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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN on 07/12/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202421655551.7 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Stump (US5800105A).
Regarding claim 1, Stump discloses a fast-connecting safety tensioning device for automobiles, comprising: a main body (13; Figures 1-5) which consists of a base assembly (27), a handle assembly (37) and a rolling assembly (47, 39); and a band (65); wherein, the base assembly (27) comprises a base (base of 27, 29, 31) having a bottom (base of 27), the rolling assembly (47, 39) comprises a spindle (47) for mounting the band (65), the spindle (47) is mounted on the base (base of 27, 29, 31); the base (base of 27, 29, 31) has one threaded hole (69) on the bottom of the base (base of 27, 29, 31) for one screw (67) to pass through so as to mount the fast-connecting safety tensioning device onto an object (11) to be fixed in place.
Regarding claim 7, Stump discloses wherein a connecting plate (15) having one connecting hole (71) for allowing the one or more screws (67) to pass through is disposed under the bottom of the base (base of 27, 29, 31), so that the main body (13) is mounted onto an object (11) to be fixed in place.
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.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stump in view of Matsuda (CN103771277A).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, Stump discloses the above tensioning device, but fails to teach wherein one or more (“two blind” claim 4) rivet nuts each having one threaded hole are integrally formed (“disposed” claim 4) on the bottom of the base.
Matsuda teaches a similar tensioning device and further teaches wherein one or more (“two blind” claim 4) nuts (16a, 16b; page 8, ¶8; Figure 5) each having one threaded hole are integrally formed (“disposed” claim 4) on the bottom of the base (13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tensioning device of Stump to include the nuts as taught by Matsuda and wherein the nuts are riveted in order to provide strong and reliable threads for continuous use and high load. Furthermore, it is known in the art that rivet nuts are joined to thin materials to avoid damage and warping of the material.
Regarding claim 3, Stump discloses the above tensioning device, but fails to teach wherein the number of the threaded holes is two and the two threaded holes are respectively located on opposite sides of the spindle.
Matsuda teaches a similar tensioning device and further teaches wherein the number of the threaded holes (10a, 10b; page 7, ¶8, tapped bores set on two sides, above and below sides; Figure 7, 10a,10b holes are on bottom side of device 1 attached to the trolley 30) is two and the two threaded holes (10a, 10b) are respectively located on opposite sides of the spindle (14; Figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tensioning device of Stump to include the two threaded holes as taught by Matsuda in order to stably secure the main body and prevent rotation of the tensioning device.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stump, in view of Joly (EP2980421A1), and in further view of Matsuda.
Regarding claim 6, Stump discloses the above tensioning device and further teaches wherein the one threaded hole (69) comprise a first threaded hole, but fails to teach a second threaded hole; a first column with the first threaded hole extends downward from the bottom of the base, and a second column with the second threaded hole extends upward from the bottom of the base.
Joly teaches a similar threaded hole and nut and further teaches a first column (15; Figures 5-6) with the first threaded hole (10) extends downward from the bottom of the base (3; base 27 of Stump). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first threaded hole of Stump to include the first threaded hole as taught by Joly in order to provide tolerance spacing adjustment between the base of the device and uneven portions of an object to ensure proper engagement and fixation.
Matsuda teaches a similar tensioning device and further teaches a second threaded hole (10b; page 8, ¶8; Figure 5), and a second column (16b) with the second threaded hole (10b) extends upward from the bottom of the base (13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tensioning device of Stump to include the seconded threaded hole as taught by Matsuda in order to reduce protrusions in areas to allow the base of the device to be flushed with the object.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 5 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the entire combination of elements set forth including for disclosing the first threaded nut is adjacent to the band and extends downward from the bottom of the base.
Stump teaches the above tensioning device, but fails to teach wherein a first threaded nut with a first threaded hole and a second threaded nut with a second threaded hole are disposed on the bottom of the base; the first threaded nut is adjacent to the band and extends downward from the bottom of the base, the second threaded nut extends upward from the bottom of the base. Matsuda teaches wherein a first threaded nut with a first threaded hole and a second threaded nut with a second threaded hole are disposed on the bottom of the base; the second threaded nut extends upward from the bottom of the base, but fails to teach the first threaded nut is adjacent to the band and extends downward from the bottom of the base.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references listed on form PTO-892 are cited for their relevance to the disclosed invention and demonstration of the state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights