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 . 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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “110” has been used to designate both the first handrail and the second hand rail shown in figures 2 and 3, whereas in paragraph. 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. 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 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.
Claims 1-9 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 1, the claim recites “the first handrail is positioned over a first stair, a second stair, and a third stair of a staircase” and “the second handrail is positioned over the third stair, a fourth stair, and a fifth stair of a staircase” and “the first handrail is positioned above the second handrail in a parallel arrangement on a wall surface and in a non-overlapping position”. Because both the first handrail and the second handrail are claimed to be positioned over the third stair simultaneously, their longitudinal spans inherently must overlap each other at the location of the third stair thus cannot be “in a non-overlapping position”. This creates physical contradiction within the claim because the handrails cannot share the space over the third stair while also remaining in a strictly non overlapping position. Accordingly, a person having ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine the exact metes and bounds of the claimed stair railing system, rendering the claim indefinite. For purposes of examination the examiner will interpret the claim to have the handrails in an overlapping position.
Claims 2-9 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7- 11 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 4556201 A (Turner).
Regarding claim 1, Turner discloses a stair railing system (see figures 1 and 2) comprising:
a first handrail (14) comprised of a first mounting bracket (18) and a first body comprised of a first first end and a first second end (see annotated figure 1 below), wherein the first handrail is positioned over a first stair, a second stair, and a third stair of a staircase (see annotated figure 1); and
a second handrail (10) comprised of a second mounting bracket (12) and a second body comprised of a second first end and a second second end (see annotated figure 1 below);
wherein the second handrail (10) is positioned over the third stair, a fourth stair, and a fifth stair of a staircase (see annotated figure 1 below); and
wherein the first handrail (14) is positioned above the second handrail (18) in a parallel arrangement on a wall surface and in a non-overlapping position (NOTE: first and second handrail span over the third stair so they would overlap see 112b rejection above) (see figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
365
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 1, wherein the first handrail is comprised of a grip area (see figure 1 where 14 inherently provides an area for a user to grasp for support).
Regarding claim 7, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 1, wherein the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket are comprised of a flat plate, a U-shaped clamp, or an adjustable joint (see figure 2 where the brackets 12 and 18 have flat plates 28 and 32).
Regarding claim 8, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 1, wherein the first handrail is comprised of a flat surface (see figure 2 where 14 includes brackets 18 mounted flush against a flat end 28 of a hanging device 26).
Regarding claim 9, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 1, wherein the second handrail is comprised of a flat surface (see column 5 lines 14-15 states the second handrail can be sanded flat on one side).
Regarding claim 10, Turner discloses a stair railing system (see figures 1) comprising:
a first handrail (14) comprised of a first mounting bracket (18) and a first body comprised of a first first end and a first second end (see annotated figure 1 above), wherein the first handrail (14) is positioned over a first stair, a second stair, and a third stair of a staircase (see annotated figure 1 above); and
a second handrail (10) comprised of a second mounting bracket (12) and a second body comprised of a second first end and a second second end (see annotated figure 1 above);
wherein the second handrail (10) is positioned over the third stair, a fourth stair, and a fifth stair of a staircase (see annotated figure 1 above); and
wherein the first handrail (14) is positioned above the second handrail (10) on a wall surface in a parallel arrangement and in an overlapping position wherein the first second end and the second first end overlap (see figure 1).
Regarding claim 11, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 10, wherein the first handrail is comprised of a grip area (see figure 1 where 14 inherently provides an area for a user to grasp for support).
Regarding claim 16, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 10, wherein the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket are comprised of a flat plate, a U-shaped clamp, or an adjustable joint (see figure 2 where the brackets 12 and 18 have flat plates 28 and 32).
Regarding claim 17, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 10, wherein the first handrail is comprised of a flat surface (see figure 2 where 14 includes brackets 18 mounted flush against a flat end 28 of a hanging device 26).
Regarding claim 18, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 10, wherein the second handrail is comprised of a flat surface (see column 5 lines 14-15 states the second handrail can be sanded flat on one side).
Regarding claim 19, Turner discloses a method of using a stair railing system (see figure 1), the method comprising the following steps:
providing a stair railing system comprised of a first handrail (14) and a second handrail (10);
attaching the first handrail (14) to a wall surface at a first height above a first stair of a staircase (see figure 1);
attaching the second handrail (10) to a wall surface at a second height above a second stair of a staircase (see figure 1);
walking up or down the staircase while grasping the first handrail or the second handrail to prevent falling (see annotated figure 1 where a user can walk up or down the stairs 16 grasping the first and second hand rails 14 and 10).
Regarding claim 20, Turner discloses the method of using a stair railing system of claim 19, wherein the first handrail overlaps the second handrail in a non-aligned position (see figures 1 and 2).
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.
Claims 3-6 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4556201 A (Turner) in view of US 6857622 B2 (Okita).
Regarding claim 3, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 2 but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a knurling.
However, Okita teaches it is known in the art of handrails to apply an anti-slip mechanism (18) to the gripping surface of a handrail to prevent accidental slippage of the user’s hand wherein the anti-slip mechanism can take the form of grooves (180) extending longitudinally or circumferentially around the handrail (see column 7 lines 25-37).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handrail of Turner with the grip area comprising knurling as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of preventing accidental slippage of the user’s hands from grasping engagement with the handrail allowing the user to safely ascend or descend a flight of stairs by firmly grasping the handrail (see column 7 lines 25-27).
Regarding claim 4, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 2, but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a groove.
However, Okita teaches an anti-slip mechanism (18) applied to the gripping surface of a handrail (1f), wherein the anti-slip mechanism is in the form of grooves (180) formed in the upper half circumference of the handrail and extending longitudinally thereof (see column 7 lines 25-28 and figure 20 element 180).
It would there for have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing system of Turner with the grip area comprised of a groove as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of preventing accidental slippage of the user’s hand from the grasping engagement with the handrail allowing the user to safely ascend or descend a flight of stairs by firmly grasping the handrail (see column 7 lines 23-33).
Regarding claim 5, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 2, but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a raised pattern.
However, Okita teaches providing indicia (190a) on the handrail wherein the indica may be disposed on the lower side of the handrail where a person manually grips the handrail and wherein the indica are formed on a metal strip or bar with characters projecting from the base which is a raised pattern (see figure 21 elements 190a and 190b and column 7 lines 47-52 and see column 8 lines 14-17).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing system of Turner with the grip area comprised of a raised pattern as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of having a visually handicapped person able to manually grip the handrail and can feel and engage the characters for manual reading to determine the number of steps in a flight of stairs and/or the location of a step in the flight of stairs (see column 7 lines 47-52 and column 8 lines 24-27).
Regarding claim 6, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 2, but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a non-slip coating.
However, Okita teaches an anti-slip mechanism applied to the gripping surface of a handrail and can be provided using martial having inherent anti-slip or frictional property (see column 7 lines 28-33).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing system of Turner with the grip area is comprised of a non-slip coating as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of preventing accidental slippage of the user’s hands from grasping engagement with the handrail allowing the user to safely ascend or descend a flight of stairs by firmly grasping the handrail (see column 7 lines 25-27).
Regarding claim 12, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 11 but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a knurling.
However, Okita teaches it is known in the art of handrails to apply an anti-slip mechanism (18) to the gripping surface of a handrail to prevent accidental slippage of the user’s hand wherein the anti-slip mechanism can take the form of grooves (180) extending longitudinally or circumferentially around the handrail (see column 7 lines 25-37).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handrail of Turner with the grip area comprising knurling as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of preventing accidental slippage of the user’s hands from grasping engagement with the handrail allowing the user to safely ascend or descend a flight of stairs by firmly grasping the handrail (see column 7 lines 25-27).
Regarding claim 13, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a groove.
However, Okita teaches an anti-slip mechanism (18) applied to the gripping surface of a handrail (1f), wherein the anti-slip mechanism is in the form of grooves (180) formed in the upper half circumference of the handrail and extending longitudinally thereof (see column 7 lines 25-28 and figure 20 element 180).
It would there for have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing system of Turner with the grip area comprised of a groove as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of preventing accidental slippage of the user’s hand from the grasping engagement with the handrail allowing the user to safely ascend or descend a flight of stairs by firmly grasping the handrail (see column 7 lines 23-33).
Regarding claim 14, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a raised pattern.
However, Okita teaches providing indicia (190a) on the handrail wherein the indica may be disposed on the lower side of the handrail where a person manually grips the handrail and wherein the indica are formed on a metal strip or bar with characters projecting from the base which is a raised pattern (see figure 21 elements 190a and 190b and column 7 lines 47-52 and see column 8 lines 14-17).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing system of Turner with the grip area comprised of a raised pattern as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of having a visually handicapped person able to manually grip the handrail and can feel and engage the characters for manual reading to determine the number of steps in a flight of stairs and/or the location of a step in the flight of stairs (see column 7 lines 47-52 and column 8 lines 24-27).
Regarding claim 15, Turner discloses the stair railing system of claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the grip area is comprised of a non-slip coating.
However, Okita teaches an anti-slip mechanism applied to the gripping surface of a handrail and can be provided using martial having inherent anti-slip or frictional property (see column 7 lines 28-33).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stair railing system of Turner with the grip area is comprised of a non-slip coating as taught by Okita. Such modification would provide the benefit of preventing accidental slippage of the user’s hands from grasping engagement with the handrail allowing the user to safely ascend or descend a flight of stairs by firmly grasping the handrail (see column 7 lines 25-27).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure US 5099402 A, US 5337528 A, US 5853166 A, US 7032355 B1, US 20220098869 A1, US 20200071933 A1, US 20060102885 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALMUTASIM HEZAM AIYASH whose telephone number is (571)272-6104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30AM-5PM.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/A.H.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
