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 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, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14-18, 20, 21, 25, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 6,312,002 to Slagerman.
Regarding Claim 1, Slagerman discloses a wheel lock 148 for a wheelchair 110, the wheel lock 148 comprising: a supporting member 150 configured to attach to a frame 128 of the wheelchair 110 adjacent to a wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110, a brake shoe 156 mechanically coupled to the supporting member 150 and configured to be movable between a first directional configuration and a second directional configuration (i.e., in a direction away from the wheel and in a direction of contacting the wheel), a brake pad 168 mechanically coupled to the brake shoe 156, and a lever 171 mechanically coupled to the brake shoe 156 configured to move the brake shoe 156 between the first directional configuration and the second directional configuration, wherein, when the brake shoe 156 is in the first directional configuration, the brake pad does not contact the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110 (see Figure 2), and when the brake shoe 156 is in the second directional configuration, the brake pad 168 is configured to mechanically couple to the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110 to prevent the wheel 146 from rotating (see Figure 10 and column 5 lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 4, Slagerman further discloses that the lever is mechanically coupled to a first attachment point 163 of a linking member 172, and the brake shoe 156 is mechanically coupled to a second attachment point of the linking member 172 (see Figure 10 and the left arrow portion of link 172 and column 3 lines 34-39 and column 5 lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 5, Slagerman further discloses that the first attachment point and the second attachment point are configured to translate relative to the supporting member 150 when the lever 171 moves the brake shoe 156 between the first directional configuration and the second directional configuration (see Figures 2 and 10 and column 3 lines 34-39 and column 5 lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 8, Slagerman further discloses that when the brake shoe 156 is in the first directional configuration (see Figure 2, where the brake pad 168 is not contacting wheel 146), a length of the brake shoe 156 is parallel to a length of the lever 171 (see Figure 2 and note that when a length of both element 156 and lever 171 are measured from end 158 of shoe element 156 and end 163 of the lever, those lengths extend parallel to one another).
Regarding Claim 10, Slagerman further discloses that the brake pad 168 is certainly capable of being removable from the brake shoe 156.
Regarding Claim 12, Slagerman further discloses that the surface of the brake pad 168 configured to mechanically couple to the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110 has an undulating shape (see Figures 2 and 10).
Regarding Claim 14, Slagerman further discloses that the lever 171 is configured to be manually operated.
Regarding Claim 15, Slagerman further discloses that the wheel lock 148 further comprises: a mounting bar 178 mechanically coupled to the supporting member 150 and configured to attach to the frame 128 of the wheelchair 110 adjacent to the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110 (see Figures 2 and 10 and column 3 lines 54 et al), wherein the mounting bar 178 comprises a slot 180 along a length of the mounting bar 178 (see Figure 10), and a position of the supporting member 150 along a length of the mounting bar slot 180 is configured to be adjustable (see column 4 lines 9-24).
Regarding Claim 16, Slagerman further discloses that the length of the mounting bar slot 180, when attached to the frame 128 of the wheelchair 110, is orthogonal to a rotation axis of the wheel 146 (see Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 17, Slagerman further discloses that the slot 180 is configured to receive a fastener that mechanically couples the supporting member 150 to the mounting bar 178 (see Figure 10 and the fasteners within slot 180 and column 4 lines 9-24).
Regarding Claim 18, Slagerman further discloses that the supporting member 150 is mechanically coupled to the mounting bar 178 by an adjustable fastener (see column 4 lines 9-24).
Regarding Claim 20, Slagerman further discloses that the position of the supporting member 150 along the length of the mounting bar slot 180 is adjustable when the adjustable fastener is adjusted by a first amount (see column 4 lines 9-24).
Regarding Claim 21, Slagerman further discloses that a separation distance between the supporting member 150 and a portion of the frame of the wheelchair 110 is adjustable when the adjustable fastener is adjusted by a second amount (see column 4 lines 9-24).
Regarding Claim 25, Slagerman further discloses that the mounting bar 178 is configured to attach to the frame 128 of the wheelchair 110 adjacent to the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110 using at least one of a clamping component 154 (see Figure 10).
Regarding Claim 26, Slagerman further discloses that the wheel lock 148 further comprises a clamping component 154 mechanically coupled to the supporting member 150 and configured to attach to the frame 128 of the wheelchair 110 adjacent to the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110 (see Figure 10).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 11, 13, 22, 23, and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 6,312,002 to Slagerman.
Regarding Claim 11, Slagerman discloses most all the features of the instant invention as applied above, except for the brake pad being removably coupled to the brake shoe using at least one of a dowel pin, a threaded fastener, or a spring clip.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the brake pad of Slagerman to be removably coupled to the brake shoe using at least one of a dowel pin, a threaded fastener, or a spring clip as a matter of design preference dependent upon the desired type of fastener to enable easy removal of the brake pad from the shoe for replacement upon wear.
Regarding Claim 13, Slagerman discloses most all the features of the instant invention as applied above, except for the brake pad being composed of a metallic material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the brake pad of Slagerman to be made of a metallic material as a matter of design preference dependent upon the desired friction coefficient of the brake pad and the desired wear characteristics of the brake pad.
Regarding Claim 22, Slagerman discloses most all the features of the instant invention as applied above, except for the separation distance between the supporting member and the wheelchair frame being adjustable by at least three inches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the separation distance between the supporting member and the wheelchair frame of Slagerman to be adjustable by at least three inches to best be able to position the wheel lock for better accessibility by the user so that the user can more easily activate the wheel lock assembly.
Regarding Claim 23, Slagerman discloses most all the features of the instant invention as applied above, except for a position adjustment range of the position of the supporting member along the length of the mounting bar slot being between five and 15 inches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed a position adjustment range of the position of the supporting member along the length of the mounting bar slot of Slagerman to be between five and 15 inches to best be able to position the wheel lock for better accessibility by the user so that the user can more easily activate the wheel lock assembly.
Regarding Claim 27, Slagerman further discloses that the supporting member 150 is configured to attach to the frame 128 of the wheelchair 110 adjacent to the wheel 146 of the wheelchair 110.
However, Slagerman does not disclose that this attachment uses at least one of a snap-fit joint or a threaded fastener.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the supporting member of Slagerman to be attached to the wheelchair frame using at least one of a snap-fit joint or a threaded fastener as a matter of design preference dependent upon the desired degree of attachment and strength of attachment between the supporting member and the wheelchair frame.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 19, and 24 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 5,174,418 to Le et al., U.S. Patent No. 6,520,526 to Amirola, French Patent No. FR 2515123 to Brudermann et al., and European Patent No. EP 0687615 to Lauzier all disclose wheel locks similar to applicant’s.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 PM.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
PAMELA RODRIGUEZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/PAMELA RODRIGUEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 07/29/26
Prosecution Insights