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
Figure 1A should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the word “to” in line 2 should be deleted. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “bucket” in line 3 should be changed to --buckle--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, the units “inches” are missing after “.88”. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 11-14, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cale (US 2,846,958).
With regard to claim 11, Cale discloses an assembly for securing cargo inside a container (column 1, lines 25-26; “a railway car or the like) comprising:
a first cargo restraining device (i.e. the “strap anchor”) securable to a first wall (8, 9, 13) of the container having a first inwardly-facing arcuate wall (see annotated Fig. below) with a radius defining an opening (see Fig. below);
a first strap (i.e. a “lading strap,” not shown) having two ends (not shown, but the strap is not infinitely long and thus inherently has two ends);
a first hook (2) having a shank (4) coupled the first strap adjacent one end of the first strap (via ring 3), a bend extending from the shank (see Fig. below), and a support arm (see Fig. below) extending upward from the arcuate bend opposite the shank, the arcuate bend having an outwardly-facing arcuate wall with a radius receivable by the opening and engageable with the end of the inwardly-facing arcuate wall of the cargo restraining device (see Fig. below), the radius of the outwardly-facing arcuate wall being the same as the radius of the inwardly-facing arcuate wall (see matching radii in the Fig. below, as well as column 1, lines 59-70; “the diameter of the shank is nearly as great as the diameter of the hole in the ring so that the two fit together rather snugly but without bending.” The hook portion of the shank has about the same curvature as the wall of the hole through the ring”).
PNG
media_image1.png
378
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 12, Cale teaches that the support arm includes a beveled portion (see Fig. above) for deflecting the cargo restraining device during installation of the assembly (note that this limitation refers to the intended use of the beveled portion, and therefore is given little patentable weight).
With regard to claim 13, Cale fails to teach a ratchet buckle secured to the strap adjacent an other end of the strap for securing the strap to another strap, the ratchet buckle including a magnet for securing to a wall of the container during installation of the assembly.
Laarmann teaches a ratchet buckle (17) having a magnet (18—note that paragraph 0113 states that “the coupling portion of the ratchet [indicated by numeral 18] may also comprise a magnet”).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified Cale by providing a ratchet buckle as shown by Laarman to be used with Cale’s “lading straps,” with a reasonable expectation of success, given that Laarmann teaches that it is known to use ratcheting straps and buckles in transporting cargo, stating that “some straps involve the use of a hand-operated pulling device, also called a ratchet strap, to tighten the straps into a holding state, thereby preventing their loosening” (Laarmann, paragraph 0005). Furthermore, it would have been considered obvious to have provided Laarman’s magnetic elements as well, including magnets on the ratchet buckle as well as the straps themselves, in order to improve storage convenience (Laarman, paragraphs 0007-0008).
With regard to claim 14, Cale in view of Laarmann teaches that the ratchet buckle includes a face (see Fig. below), the magnet coupled to the face (“the coupling portion of the ratchet [indicated by numeral 18] may also comprise a magnet”).
PNG
media_image2.png
282
442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 18, Cale discloses a second cargo restraining device (see the second identical “lading strap anchor” shown in Fig. 1—note that the rest of the claim limitations will not be discussed as they are identical to that of claim 11).
With regard to claim 19, Cale teaches that the support arm includes in a beveled portion (see Fig. above) for deflecting the cargo restraining device during securement of the cargo restraining device (note that this limitation refers to the intended use of the beveled portion, and therefore is given little patentable weight).
Claim(s) 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cale in view of Jung (KR 101176332 B1).
With regard to claims 20 and 21, Cale fails to teach that the radius of the first outwardly-facing arcuate wall is .88 inches. Note: the remaining limitations of claim 21 are identical to those of claim 11, thus they will not be discussed here. Please refer to the rejection of claim 11 for the limitations taught by Cale.
Jung teaches that hooks for cargo straps “may be appropriately changed in size and specific configuration depending on the shape, weight, and the like of the cargo.” In other words, Jung teaches that the dimensions of a hook are a result-effective variable.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified Cale such that the mating curved surfaces had a radius of 0.88 inches, with a reasonable expectation of success, given that Jung teaches that cargo hooks can be made in a variety of sizes, depending on the load to be secured.
With regard to claim 22, Cale in view of Jung fails to teach a ratchet buckle secured to the strap adjacent an other end of the strap for securing the strap to another strap, the ratchet buckle including a magnet for securing to a wall of the container during installation of the assembly.
Laarmann teaches a ratchet buckle (17) having a magnet (18—note that paragraph 0113 states that “the coupling portion of the ratchet [indicated by numeral 18] may also comprise a magnet”).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified Cale in view of Jung by providing the ratchet buckle of Laarmann to be used with Cale’s “lading straps,” with a reasonable expectation of success, given that Laarmann teaches that it is known to use ratcheting straps and buckles in transporting cargo, stating that “some straps involve the use of a hand-operated pulling device, also called a ratchet strap, to tighten the straps into a holding state, thereby preventing their loosening” (Laarmann, paragraph 0005). Furthermore, it would have been considered obvious to have provided Laarman’s magnetic elements as well, including magnets on the ratchet buckle as well as the straps themselves, in order to improve storage convenience (Laarman, paragraphs 0007-0008).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowed.
Claims 15-17 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The closest prior art is Cale (US 2,846,958).
With regard to claim 1, Cale discloses a method for securing cargo within a container (column 1, lines 25-26; “a railway car or the like”) comprising:
(a) securing to a first wall (8, 9, 13) of the container a first cargo restraining device (i.e. the “strap anchor”) having a first inwardly-facing arcuate wall with a radius defining a first opening (see annotated Fig. provided below);
(b) securing to the first cargo restraining device a first hook (4)
Cale teaches that the hook (or “stirrup”) is bent behind the ring in which it is inserted, and that “the stirrup and ring should be assembled before the ring is welded in place” (column 1, lines 63-65). Then, Cale states that “a lading strap is connected to a stirrup by looping it through the stirrup slot, pulling it taut and then anchoring the end of the strap in any well known manner” (column 2, lines 23-25). Therefore, Cole does not teach securing a first hook “coupled to an end of a first strap by inserting a bend of the first hook…into the opening” as required in claim 1. The hook is not coupled to the strap when it is inserted into the opening.
With regard to claim 15, Cale in view of Laarmann fails to teach that the ratchet buckle further includes a receptacle coupled to the face, the magnet received by the receptacle. While Laarmann does actually teach a receptacle in the face that can be engaged by a magnet (Paragraph 0113: “A small opening (not shown) may be provided in the coupling surface 18 so that the magnetic member of the rolled up strap can be positioned in the area of the opening.”), the magnet being received is the magnet of a different component (i.e. the strap), rather than the magnet that is part of the ratchet buckle. When claim 15 recites “the magnet,” it is referring to the magnet that is in the ratchet buckle.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references provide further examples of the state of the art with regard to load anchors having similar structure applicant’s disclosed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6300. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM - 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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at 571-270-7741. 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.
/ROBERT E FULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights