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
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) 1-2, 4-7, 10-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MacKarvich (US Pub. App. 2021/0238924).
Re Claim 1, MacKarvich discloses an energy absorber assembly (270) for use with a ladder safety system (80) operatively connected to a ladder (70) (Figs. 5-6), comprising: a cable connector (170, 272, and 280) configured and arranged to be operatively connected to a portion of a cable (140); an energy absorber (410) operatively connected to the cable connector and configured and arranged to move from an expanded position (the position shown in Figs. 5-6) toward a compressed position (Claim 12; [0049]); and a bottom (610c as part of 260 with 675) fixed relative to the ladder configured and arranged to support the energy absorber.
Re Claim 2, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein the cable connector includes a flange (280) and a retainer (275, 277), a first portion (annotated Fig. 5 below) of the energy absorber being captured between the flange and the retainer.
PNG
media_image1.png
961
663
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 4, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein the energy absorber is made of metal ([0091].).
Re Claim 5, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein the energy absorber (shown in a hidden state/configuration) includes a top portion (annotated Fig. 6 below), a bottom portion (annotated Fig. 6 below), and at least one intermediate portion (annotated Fig. 6 below) interconnecting the top portion and the bottom portion.
PNG
media_image2.png
1170
791
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 6, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 5, wherein the top portion is configured and arranged to contact the at least one intermediate portion and the at least one intermediate portion is configured and arranged to contact the bottom portion when the energy absorber is in the compressed position (It can be understood, through the views shown in the figures, that said absorber compresses and the respective portions contact each other, as each ‘portion’ is always contacting its neighboring portion where they transition from each portion to the next.)
Re Claim 7, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 5, wherein the top, at least one intermediate, and bottom portions include apertures (“a bore therethrough”, paragraph [0049], Line 3 of the righthand column of Pg. 4) through which the cable connector extends (Part of said connector extends partially through some of the disclosed apertures, as shown clearly in the exposed configuration of Fig. 5.).
PNG
media_image3.png
1170
791
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 10, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein an intermediate connector portion (annotated Fig. 5 below) of the cable connector is positioned within the energy absorber when the energy absorber is in the expanded position.
PNG
media_image4.png
1165
782
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 11, in an alternative interpretation, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein an intermediate connector portion (675 and 676 as part of 272) of the cable connector extends downward from the energy absorber when the energy absorber is in the compressed position (The relative downwards position of the intermediate connector portion when the absorber is compressed can be understood by Fig. 5.).
Re Claim 12, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein during use when a downward force (F, [0049]) is exerted on the cable the energy absorber moves from the expanded position toward the compressed position (Claim 12; [0049]) and an intermediate connector portion (annotated Fig. 5 directly above) of the cable connector moves from being positioned within the energy absorber to extending downward from the energy absorber (It can be understood by the figures that if absorber 410 is sufficiently compressed against the top edges/lips of 610c, the intermediate connector portion disclosed would extend 62 at least partially downwards from it.).
Re Claim 13, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1, wherein the bottom includes a bottom slot (268) configured and arranged to selectively receive portions of the cable connector.
Re Claim 14, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 1 (Fig. 6), wherein the energy absorber is contained within a housing (260/268) to which the bottom is operatively connected, the housing being operatively connected to a bracket (90).
Re Claim 15, MacKarvich discloses an energy absorber assembly (270) for use with a ladder safety system (80) operatively connected to a ladder (70) (Figs. 5-6), comprising: a cable connector (170, 272, and 280) configured and arranged to be operatively connected to a portion of a cable (140); an energy absorber (410) operatively connected to the cable connector and configured and arranged to move from an expanded position (the position shown in Figs. 5-6) toward a compressed position (Claim 12; [0049]), the energy absorber includes a top portion (annotated Fig. 6 immediately above), a bottom portion (annotated Fig. 6 immediately above), and at least one intermediate portion (annotated Fig. 6 immediately above) interconnecting the top portion and the bottom portion.; and a bottom (610c as part of 260 with 675) fixed relative to the ladder configured and arranged to support the energy absorber and wherein during use when a downward force (F, [0049]) is exerted on the cable the energy absorber moves from the expanded position toward the compressed position (Claim 12; [0049]) and an intermediate connector portion (annotated Fig. 5 directly above) of the cable connector moves from being positioned within the energy absorber to extending downward from the energy absorber (It can be understood by the figures that if absorber 410 is sufficiently compressed against the top edges/lips of 610c, the intermediate connector portion disclosed would extend 62at least partially downwards from it.), and wherein the top portion is configured and arranged to contact the at least one intermediate portion and the at least one intermediate portion is configured and arranged to contact the bottom portion when the energy absorber is in the compressed position (It can be understood, through the views shown in the figures, that said absorber compresses and the respective portions contact each other, as each ‘portion’ is always contacting its neighboring portion where they transition from each portion to the next.)
Re Claim 17, Mackarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 15, wherein the top, at least one intermediate, and bottom portions include apertures (“a bore therethrough”, paragraph [0049], Line 3 of the righthand column of Pg. 4) through which the cable connector extends (Part of said connector extends partially through some of the disclosed apertures, as shown clearly in the exposed configuration of Fig. 5.).
Re Claim 20, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 15 (Fig. 5), wherein the energy absorber is contained within a housing (260 and 268) to which the bottom is operatively connected, the housing being operatively connected to a bracket (90).
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) 3 and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacKarvich, as applied above.
MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claims 1 and 15, respectively, wherein the cable connector includes a bore (please refer to the cable clamp 170 in annotated Fig. 5 above.) configured and arranged to receive the portion of the cable. MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assembly of claim 15, wherein the cable connector includes a bore (Please refer to the cable clamp 170 in annotated Fig. 5 below.) configured and arranged to receive the portion of the cable, and wherein the cable connector includes a flange (280) and a retainer (275, 277), a first portion (annotated Fig. 5 below) of the energy absorber being captured between the flange and the retainer.
MacKarvich does not clearly teach the cable connector being swaged onto the cable.
The examiner takes Official Notice in that it was old and well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to swage a cable to a connector. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MacKarvich’s cable connector, as disclosed in their respective claims, to be swaged onto the cable in order to securely fasten the two elements (connector and cable) together. Furthermore, the method of forming an apparatus or any structure is not germane as to its patentability.
2113 Product-by-Process Claims [R-01.2024]
I. PRODUCT-BY-PROCESS CLAIMS ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE MANIPULATIONS OF THE RECITED STEPS, ONLY THE STRUCTURE IMPLIED BY THE STEPS
"[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted)
PNG
media_image1.png
961
663
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 8-9 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacKarvich, as applied above, in view of Olson et al. (U.S. Patent 5,458,214).
Re. Claims 8 and 18, MacKarvich discloses the energy absorber assemblies of claims 5 and 15, wherein the top portion is a first portion (annotated Fig. 6 above), the at least one intermediate portion includes a second portion (the line descending adjacent the top/first), a third portion (the line descending after the second), and a fourth portion (the line descending directly below the third and directly above the bottom/fifth), and the bottom portion is a fifth portion (annotated Fig. 6 below), wherein the first portion and the fifth portion are parallel (Fig. 6).
MacKarvich does not clearly teach wherein the second portion, third portion, and fourth portion zigzag between the first portion and the fifth portion, as the absorber is continuously helical and spiral-shaped.
Olson teaches an energy absorber (96, Fig. 1 or 216, Fig. 6) wherein the second portion, third portion, and fourth portion zigzag between the first portion and the fifth portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MacKarvich’s compression spring with stacked Belleville-type washers as it would be predictable in the art to substitute one well-known energy absorber for another in order to also absorb energy for dampening purposes.
Re Claims 9 and 19, the modified MacKarvich teaches the energy absorber assembly of claim 8 and the energy absorber assembly of claim 18.
The modified MacKarvich does appear to teach the second portion is angled 30 to 60 degrees from the first portion and approximately 90 degrees from the third portion and the fourth portion is angled approximately 90 degrees from the third portion and 30 to 60 degrees from the fifth portion as the angles shown do appear to be at least 30 degrees and within the range claimed, however, the drawings are not necessarily drawn to scale such that this limitation doesn’t appear explicitly taught.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a specific range of angles to manufacture the interconnected portions of the modified MacKarvich’s energy absorber (specifically the angles of the Belleville washers of Olson) to fall within the claimed range of 30 to 60 degrees, as the Courts have held, because it is a matter of routine optimization to tune energy absorption or spring constant of a given structure by finding the optimal angle, pitch, or orientation between adjacent segments via routine experimentation. Angles in dynamic structures are standard variables affecting mechanical resistance, unless a new and unexpected result occurs and is disclosed accordingly. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454 (CCPA 1955); E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co. v. Synvina C.V., 904 F.3d 996 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROHAN O PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-9628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30 - 5 EST.
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, Daniel Cahn, can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/R.O.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights