DETAILED ACTION
This 2nd Non-Final Office Action is in response to the amendments and / or remarks filed on April 24, 2026. Claims 12 – 22 are pending and currently being examined.
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 § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 & 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (U.S. Patent Number 4,074,839) to Wood et al., in view of (U.S. Patent Number 9,131,762 B2) to Buffinton, and (EP 2 420 155 A1) to Shtriker.
Regarding claim 12, Wood et al., discloses the backpack (10) comprising:
the pocket (14) demarcated by the dorsal wall (17) opposite the back of a user when the backpack (10) is carried (See Figures 1, 5 & 6);
the frame (30), the frame (30) comprising the structural portion (i.e. Upper Angled Slope of (30) in Figures 4 & 6) making it possible to shape the dorsal wall (17) (See Figures 5 & 6); and wherein:
the structural portion (i.e. Upper Angled Slope of (30) in Figures 4 & 6) of the frame (30) forms the camber (i.e. Angle Slope Portion in Figures 5 & 6) such that the median portion (44 & 46) of the structural portion (i.e. Upper Angled Slope of (30) in Figures 4 & 6) is further away from the back of the user than an upper end (34 & 36) and the lower end (40 & 42) of the structural portion (i.e. Upper Angled Slope of (30) in Figures 4 & 6), in projection onto the sagittal plane (i.e. via (X,Y) Plane) (See Figured 2, 4, 5 & 6).
However, Wood et al., does not explicitly disclose partially fixed to the dorsal wall.
Buffinton discloses the frame (9) partially fixed (i.e. via (21, 22, 23 & 24) in Figure 5) to the dorsal wall (8) (See Figure 5).
It would have been obvious to on having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make the frame partially fixed to the dorsal wall as taught by Buffinton with the backpack of Wood et al., in order to prevent excess movement.
However, Wood et al., does not explicitly disclose an extension, connected to the structural portion, extending towards the user’s back from the structural portion, the extension being designed and arranged so as to define in an area of the user when the backpack is carried.
Shtriker teaches an extension (200), connected to the structural portion (10) (See Figure 14), extending towards the user’s back from the structural portion (10), the extension (200) being designed and arranged so as to define in an area of the user when the pack (20) is carried (See Figure 14).
It would have been obvious to on having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make an extension, connected to the structural portion, extending towards the user’s back from the structural portion, the extension being designed and arranged so as to define in an area of the user when the backpack is carried as taught by Shtriker with the backpack of Wood et al., in order to contact the back of the user.
PNG
media_image1.png
495
477
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Wood et al., discloses wherein: the frame (30) is comprised of the shaped cylindrical metal bar (See Column 3, lines 8 & 9) (See Figures 1 – 6).
Regarding claim 14, Wood et al., discloses further comprising: an intermediate panel (15) connected to lower and upper portions of the dorsal wall (17) (See Figure 5).
Regarding claim 15, Wood et al., discloses wherein: the intermediate panel (15) is stretched between the lower and upper portions of the dorsal wall (17) (See Figure 5).
Regarding claim 16, Wood et al., discloses wherein: the frame (30) is inserted between the wall (17) and the intermediate wall (15) (See Column 2, lines 43 – 52) (See Figure 5).
Regarding claim 17, Wood et al., discloses further comprising:
the belt (50) connected to the lower portion of the dorsal wall (17) (See Figure 6), the belt (50) comprising an inner wall (i.e. Inside Wall Portion of (50) in Figure 6), configured to be in contact with the user’s body when the belt (50) is fastened (See Figure 6), and an outer wall (i.e. Outside Wall Portion of (50) in Figure 6), opposite the inner wall (i.e. Inside Wall Portion of (50) in Figure 6); and wherein:
In addition, Wood et al., as modified by Shtriker discloses the extension (200) is designed so that the outer wall of the belt (30) in the area of the lumbar zone of the user when the pack (20) is carried (See Figure 14).
Regarding claim 18, Wood et al., discloses further comprising: an intermediate panel (15) connected to lower and upper portions of the dorsal wall (17); and wherein: the belt (50) is connected to the intermediate panel (15) (See Figure 6).
Regarding claim 19, Wood et al., as modified by Shtriker discloses wherein: the support section (264) of the extension (200) extends transversely (See Figure 6B).
However, Wood et al., does not explicitly disclose over at least three centimeters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make the extension extending transversely over at least three centimeters, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 20, Wood et al., discloses wherein: the frame (30) comprises the lower portion (i.e. Lower Portion of (30) in Figure 2) forming two open lower loops (i.e. Lower Left & Right Curve Corners adjacent (40 & 42) in Figures 2 & 4), arranged vertically in a same area and away from one another transversely, the two lower loops (i.e. Lower Left & Right Curve Corners adjacent (40 & 42) in Figures 2 & 4) being connected by the lower median portion (38), the lower median portion (38) being arranged so that it is closer to the back of the user than the structural portion (i.e. Upper Angled Slope of (30) in Figures 4 & 6) of the frame (30), in projection onto the sagittal plane (i.e. via (X,Y) Plane) (See Figured 2, 4, 5 & 6).
Furthermore, Wood et al., as modified by Shtriker discloses defining the extension (200) (See Figure 14).
Regarding claim 21, Wood et al., as modified by Buffinton discloses wherein: the frame (9) is removably mounted (i.e. via (21, 22, 23 & 24) in Figure 5) on the dorsal wall (8) (See Figure 5).
Regarding claim 22, Wood et al., as modified by Shtriker discloses the support section (264) is offset upwards in relation to the lowermost portion of the frame (14), in projection onto the sagittal plane (i.e. via (X, Y) Plane) (See Figures 6B & 10B).
However, Wood et al., as modified by above does not explicitly disclose the distance between 60 and 140 millimeters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make the distance between 60 and 140 millimeters, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2 – 6, filed on April 24, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 & 21 under (U.S. Patent Number 4,074,839) to Wood et al., in view of (U.S. Patent Number 9,131,762 B2) to Buffinton and (U.S. Patent Number 10,806,238 B2) to Sears et al., have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of (U.S. Patent Number 4,074,839) to Wood et al., in view of (U.S. Patent Number 9,131,762 B2) to Buffinton, and (EP 2 420 155 A1) to Shtriker.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(U.S. Patent Number 3,774,825) to Schone et al., teaches an extension (i.e. Angled Curved Portion of (30 & 31) in Figures 2 & 6), connected (i.e. via (34 & 35) in Figures 1 & 2) to the structural portion (15), extending towards the user’s back from the structural portion (15), the extension (i.e. Angled Curved Portion of (30 & 31) in Figures 2 & 6) being designed and arranged so as to define in an area of the user when the pack (12) is carried (See Figures 1, 2 & 6) (See Column 3, lines 33 – 35).
(U.S. Patent Number 10,806,238 B2) to Sears et al., teaches the support section (i.e. via (116) in Figure 3) located in an area of the lumbar region of the user when the backpack (100) is carried (See Figure 1).
Furthermore, Sears et al., discloses further comprising: the belt (122) connected to the lower portion (See Figures 1 & 3), the belt (122) comprising an inner wall (i.e. Inside Wall Portion of (122) in Figure 3), configured to be in contact with the user’s body when the belt (122) is fastened (166) (See Figure 1), and an outer wall (i.e. Outside Wall Portion of (122) in Figure 3), opposite the inner wall (i.e. Inside Wall Portion of (122) in Figure 3); and wherein: the support section (116) is in contact with the outer wall (i.e. Outside Wall Portion of (122) in Figure 3) of the belt (122) in the area of the lumbar zone of the user when the backpack (100) is carried (See Column 11, lines 19 – 36) (See Figures 1 & 3).
Lastly, Sears et al., teaches wherein: the frame (140 & 142) comprises a lower portion forming two open lower loops (i.e. Lower Left & Right Curve Corner Portions of (140 & 142) in Figure 3), arranged vertically in a same area and away from one another transversely, the two lower loops being connected by a lower median portion defining the extension, the lower median portion (i.e. Lower Left & Right Curve Corner Portions of (140 & 142) in Figure 3) being arranged so that it is closer to the back of the user than the structural portion of the frame (140 & 142), in projection onto a sagittal plane.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESTER L VANTERPOOL whose telephone number is (571)272-8028. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathan J. Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/L.L.V/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights