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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/10/2026 have been fully considered.
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The amendments removing the “said cable receiver” clause from claim 9 and completing the dependency of claim 10 (“assembled according to claim 9”) resolve those grounds and the rejections of claims 9, 10, and 11 are withdrawn.
The rejections of claims 1-4 and 6-8 under 35 U.S.C. 102 over Quicklock. Applicant argues that Quicklock does not disclose the cap functions added to claim 1 and that Quicklock is an all-stainless system whose instructions advise against contact with other metals. These arguments are moot, because the rejection of amended claims 1-4 and 6-8 does not rely upon Quicklock; a new ground of rejection over Graber in view of Clark, necessitated by applicant’s amendment, is set forth.
The rejections of claims 9 and 10 over Burt.
Applicant argues that Burt does not disclose a cap that prevents a loosened nut from falling and that inhibits galvanic corrosion. The argument is moot, because the rejection of amended claims 9-132 does not rely upon Burt.
Herbold as nonanalogus art. The argument is not persuasive. A reference is analogous art if it is either from the same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor is involved. Herbold is relied upon not for its turbomachinery application but for its teaching at the level of mating threaded fasteners: a first threaded member engaging a second threaded member under load, formed of a strong bearing material resistant to galling such as phosphor bronze, the mating members being of dissimilar materials i.e. phosphor bronze and stainless steel for the other to resist galling. (Herbold col. 2 lines 25-27 see col. 3 lines 10-15). Galling between mating threaded members is the problem which the inventors were involved. The problem and the solution are fastener-scale, not turbine-scale.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 11732776 issued to Graber in view of U.S. Patent No. 10655664 issued to Clark.
Regarding claim 1,
Graber discloses a cable attachment structure comprising a sleeve, a capsule (Graber: FIGS. 3 and 5; securement assembly 54 comprising nut 62 (sleeve) and cable tensioner 76 (capsule) receiving cable 24 within lower rail 10) … said sleeve has a length, a longitudinal axis, a first end, a second end, an external surface and an internal surface, said internal surface having a diameter; said second end adapted to be turned by a tool; (Graber: FIG. 5; nut 62 has a length and axis 124 opposed ends, an external surface and an internal threaded bore 106 of a diameter receiving the tensioner; nut 62 is capable of being turned by a wrench) said capsule having a length, a longitudinal axis, a first end, a second end, an external surface, and an internal surface defining a lumen; said external surface of the capsule having a diameter said capsule capable of being inserted into the sleeve said external surface of the capsule and the internal surface of the sleeve adapted such that the inserted capsule is capable of movement along the longitudinal axis of the sleeve, (Graber: FIG. 5; see also col. 10 lines 1-21 threaded outer surface of 76 is engaged in bore 106 of nut 62 and rotation of nut 62 “creates the selective linear movement in either direction 68 or 70” moving the tensioner through the nut to draw the cable taut or relieve tension)
Graber does not appear to disclose and said cap adapted to reversibly connect to the sleeve so as to retain the sleeve such that the sleeve does not fall away if the sleeve is loosened and separated from the capsule and separate dissimilar metals of the cable attachment.
However, Clark discloses and said cap adapted to reversibly connect to the sleeve so as to retain the sleeve such that the sleeve does not fall away if the sleeve is loosened and separated from the capsule and separate dissimilar metals of the cable attachment. (Clark: FIGS. 9A-9b; col. 8 lines 42-57 retaining nut 500 formed of plastic, having an interior ledge 502 that clamps over the outer radial edge 209 of the fastener head 208, an annular wall 506, and an outer circumferential clip 504 that clips underneath the outer edge of flange 226 which secures the fastener 204 to the bushing 206, nut doesn’t fall because the cap engages the adapter/rail structure in addition to engaging the nut, the cap also separates the attachment’s metals from adjacent structure i.e. the railings since the cap would sit interposed between attachment hardware and surrounding rail structure which can be of a different material than the capsule.)
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the nut 62 of Graber with a snap-fit retainer cap as taught by Clark, so that the nut is captured and retained when it is loosened and unthreaded from tensioner 76, since capturing the fastening nut keeps the parts of the assembly associated and avoids lost hardware.
Regarding claim 2,
Graber in view of Clark discloses the cable attachment structure of claim 1 in which the external surface of the capsule comprises male threads, and the internal surface of the sleeve comprises corresponding female threads. (Graber: FIGS. 3 and 5, the partially cylindrical body of cable tensioner 76 has threaded outer surfaces 102 and 104 i.e. male threads on the external surface of the capsule which engage with the bore 106 of nut 62)
Regarding claim 3,
Graber in view of Clark discloses the cable attachment structure of claim 1, in which the second end of the capsule is adapted to grip a cable inserted through the first end of the capsule. (Graber: FIG. 5 (24) extends through the bore (98))
Regarding claim 6,
Graber in view of Clark discloses the cable attachment of claim 2 is in which the male and female threads are compatible such that the capsule is positional within the sleeve. (Graber: FIG. 5; male threads of outer surfaces 102 and 104 of tensioner 76 are matingly engaged with the female threads of bore 106 and nut 62)
Regarding claim 7,
Graber in view of Clark discloses the cable attachment structure of claim 1 further comprises a cable crimp at or near the second end of the capsule. (Graber: FIGS. 3 and 5; cable stop sleeve 108 is fitted and secured about cable 24 i.e. a crimped sleeve and is received within cable bore 98)
Regarding claim 8,
Graber in view of Clark discloses a cap adapted to be affixed to the first end of the sleeve. (Clark: FIGS. 9A-9B col. 8 lines 42-57; retaining cap 500 snap fitted over the end of the fastener; in the combination, the cap is affixed over the end of the nut 42)
Claims 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 11732776 issued to Graber in view of U.S. Patent No. 10655664 issued to Clark further in view of Quicklock.
Regarding claim 4,
Graber in view of Clark discloses the cable attachment structure of claim 2.
Graber in view of Clark does not appear to disclose in which said sleeve is a flange nut.
However, Quicklock discloses a flange nut. (Quicklock: see FIGS. 3.1 and 4.1)
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the nut of the combination as a flange nut, since selecting one known nut configuration in place of another is known and the flange would furnish the circumferential edge over which the snap-fit cap of the combination engages allowing Clark to be more efficient in the combination.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 11732776 issued to Graber in view of U.S. Patent No. 10655664 issued to Clark further in view of U.S. Patent No. 8602390 issued to Herbold.
Regarding claim 5,
Garber in view of Clark discloses the cable attachment structure of claim 2.
Graber in view of Clark does not appear to disclose in which the capsule is a phosphor bronze threaded crimp.
However, Herbold discloses in which the capsule is a phosphor bronze threaded crimp. (Herbold: col. 2 lines 25-27 “In some embodiments, the insert 12 is made from a strong bearing material which is resistant to galling, such as phosphor bronze.” Col. 3 lines 10-15 “As such, in some embodiments, the insert 12 and the jacking bolt 24 may be formed of corrosion-resistant materials, such as a phosphor bronze for the insert 12 and a stainless steel for the jacking bolt 24.”)
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Graber in view of Clarks threaded crimp (capsule) of phosphor bronze, since phosphor bronze was a known strong bearing material resistant to galling, selected for threaded members engaging other threaded members under load i.e. its suitability, and substituting it for the material of Graber in view of Clarks threaded crimp to obtain the predictable result of reduced galling at the threaded interface is just a simple substitution with a finite number of choices. Selecting either the threaded crimp or flange nut to be made of phosphor bronze or both to satisfy the anti-galling function is a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim(s) 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Key-Link vertical cable infill installation guide (Keylink) in view of Clark, and further in view of Herbold and Quicklock.
Regarding claim 9,
Keylink discloses a method of assembling a section of railing having vertical cables (Keylink: steps 1-7) comprising the steps of: providing a top rail comprising a longitudinal axis, a first end, a second end, a top, a bottom comprising a plurality of holes, and an internal space; and providing a bottom rail comprising a longitudinal axis, a first end, a second end, a top comprising a plurality of holes, a bottom, and an internal space; and providing a plurality of cables, (Keylink: What’s included, “Top & Bottom Rail w/ Cable Hardware”; steps 2-3, the rails are extended and cut to length, the section’s cables extending between the rails; the plurality of vertically aligned holes through which the cables pass into the rails internal space is present, the cables extending from within one rail within the other and their securing hardware being accessed inside the rails) each having a top terminus contained within the internal space of the top rail and a bottom terminus contained within the internal space of the bottom rail; the top terminus of each cable passes through a hole in the top rail … and which is secured within the internal space of the top rail with a threaded crimp …; and the bottom terminus of each cable passing through a hole in the bottom rail, and which is secured within the internal space of the bottom rail with a … crimp contained within a flange nut; (Keylinkd: steps 3 and 6 the section is provided with its cables and cable hardware installed, flange nuts are also tightened at the ends and tensioned with a socket wrench) providing a spacing rod adapted to provide rigid support separating the bottom of the top rail from the top of the bottom rail; (Keylink: “What’s included, “Stainless Steel Support Rods”) and removing one or more cables from the top rail and the bottom rail and inserting a spacing rod into the holes exposed in the rails; (Keylink: step 2 “insert support rods into empty rail holes”) gripping a cable adjacent to the spacing rod proximal to the bottom rail to prevent the cable from rotating, rotating the flange nut about the longitudinal axis of the flange nut, causing the phosphor bronze threaded crimp to move within the flange nut and away from the top rail thereby pulling the cable taut; and similarly pulling each of the other cables taut; (Keylink: step 6 each cable is tensioned using cable gripping pliers and a 7/16” socket wrench applied to the flange nut, examiner notes that Quicklock also discloses this step in its instructions i.e. tightening the flange nut draws the threaded crimp through the nut to tension the cable)
Keylink does not appear to disclose that the top terminus passes through a washer and is secured with a crimp nut, nor that the threaded crimp is phosphor bronze.
However, Quicklock discloses the top terminus passing through a washer and secured with a crimp nut (Quicklock: step 5; FIG. 6; brass washer placed onto the cable before the swaged fitting is passed through the mounting hole, the swaged threaded crimp being retained by the nut i.e. a crimp nut)
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to secure the top terminus of the Guide’s cables through a washer with a crimp nut as taught by Quicklock in order to distribute the retaining load at the rail.
Keylink in view of Quicklock does not appear to disclose a phosphor bronze threaded crimp.
However, Herbold discloses a phosphor bronze threaded crimp. (Herbold: col. 2 lines 25-27 “In some embodiments, the insert 12 is made from a strong bearing material which is resistant to galling, such as phosphor bronze.” Col. 3 lines 10-15 “As such, in some embodiments, the insert 12 and the jacking bolt 24 may be formed of corrosion-resistant materials, such as a phosphor bronze for the insert 12 and a stainless steel for the jacking bolt 24.”)
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Keylink in view of Quick lock with a threaded crimp (capsule) of phosphor bronze, since phosphor bronze was a known strong bearing material resistant to galling, selected for threaded members engaging other threaded members under load i.e. its suitability, and substituting it for the material of Keylink in view of Quicklock threaded crimp to obtain the predictable result of reduced galling at the threaded interface is just a simple substitution with a finite number of choices. Selecting either the threaded crimp or flange nut to be made of phosphor bronze or both to satisfy the anti-galling function is a matter of obvious design choice.
Keylink in view of Quicklock in view of Herbold does not appear to disclose and providing a flange nut cap that reversible connects to the flange nut and that retains the flange nut such that the flange nut does not fall away from the bottom rail if the flange nut is loosened and separated from the phosphor bronze threaded crimp, and separates dissimilar metals of the railing.
However, Clark discloses and providing a flange nut cap that reversible connects to the flange nut and that retains the flange nut such that the flange nut does not fall away from the bottom rail if the flange nut is loosened and separated from the phosphor bronze threaded crimp, and separates dissimilar metals of the railing. (Clark: FIGS. 9A-9b; col. 8 lines 42-57 retaining nut 500 formed of plastic, having an interior ledge 502 that clamps over the outer radial edge 209 of the fastener head 208, an annular wall 506, and an outer circumferential clip 504 that clips underneath the outer edge of flange 226 which secures the fastener 204 to the bushing 206, nut doesn’t fall because the cap engages the adapter/rail structure in addition to engaging the nut, the cap also separates the attachment’s metals from adjacent structure i.e. the railings since the cap would sit interposed between attachment hardware and surrounding rail structure which can be of a different material than the capsule.)
It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the flange nut of Keylink’s method with Clark’s snap-fit retainer cap, engaging the bottom rail structure against which the flange nut bears, so that the flange nut is captured and does not fall away from the bottom rail when loosened and unthreaded from the threaded crimp since capturing the fastening nut keeps the parts of the assembly associated and avoids lost hardware.
Regarding claim 10,
Keylink in view of Quicklock in view of Herbold in view of Clark discloses a method of assembling a section of railing having vertical cables (Keylink: steps 1-7) and including rail supports comprising the steps of: providing a mounting surface; providing a first rail support post having an inwards-facing side, an outwards-facing side, a longitudinal axis, a top, and a bottom having a base support flange adapted to connect to the mounting surface; providing a second rail support post having an inwards-facing side, an outwards- facing side, a longitudinal axis, a top, and a bottom having a base support flange adapted to connect to the mounting surface; (Keylink: Step 1 posts are positioned on the mounting surface with leveling plates between each post and the mounting surface) providing the section of railing having vertical cables assembled according to claim 9; (See claim mapping of claim 9) providing suitable hardware for attaching the top rail and the bottom rail of the section of railing to each rail support post; (Keylink: “Whats included”) attaching the first rail support post and the second rail support post to the mounting surface such that the inward-facing sides of each rail support post face each other, (Keylink: steps 1 and 4-5 posts are positioned according to the section length and attached to the mounting surface, the section is set in place centered between the posts) attaching the first end of the top rail to near the bottom of the inward-facing side of the first rail support, attaching the second end of the top rail to near the top of the inward-facing side of the second rail support, attaching the first end of the bottom rail to near the top of the inward-facing side of the first rail support, attaching the second end of the bottom rail to near the bottom of the inward-facing side of the second rail support. (Keylink: steps 4-5)
Regarding claim 11,
Keylink in view of Quicklock in view of Herbold in view of Clark discloses the method of claim 9 in which said flange nut cap is placed over the flange nut which prevents the flange nut and the contained phosphor bronze crimp from contacting the bottom rail. (Clark: FIGS. 9A-9B; col. 8 lines 42-57; retainer cap of the claim 9 combination is snap fitted over the flange nut and engages the bottom rail structure against which the nut bears, the cap thereby being physically interposed between the flange nut with its contained phosphor bronze threaded crimp and the bottom rail; the cap prevents contact from the rail)
Regarding claim 12,
Keylink in view of Quicklock in view of Herbold in view of Clark discloses the method of claim 9 in which the flange nut further comprises a longitudinal axis, and is adapted to be held by a tool and rotated along said longitudinal axis. (Keylink: step 6; each cable is tensioned by applying a 7/16” socket wrench to the flange nut)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM C ORTIZ whose telephone number is (303)297-4378. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am-3:30 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, Justin C. Mikowski can be reached at 571-272-8525. 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.
/ADAM C ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Prosecution Insights