
Regarding Claim 2, Geary, as modified, teaches that the adjustment mechanism utilizes a spring button clip (25, see fig. 3) for adjustment of the positioning of the first elongated shaft in relation to the second elongated shaft.
Regarding Claim 5, Geary, as modified, teaches that the top grip and the middle grip are configured to be positioned a distance apart that is suitable for use in transfer assistance mobility (insofar as the applicant’s device has a similar spacing between the top and middle grips).
Regarding Claim 7, Geary, as modified, teaches that the top grip (removable by removing the pin through 30C), the middle grip (removable by loosening the band 32b and sliding the device off the shaft), and the hooking mechanism (see Montanti above) are each configured to be detachably connected to the elongated shaft.
Regarding Claim 9, Geary, as modified, teaches that the stabilizer is configured to be in a fixed position (fixed by 25C).
Regarding Claim 11, Geary, as modified, teaches that the stabilizer is configured to have a gripping mechanism (such as 54) on the bottom portion of the stabilizer.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geary, as modified, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Champigny in US Patent 4809725. Geary, as modified, teaches that the middle grip (see Fig. 5, and the band 32b can be moved along the shaft when loosened) and the hooking mechanism (see Montanti, above) are each configured to be adjustable in both rotational and lateral directions. Champigny teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus with a top grip (7) that can be adjusted in both rotational (see Fig. 13) and lateral (via adjustment of the length of 5) directions. 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 device of Geary, as modified, by using a rotationally and laterally adjustable top grip as taught by Champigny in order to provide a more customizable device for the user.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geary as modified, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in Yu in US Publication 2007/0251559. Geary, as modified, is silent on the use of a lighting mechanism. Yu teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising a lighting mechanism (25) configured to be toggled on and off (via 270) to provide visual illumination of surroundings. 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 device of Geary, as modified, by adding a lighting mechanism as taught by Yu in order to provide lighting for the user when walking in the dark.
Claims 1, 3, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colegrove et al. in US Patent 3335735 in view of Montanti in US Patent 8215325.
Regarding Claims 1, Colegrove teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (11/12) comprising a first elongated shaft (11) and a second elongated shaft (12); wherein the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft are configured to be connected via an adjustment mechanism (25); a top grip (14) connected to a top end of the elongated shaft; wherein the top grip is a handle positioned perpendicular to the elongated shaft; a middle grip (13) connected to the elongated shaft positioned below the position of the top grip on the elongated shaft; wherein the middle grip is a handle positioned perpendicular to the elongated shaft; and a stabilizer (18) connected to the bottom end of the elongated shaft; wherein the stabilizer has a width (at the wide bottom) that is wider than the width of the elongated shaft.
Colegrove is silent on the use of a hooking mechanism. Montanti teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (2) and a hooking mechanism (17) connected (via 16) to the elongated shaft positioned near a bottom end of the elongated shaft; wherein the hooking mechanism extends substantially perpendicular from the elongated shaft. 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 device of Colegrove by adding a hooking mechanism as taught by Montanti in order to allow the user to rest their leg on the device.
Regarding Claim 3, Colegrove, as modified, teaches that the adjustment mechanism is configured to utilize a twist lock mechanism ( a “fastening nut”) to tighten and loosen the first elongated shaft in relation to the second elongated shaft.
Regarding Claim 10, Colegrove, as modified, teaches that the stabilizer is configured to be flexible (via 81) to adjust based on the directional force and pressure applied to the apparatus.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tryba in US Publication 2018/0243156 in view of Cato, III in US Publication 2006/0289046. Tryba teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft comprising a first elongated shaft (209) and a second elongated shaft (206); wherein the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft are configured to be connected via an adjustment mechanism (207); a top grip connected (250) to a top end of the elongated shaft; wherein the top grip is a handle positioned perpendicular to the elongated shaft; wherein the adjustment mechanism is configured to adjust the positioning of the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft from a parallel state (Fig. 3) to an angled state (Fig. 2A). Tryba is silent on the use of a middle grip or a hooking mechanism. Cato teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft comprising a first elongated shaft (12) and a second elongated shaft (16); wherein the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft are configured to be connected via an adjustment mechanism (18) and a middle grip (30) connected to the elongated shaft positioned below the position of a top grip (38) on the elongated shaft; wherein the middle grip is a handle positioned perpendicular to the elongated shaft; a hooking mechanism (24) connected to the elongated shaft positioned near a bottom end of the elongated shaft; wherein the hooking mechanism extends substantially perpendicular from the elongated shaft; and a stabilizer (40) connected to the bottom end of the elongated shaft; wherein the stabilizer has a width that is wider than the width of the elongated shaft (at the bottom end thereof). 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 device of Tryba by adding a middle grip, hooking mechanism, and stabilizer as taught by Cato in order to provide a more stable and easily gripped device.
Claims 13-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geary in US Patent 6085766 in view of Cato, III in US Publication 2006/0289046.
Regarding Claim 13, Geary teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (22/23/24); a top grip (30) connected to a top end of the elongated shaft; a middle grip (32) connected to the elongated shaft positioned below the position of the top grip on the elongated shaft; wherein the top grip and the middle grip are positioned to provide transfer assistance from an immobile position to a mobile position (insofar as the applicant’s device has a similar spacing between the top and middle grips).
Geary is silent on the use of a hooking mechanism. Cato teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (12/16), and a hooking mechanism (24) connected to the elongated shaft below the position where the middle grip is connected to the elongated shaft; and wherein the hooking mechanism is configured to provide leverage for pulling objects from a distance (the device can inherently be use for such a purpose). 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 device of Geary by adding a hooking mechanism as taught by Cato in order to provide another option for the user to grip the device.
Regarding Claim 14, Geary, as modified, teaches that the elongated shaft comprises a plurality of sections (12 and 16).
Regarding Claim 15,Geary, as modified, teaches that the plurality of sections of the elongated shaft are each configured to be connected to at least one other section of the plurality of sections for the purposes of extending the length of the multifunctional mobility apparatus (see Figs. 1A and 1B).
Regarding Claim 17, Geary, as modified, teaches that each of the plurality of sections are configured to be of differing circumferences (see Column 4, lines 21-22).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geary as modified, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in Yu in US Publication 2007/0251559. Geary, as modified, is silent on the use of a lighting mechanism. Yu teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising a lighting mechanism (25) configured to be toggled on and off (via 270) to provide visual illumination of surroundings. 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 device of Geary, as modified, by adding a lighting mechanism as taught by Yu in order to provide lighting for the user when walking in the dark.
Claims 13, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tryba in US Publication 2018/024156 in view of Cato, III in US Publication 2006/0289046. Tryba teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (209/206); a top grip (250) connected to a top end of the elongated shaft; wherein the elongated shaft comprises a plurality of sections (209 and 206), wherein a first section (206) and a second section (209) of the plurality of sections are configured to be connected using an angle adjustment mechanism (207) to adjust the positioning of the first section and the second section from a parallel state (Fig. 3) to an angled state (Fig. 2A). Tryba is silent on the use of a middle grip or a hooking mechanism. Cato teaches a multifunctional mobility apparatus comprising: an elongated shaft (!2/16) and a middle grip (30) connected to the elongated shaft positioned below the position of a top grip (38) on the elongated shaft; a hooking mechanism (24) connected to the elongated shaft below the position where the middle grip is connected to the elongated shaft wherein the top grip and the middle grip are positioned to provide transfer assistance from an immobile position to a mobile position (insofar as the applicant’s device has a similar spacing between the top and middle grips); and wherein the hooking mechanism is configured to provide leverage for pulling objects from a distance (the device can inherently be use for such a purpose). 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 device of Tryba by adding a middle grip, hooking mechanism, and stabilizer as taught by Cato in order to provide a more stable and easily gripped device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Neptune, Gish, Grimball, Lai, Diamond, Kelly, Van Wart Jr., Liu, Kelly, and Cato III teach multifunctional mobility devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH C. HAWK whose telephone number is (571)272-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5:30pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
NOAH C. HAWK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/Noah Chandler Hawk/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636