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
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the outer housing (see at least claim 21), the cord (see at least claim 23), and the honeycomb structure (see at least claim 32) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). If the features are shown in the drawings, then the outer housing, cord, and honeycomb structure should be indicated with reference characters to make clear that these features are illustrated (see MPEP 608.01(o), explaining that in mechanical cases the meaning of every term used in any of the claims should be identified in the descriptive portion of the specification by reference to the drawing, designating the part or parts therein to which the term applies). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “19” has been used to designate both the middle horizontal plate of the grid and the vertical columns of the grid. In view of pg. 4, lines 14-16 of the instant specification, it is presumed to be intended that the middle horizontal plate of the grid should be designated with the reference character “18” (see at least fig. 6).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 23, 27, and 38 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 23:
at line 1, “wherein cord reel assembly” should be amended to read “wherein the cord reel assembly”
at line 2, “the cord” should be amended to read “a cord”
Claim 27: it is not clear what is intended by the limitation “the cord guide is arranged below the pole connection mechanism”; since the device is handheld in nature, it appears that the cord guide being positioned below the pole connection mechanism is dependent on the orientation the device is being held
Claim 38: it is not clear what is intended by the limitation “a slot located at a bottom of the locking mechanism”; as discussed above, since the device is handheld in nature, it appears that the slot being located at a bottom of the locking mechanism is dependent on the orientation the device is being held
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 21, the locking mechanism and the pole are not positively recited. Therefore, it is not clear if the locking mechanism and the pole are required elements of the claim, or if the pole connection mechanism must simply be capable of engaging with a locking mechanism of a pole. As currently recited, it is interpreted that the locking mechanism and the pole are not required.
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.
Claims 21, 23-29, 33-34, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 20090038162) in view of Graves (US 5288161).
Regarding claim 21, Shan discloses a cord reel assembly for a tree pruner having a pole, comprising an outer housing (drum 21 forms an outer housing; see fig. 2), which is divided into a first and a second half (drum 21 comprises fixed portion 22 and rotatable portion 30; see paragraph [0035] and fig. 2), the first half comprising a pole connection mechanism having a male connection part (fixed portion 22 comprises combining portion 24, which is formed as a male connection part; see paragraph [0041] and fig. 10).
Shan does not explicitly disclose that the male connection part has an insert, the insert is adapted to engage with a locking mechanism of the pole, for locking the cord reel in place to the pole.
Graves discloses an insert (insert 17; see fig. 6), the insert is adapted to engage with a locking mechanism of the pole (insert 17 is configured to receive locking pin 44; see col. 6, lines 44-51 and figs. 6, 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Shan in view of Graves to include an insert that engages a locking mechanism. Graves discloses a construction for securing hand grip 2 to extension pole 1 (see figs. 6 and 7). The structure of Graves provides quick, easy attachment of the extension pole to the hand grip (see col. 3, lines 60-64). Therefore, in order to provide an efficient means for connecting the cord reel to the pole, such a modification would be obvious.
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose that the male connection part has an insert.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Graves to include the insert on the male connection part since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (see In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167). Graves discloses the opposite configuration, wherein the insert is located on the female connection part (hand grip 2). However, reversing the parts such that the insert is located on the male connection part and the locking mechanism is located on the female connection part would not impede the device from operating as intended. In other words, as modified to switch the positions of the insert and the locking mechanism, the cord reel and pole would still be capable of connecting to each other. Therefore, such a modification would be obvious.
Regarding claim 23, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified further discloses wherein cord reel assembly further comprises a cord drum (first reel 41; see fig. 2), which houses the cord, a coil spring and a coil locking plate (first rope 11, a spring, and bolt assembly 25 are at least partially housed by first reel 41; see figs. 2 and 7).
Regarding claim 24, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 23 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified further discloses wherein the cord drum has a hollow cylindrical pocket that houses the coil spring (first reel 41 comprises a hollow section that houses the spring; see fig. 7).
Regarding claim 25, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 23 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified further discloses wherein the locking plate prevents the coil spring from dissociating from the cord drum (nut 251 of bolt assembly 25 includes a plate portion which prevents movement of the spring away from first reel 41; see fig. 7).
Regarding claim 26, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified further discloses wherein the outer housing is in a shape of a cylinder (drum 21 is formed as a cylinder; see figs. 1 and 2) and the pole connection mechanism protrudes from a rim of the cylinder (combining portion 24 protrudes from the rim of drum 21; see figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 27, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified further discloses wherein the cord reel assembly further comprises a cord guide allowing smooth exiting of a cord from the cord reel assembly (positioning member 34; see figs. 2 and 3), wherein the cord guide is arranged below the pole connection mechanism (positioning member 34 is located below combining portion 24 depending on how the device is held; see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 28, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Graves further discloses wherein a distal end of the pole connection mechanism comprises an aperture below the insert (as modified to position the insert on the male connection part, recess 32 is located at least partially below insert 17; see col. 4, lines 58-64 and fig. 6).
Regarding claim 29, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Graves further discloses wherein the insert comprises a ramped channel leading upward to a cylindrical pocket (insert 17 comprises ramp 61, which leads to hole 47; see col. 6, lines 44-51 and fig. 6).
Regarding claim 33, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified further discloses a tree pruner pole (rod 10; see fig. 1), comprising a locking mechanism at one end adapted to receive a pole connection mechanism of a cord reel assembly according to claim 21 (as modified by Graves, rod 10 comprises a locking mechanism adapted to receive combining portion 24; see paragraph [0036] and fig. 1).
Regarding claim 34, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 33 as described in the rejection above.
Graves further discloses wherein the locking mechanism comprises a spring-loaded release button (lever 40 is biased by action of hair pin spring 58; see col. 6, lines 25-29 and fig. 6) and a locking pin (locking pin 44; see fig. 6).
Regarding claim 36, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 33 as described in the rejection above.
Graves further discloses wherein the pole is hollow (handgrip 2 includes internally threaded bore 15; see col. 4, lines 12-26 and fig. 6), and the locking mechanism comprises a female connection part, arranged to receive the pole connection mechanism in a male-female connection (internally threaded bore 15 is configured to receive end portion 14 of extension pole 1; see col. 4, lines 12-16 and fig. 7).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 20090038162) in view of Graves (US 5288161), and further in view of Chern (US 10814410).
Regarding claim 22, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein the pole connection mechanism comprises a pin, which locks the insert to the male connection part.
Chern discloses wherein the pole connection mechanism comprises a pin (bolt 71; see fig. 2), which locks the insert to the male connection part (insert plate 20 is secured to handle 10 by bolt 71; see col. 3, lines 4-13 and fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Chern to include a pin to secure the insert to the male connection part as a simple substitution of known elements. Graves discloses an insert which is secured in place by a snap fit connection (see col. 4, lines 21-26). Chern discloses a pin (bolt 71) which is configured to secure an insert (insert plate 20) to the handle (see fig. 4). Insert 17 of Graves could be secured with a pin either in addition to, or instead of, a snap fit connection without impeding operation of the device. Therefore, such a modification would be obvious as a simple substitution of securing means.
Claims 30, and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 20090038162) in view of Graves (US 5288161), and further in view of Billingsley (US 20230241757).
Regarding claim 30, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein a spring wire is fixed inside the pole connection mechanism.
Billingsley discloses wherein a spring wire is fixed inside the pole connection mechanism (spring pins 58 are positioned in hollow interior 50 of pole 48; see paragraph [0029] and fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Billingsley to include a spring wire. Billingsley discloses a pair of spring pins 58 comprising buttons 60, which are inserted into holes in order to retain a pole (see paragraphs [0029-0030]). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing an additional locking means such as this improves the security of the connecting elements, thus decreasing the chance of unintended uncoupling. Therefore, in order to provide a more secure connection, such a modification would be obvious.
Regarding claim 37, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 33 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein the locking mechanism comprises a secondary locking region.
Billingsley discloses wherein the locking mechanism comprises a secondary locking region (a secondary locking region is formed where spring pins 58 are positioned in hollow interior 50 of pole 48; see paragraph [0029] and fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Billingsley to include a spring wire forming a secondary locking region. Billingsley discloses a pair of spring pins 58 comprising buttons 60, which are inserted into holes in order to retain a pole (see paragraphs [0029-0030]). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing an additional locking means such as this improves the security of the connecting elements, thus decreasing the chance of unintended uncoupling. Therefore, in order to provide a more secure connection, such a modification would be obvious.
Regarding claim 38, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 37 as described in the rejection above.
Billingsley further discloses wherein the secondary locking region comprises a slot located at a bottom of the locking mechanism (spring pins 58 are configured to be positioned into holes 56, 44 in order to secure pole 48 to tube 34; see paragraphs [0029-0030]).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 20090038162) in view of Graves (US 5288161), and further in view of Held (US 20180112700).
Regarding claim 31, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 21 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein the pole connection mechanism comprises a grid comprising a middle horizontal plate and vertical columns defining rectangular through-holes.
Held discloses wherein the pole connection mechanism comprises a grid comprising a middle horizontal plate and vertical columns defining rectangular through-holes (guide 12 has a grid configuration comprising at least one horizontal structure and a plurality of vertically aligned structures, such that rectangular gaps are formed; see figs. 8 and 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Held to include a grid on the pole connection mechanism. Held discloses a pole connection mechanism (guide piece 12) which is configured to secure handle piece 2 (see fig. 1). The grid-like configuration of guide piece 12 is capable of securing and stabilizing internal elements of handle tube 10 (see paragraph [0034]). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that this increases the security of the structure as a whole and would likely prevent unintentional decoupling of the handle elements. Therefore, in order to improve the stability and security of the handle elements, such a modification would be obvious.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 20090038162) in view of Graves (US 5288161), in view of Held (US 20180112700), and further in view of Qi (see attached NPL).
Regarding claim 32, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 31 as described in the rejection above.
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein the grid further comprises a honeycomb structure for additional support.
Qi teaches the benefit of including a honeycomb structure for additional support (honeycomb structures provide high stiffness/strength and specific energy absorption; see 1. Introduction, paragraph 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Qi to include a honeycomb structure. Qi discloses that honeycombs provide increased strength and energy absorption (see 1. Introduction, paragraph 1). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that such a benefit would be useful for an application involving a tool handle, particularly within connection members. Therefore, in order to provide increased strength and energy absorption capabilities to the connecting elements of the pole, such a modification would be obvious.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shan (US 20090038162) in view of Graves (US 5288161), and further in view of Ekstrom (US 3910590).
Regarding claim 35, Shan as modified discloses the limitations of claim 34 as described in the rejection above.
Graves further discloses wherein the locking mechanism comprises a central button axial pin (pivot pin 41; see fig. 6), a button spring (hair pin spring 58; see col. 6, lines 25-29).
Shan as modified does not explicitly disclose an axial pin for the locking pin.
Ekstrom discloses an axial pin for the locking pin (latch 7 is held in place by pivot pin 9; see figs. 1 and 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shan in view of Ekstrom to include an axial pin for the locking pin as a simple substitution of known elements. Graves discloses a locking pin (locking pin 44) which is inserted through hole 45 of lever 40 (see fig. 6). Ekstrom discloses a similar locking pin (latch 7), where latch 7 is secured by pivot pin 9 (see fig. 3). Graves discloses a locking pin that is held in place by an enlarged portion, while Ekstrom discloses an alternate way to secure a locking pin using a pivot pin. Therefore, such a modification would be obvious as a simple substitution of securing means.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 6526664 to Cech, drawn to a low profile pruning tool; US 6345445 to Schofield, drawn to a lopping tool and a method for lopping; US 6748663 to Linden, drawn to a lopper; and US 7658011 to Shan, drawn to a lopper.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HALEIGH N WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3818. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 530AM-330PM 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571)272-4502. 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.
/HALEIGH N WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights