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 .
Application Status
Claims 1 and 4-22 are pending and have been examined in this application.
This communication is the first action on the merits.
Claims 1 and 4-22 are rejected herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of the date of this action, an information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 12/12/2024 and reviewed by the Examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1, 4-7, 16-17, 19, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edmond (U.S. Pat. No. 8985533 B2), in view of Messina (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20040049892 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Edmond teaches a routing clamp, comprising:
a body (Fig. 5; 114) defining a channel (channel receiving 111a, 111b), wherein:
the body includes a base portion (top portion of 114) and an upper portion (side portion when used in upside down orientation);
the upper portion includes a first member (side vertical portion) extending perpendicular from the base portion along a first axis and a second member (portion having 115a, 116a) extending perpendicular from the first member along a second axis;
the base portion, the first member, and the second member define the channel;
the body includes one or more blind holes (115a, 116a) extending a depth into the body; and the one or more blind holes and the channel are included in a face of the body;
a cushion (111a, 111b) that is configured to be inserted into the channel, wherein:
the cushion includes two or more through holes (central openings of 111a, 111b) extending through the cushion that are configured to receive flexible lines; and
a cap (113) that is configured to be fastened to the body over an opening of the channel, wherein:
the cap includes one or more apertures (115b, 116b) aligned with the one or more blind holes of the body,
the one or more apertures and the one or more blind holes of the body are configured to receive one or more fasteners to fasten the cap to the body,
the cap includes one or more lips (137) that are configured to restrict movement of the cushion after the cushion is inserted into the channel, and
the cap and the body are more rigid than the cushion. However, Edmond is silent to disclose the one or more holes being blind holes. Messina teaches the blind holes (Messina; 74).
Edmond and Messina are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. providing a structure for supporting an object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the holes of Edmon being blind holes. The motivation would have been to improve structural integrity.
Regarding claim 4, Edmond teaches the cushion (111a, 111b) is at least partially split into a first section and a second section.
Regarding claim 5, Edmond teaches the two or more through holes (central openings of 111a, 111b) are defined by an interface (portion of 111a, 111b facing one another) between the first section and the second section.
Regarding claim 6, Edmond teaches the cushion has a depth. However, Edmond is silent to explicitly disclose the depth of at least 16 millimeters. The Examiner notes that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the cushion of Edmon having the depth of at least 16 millimeters, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would have been to make the product compact in design and as well as to provide appropriate strength during the retention.
Regarding claim 16, Edmond teaches a system, comprising:
a device (Col. 3; lines 1-2 or Fig. 1);
one or more lines (20); and
a clamp (10) fixed to the device, wherein the clamp secures the one or more lines with respect to the device, and wherein the clamp comprises:
a body (114) including a base portion (upper flat portion of 114) and a channel (channel receiving 111a, 111b), wherein:
the clamp is fixed to the device via the base portion, wherein:
the body includes one or more blind holes (115a, 116a) extending a depth into the body, and the one or more blind holes and the channel are included in a face of the body;
a cushion (111a, 111b) that is removable from the channel, wherein:
the cushion includes two or more through holes (holes for receiving 20) extending through the cushion that are configured to receive flexible lines; and
a cap (113) that is configured to be fastened to the body over an opening (opening facing 113 of 114) of the channel,
wherein:
the cap includes one or more apertures (115b, 116b) aligned with the one or more blind holes of the body,
the one or more apertures and the one or more blind holes of the body are configured to receive one or more fasteners to fasten the cap to the body,
the cap includes one or more lips (137) that extend into the channel when the cap is fastened to the body, and
the cap and the body are more rigid than the cushion. However, Edmond is silent to disclose the one or more holes being blind holes. Messina teaches the blind holes (Messina; 74).
Edmond and Messina are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. providing a structure for supporting an object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the holes of Edmon being blind holes. The motivation would have been to improve structural integrity.
Regarding claim 17, Edmond teaches the clamp (10) is configured to restrict a movement of the one or more lines and maintain a spatial separation between the one or more lines and the device or another surface when the device is moving.
Regarding claim 19, Edmond teaches wherein the cushion (111a, 111b) includes a first section and a second section, and wherein the two or more through holes are defined by an interface (sections of 111a, 111b facing one another) between the first section and the second section.
Regarding claim 22, Edmond teaches the cushion has a depth. However, Edmond is silent to explicitly disclose the depth of at least 16 millimeters. The Examiner notes that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the cushion of Edmon having the depth of at least 16 millimeters, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would have been to make the product compact in design and as well as to provide appropriate strength during the retention.
Regarding claims 7 and 21, Edmond teaches the device. However, Edmond is silent to disclose the material is associated with one or more chemical applications, and wherein materials of the body, the cushion, and the cap are compatible with the one or more chemical applications; and
[18] the device is associated with one or more chemical applications, and wherein a first material of the body, a second material of the cushion, and a third material of the cap are compatible with the one or more chemical applications. The Examiner takes the official notice that providing the clamp/system associated with one or more chemical applications and the first, second and third materials being compatible with the chemical application is old and well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the clamp/system in a chemical application and make the body, cushion and the cap with the material that are compatible with the chemical application. The motivation would have been to enable the use of the clamp for specific applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-15 and 21 are allowed.
Claim 20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD IJAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am-10:00 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728227. 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.
MUHAMMAD IJAZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3631
/Muhammad Ijaz/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights