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 Objections
Claim 27 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “opining” (line 1) should be replaced with -- opening --. 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) 1, 4-11, 14-19, 26 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Evans et al., US 2007/0289045.
Regarding claim 1, Evans discloses a clip (35) [for removably securing a device (11) to a plurality of straps (on MOLLE loop members 3)], the clip comprising: a main part (51A, 51B, 53) comprising a first main part (upper end region of 51A, 51B), a second main part (lower end region of 51A, 51B), and an intermediate part (53 and region of 51A, 51B between said upper and lower regions) between the first main part and the second main part (see figure 5), [the main part configured to couple to the device]; a first hook part (upper bent-over portion comprising fingers 64) at a first end of the main part, the first hook part comprising a first surface (inner face of 64) facing towards a first surface (face of 66 with 64 on top) of the main part (see figure 5); and a second hook part (inner face of 65 forming the slots 63) at a second end of the main part (figure 5), the second hook part (45) comprising a second hook surface facing towards a second surface (opposite face of arms 66) of the main part (figure 5), the second surface being opposite from the first surface (figure 5); wherein the first hook surface (of 64) of the first hook part overlaps with less than or equal to 75% of a length (S2) of the main part (see figure 5; fingers 64 extend over a minor fraction of the length of clip 35); and wherein the first hook part (64, 64, 55) is aligned with a longitudinal axis of the clip (the first hook part is symmetric about the longitudinal centerline of clip 35; figure 5), and includes a first opening (55).
Claim language set in brackets [] set forth above and below in this office action are considered by the examiner to be intended use that fails to further limit the structure of the claimed invention. Since the claimed invention is directed solely to that of the clip, the prior art must only be capable of performing the functional recitations in order to be applicable, and in the instant case, the examiner maintains that the attachment (clip) device disclosed by Evans et al. (US 2007/0289045), is indeed capable of the intended use statements. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Regarding claim 4, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the first hook surface (of 64) extends parallel to the first surface (of 66).
Regarding claim 5, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the second hook surface (of 65) extends parallel to the second surface (of 66).
Regarding claim 6, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the first hook surface (of 64) of the first hook part is offset from and not overlapping with the second hook surface (of 65) of the second hook part in a longitudinal direction of the clip (fingers 64 and 65 at opposite ends of clip 35, spaced apart along S2; figure 5).
Regarding claim 7, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein one or more of the first hook surface (of 64), the second hook surface (of 65), and the main part has a taper configuration (tapered lead-ins 71, 72 of fingers 64, 65).
Regarding claim 8, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, [wherein the first hook part (64) is configured to releasably retain one of the plurality of straps].
Regarding claim 9, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, [wherein the second hook part (65) is configured to releasably retain one of the plurality of straps].
Regarding claim 10, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, [wherein the first hook part (64) is configured to releasably retain one of the plurality of straps, and the second hook part (65) is configured to releasably retain another one of the plurality of straps].
Regarding claim 11, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the main part comprises a through-hole (74) [configured to receive a fastener for securing the clip to the device].
Regarding claim 14, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the main part comprises a mounting part (81) [configured to couple to the device], and wherein the clip also comprises a cut-out (56) between the mounting part (81) of the main part and a hook end (72) of the second hook part (figure 5).
Regarding claim 15, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, [wherein the clip is integratable as a part of a Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE)].
Regarding claim 16, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, [wherein the clip is integratable as a part of a Pouch Attachment Ladder System (PALS)].
Regarding claim 17, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the main part, the first hook, and the second hook are integral with respect to each other (figure 2).
Regarding claim 18, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the main part, the first hook, and the second hook are formed from a single planar structure (sheet of material; [0017]).
Regarding claim 19, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, [wherein the main part is configured to couple (via apertures 74) to the device].
Regarding claim 26, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the second hook part (65, 65, 56) comprises a second opening (56).
Regarding claim 27, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, wherein the first opening (55) of the first hook part is aligned with a centerline of the first hook part (55 is centered between fingers 64; figure 5).
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al., US 2007/0289045 in view of Reynolds, III, US 6,199,733.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Evans discloses the clip according to claim 1, including a first hook part (64) overlying a first surface (of arms 66) and a second hook part (65) overlying the opposite, second surface (of arms 66) in figure 5.
Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein the first main part and the second hook surface of the second hook part (65) are both offset from the second main part in a direction perpendicular to the major plane of the second main part (claim 2), and wherein the second main part and the first hook surface of the first hook part (64) are both offset from the first main part in a second direction perpendicular to the major plane of the first main part. However, Evans does disclose that the fingers “may be traversely offset from the arm … or from each other” ([0014]).
Reynolds, III teaches a clip having an elongated body wherein a top portion (shank of top clip 20) is horizontally offset from a bottom portion (shank of bottom clip 40) by an intermediate portion (60) extending at an angle between them (figures 2-4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the intermediate part of Evans’ side portions (51A, 51B) as an angled offset section, as taught by Reynolds, III, such that the first main part is offset from the second main part in a direction perpendicular to their major planes, in order to space the hook end portions of the clip out of a common plane (to be traversely offset as disclosed in [0014] of Evans).
Claim(s) 20-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al., US 2007/0289045 in view of Reynolds, III, US 6,199,733.
Regarding claims 20 and 21, Evans discloses a clip (35; of the second embodiment in figure 5) [for removably securing a device to a plurality of straps], the clip comprising: a main part (side portions 51A, 51B including arms 66 and bridge 53) comprising a first main part (upper end region of side portions 51A, 51B), a second main part (lower end region of side portions 51A, 51B), and an intermediate part (region between said upper and lower end regions) between the first main part and the second main part (figure 5), [the main part configured to couple to the device]; a first hook part (64) at a first end of the main part, the first hook part (64) comprising a first hook surface (inner face of fingers 64) facing towards a first surface of the main part; and a second hook part (65) at a second end of the main part, the second hook part comprising a second hook surface (inner face of 65 forming slots 63) facing towards a second surface of the main part, the second surface being opposite the first surface (see figure 5).
Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein the first main part and the second hook surface of the second hook part are both offset from a major plane of the second main part in a first direction perpendicular to the major plane of the second main part (claim 20) and wherein the second main part and the first hook surface of the first hook part are both offset from a major plane of the first main part in a second direction perpendicular to the major plane of the first main part (claim 21). Evans does however disclose that the fingers “may be traversely offset from the arm … or from each other” ([0014]).
Reynolds, III teaches a clip having an elongated body wherein a top portion (shank of top clip 20) is horizontally offset from a bottom portion (shank of bottom clip 40) by an intermediate portion (60) extending at an angle between them (figures 2-4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the intermediate part of Evans’ side portions (51A, 51B) as an angled offset section, as taught by Reynolds, III, such that the first main part is offset from the second main part in a direction perpendicular to their major planes, in order to space the hook end portions of the clip out of a common plane (to be traversely offset as disclosed in [0014] of Evans).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Evans and Reynolds, III teaches the clip according to claim 20, wherein the first hook surface (of 64) of the first hook part overlaps with less than or equal to 75% of a length (S2) of the main part (see figure 5).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Evans and Reynolds, III teaches the clip according to claim 20, wherein the second hook surface (of 65) of the second hook part overlaps with less than or equal to 25% of the length (S2) of the main part (see figure 5).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Evans and Reynolds, III teaches the clip according to claim 20, wherein the first main part comprises a plurality of members (upper end regions of side portions 51A, 51B) connected to the first hook part (64).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Evans and Reynolds, III teaches the clip according to claim 20, wherein the second main part comprises a plurality of members (lower end regions of side portions 51A, 51B) connected to the second hook part (65).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument filed July 7, 2026 with respect to claims 20-25 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection of claims 20-25 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made over Evans in view of Reynolds, III as set forth above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-11, 14-19, and 26-27 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection necessitated by amendment. The new ground relies on the second embodiment of Evans (clip 35 in figure 5), rather than the first embodiment (clip 15), to read on the added limitation a first opening, as set forth above. It is noted that under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the “first hook part” reads on the upper bent-over portion of clip 35, comprising both fingers 64 and the notch 55 between them. That portion is symmetric about the longitudinal axis of the clip and includes notch 55 as a first opening.
Applicant has argued that offsetting Evans’ main part would render the clip unable to pass through the loops (21) and thus inoperable. The claims (20-25) require an offset of no particular magnitude. Evans’ loop members (3, 21) are flexible webbing, and Evans’ arm (46) already passes outside some loops and inside others as shown in the figure 4. Moreover, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROWLAND DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5737. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 - 7:00 PT.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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.
/R.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/ SPE, Art Unit 3677
