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 § 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.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 07-330277, in view of JP 2012246142.
JP ‘277 shows a method of using the tool device as shown in figures 1-11. Regarding claims 1, 3, and 8-9, JP ‘277 discloses a lifting tool 100 for lifting a cargo object 200, the lifting tool comprising: a clamp part (1, 2) that includes a pair of clamp pieces (1b, 2b) extending in an up-down direction and connected to each other in a rotationally movable manner and that forms a cross-link mechanism (using a pin, no reference number, as same as applicant) in which lower ends and upper ends of the pair of clamp pieces (1b, 2b) each open and close, and a pair of lifting parts (21, 25) that are provided at the lower ends of the pair of clamp pieces, respectively, wherein the lifting parts (21, 25) each include a first member 25 that protrudes from the lower end of the clamp piece in a closing direction of the lower end and that includes a support surface (surface of 27) configured to support a lower surface of the cargo object (see figure 5) from below, and a second member 21 that protrudes in the closing direction above the first member 25 by a protrusion length shorter than that of the first member 25 (see figure 6) and that includes an abutting surface (surface of 21b) configured to abut against a side surface of the cargo object; and a V-shaped link mechanism (see figure 5) that includes a pair of link pieces (6, 7) whose upper ends are connected to each other in a rotationally movable manner (i.e., connected by 8), with each lower ends being connect to the upper end of the corresponding clamp pieces in a rotationally movable manner, and an external force application part (near 300) that is provided at [the] upper end of the V-shaped link mechanism (claim 2), see figures 1-11.
As stated above, JP ‘277 dose not explicitly show the tool for lifting a gas turbine blade provided with a shroud at a tip. JP ‘142 discloses the concept using a tool 100 for lifting a gas turbine blade provided with a shroud at a tip (51, 55), see figures 1-5 and paragraphs [0036]-[0042].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the lifting tool of JP ‘277 to lift a gas turbine blade product for the tool as suggested by JP ‘142, to show that the cargo object is not limited other products. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claims 7 and 11, as stated above, JP ‘277 in view of JP ‘142 does not explicitly explain the material of the first member and the second member. However, a synthetic resin material is already known material since applicant did not invent this material.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select already known material since it was known in the art that a synthetic resin material is cheaper and provide an extremely sturdy material.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘277 in view of JP ‘142 as applied to claims above, and further in view of JP 07-012380.
As stated above, JP ‘277 in view JP ‘142 does not explicitly show a locking mechanism for the lifting tool.
JP ‘380 discloses a lifting tool (see figures 1 and 7) with a locking mechanism R, a pair of locking pins (3, 3), a locking plate 6’ that is provided on one connecting pin 3, a lever portion (a part of 6’a, see figure 7), a guide hole (6’a), a first accommodating hole (6’a2), a connecting hole (6’a1), and a second accommodating plate (6’a3), see figures 1-7.
PNG
media_image1.png
392
320
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the lifting tool of JP ‘277 in view of JP ‘142 to add a locking mechanism as suggested by JP ‘380, to show that the lifting tool can have a safety feature of locking mechanism. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claims 6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘277 in view of JP ‘142 as applied to claims above, and further in view of CN 207596317.
As stated above, JP ‘277 in view JP ‘142 does not explicitly show a handle part for the lifting tool.
CN ‘317 discloses a lifting tool with a gripping part (4, 5) with a handle part 6 to adjust the gripping part to move up and down, see figure 1, and paragraphs [0027]-[0034].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the lifting tool of JP ‘277 in view of JP ‘142 to add a handle part as suggested by CN ‘317, to show that the lifting tool can have a handle part for the operator to move up and down. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
SK
9/22/26
/SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
