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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 3-13 were withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12 June 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 16 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 16, line 7, the numeral “22” appears to serve no purpose and should be deleted.
In claim 22, line 4, the numeral “23” should be deleted.
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, 2, 14-18 and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (CN 215720363).
Regarding claim 1, Wang et al. discloses an apparatus comprising:
a first buckle element (10, 20) including an accommodating space (Figs. 1 and 3 as shown) and a first matching portion (21); and
a second buckle element (30, 40, 50) including a column (40) and a second matching portion (30), wherein the column is located in the accommodating space and is for a rope to be wound around, the second matching portion is disposed on the column and located in the accommodating space, and the second matching portion is assembled with the first matching portion (Figs. 1-3 as shown),
wherein the second buckle element is able to rotate relative to the first buckle element, so that the rope (60) is able to be wound around the column in a fastening direction or loosened from the column in a releasing direction, and an engagement strength between the first matching portion and the second matching portion is different according to the fastening direction and the releasing direction (Fig. 15 shows wherein the geometry of the teeth 21 and pawls 33 allow for a ratcheting engagement wherein the when the teeth and pawls are engaged rotation of the knob 50 in a clockwise direction is easier as the pawls are allowed to slide over the teeth and rotation in the opposite direction would result in a stronger engagement such that the rotation of the knob and clutch 30 is coupled).
Regarding claim 2, Wang et al. further discloses wherein the engagement strength in the fastening direction is smaller than the engagement strength in the releasing direction (Page 8, lines 3-5 of the English translation link positive rotation/ratcheting direction as the direction for fastening).
Regarding claim 14, Wang et al. further discloses wherein the first matching portion has a plurality of positioning grooves, the second matching portion has at least one claw (311), and the claw is accommodated in one of the plurality of positioning grooves (Figs. 1, 4, 5 and 15 as shown).
Regarding claim 15, wherein the claw is composed of a base end extending outward from the column (Fig. 5 shows 311 extending from 31 which is coupled with the column), a bending body (32) bent in a circumferential direction (Fig. 5 as shown), and a buckle body (33) disposed on the bending body and facing the plurality of positioning grooves.
Regarding claim 16, Wang et al. further discloses wherein the first buckle element further includes a base (11), an annular wall (sidewalls of 20 as shown in Fig. 4) and a first limiting portion (Figs. 1, 3 and 4 show an outwardly extending lip at the top of 20), the annular wall extends outward from the base, the plurality of positioning grooves are arranged on the annular wall, the accommodating space is surrounded and defined by the base and the annular wall (Figs. 1-3 as shown), the first limiting portion extends outward from the annular wall (Figs. 1, 3 and 4 as shown), the second buckle element further includes an operating portion (50) and a second limiting portion (502), the operating portion is disposed on a top edge of the annular wall and connected to the column (Fig. 3 as shown), and the second limiting portion is disposed on the operating portion and snapped into the first limiting portion (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 17, Wang et al. further discloses wherein the first buckle element further includes two first through holes (22), the second buckle element further includes a second through hole (411), the first through holes are formed through the annular wall and correspond to each other (Fig. 4 as shown), the second through hole is formed through the column (Fig. 8 as shown), wherein the first through holes and the second through hole are used for the rope to pass through (the structures as shown in the figures can be used in this manner, Fig. 8 as shown).
Regarding claim 18, Wang et al. further discloses wherein the column has a shaft portion (411), the base has a shaft hole (Fig. 1 shows a central opening in 10), and the shaft portion is accommodated in the shaft hole, so that the second buckle element is able to rotate relative to the first buckle element with the shaft portion as an axis (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 20, Wang et al. further discloses wherein the buckle body has an inclined surface and a stopping surface adjacent to each other, and an area of the inclined surface is larger than an area of the stopping surface (Fig. 5 as shown).
Regarding claim 21, Wang et al. further discloses wherein each of the plurality of positioning grooves has a pushing surface and a limiting surface adjacent to each other, an area of the pushing surface is larger than an area of the limiting surface, the pushing surface is correspondingly engaged with the inclined surface, and the limiting surface is correspondingly engaged with the stopping surface (Figs. 4 and 15 as shown).
Regarding claim 22, Wang et al. further discloses wherein when the second buckle element rotates relative to the first buckle element so that the rope is wound around the column along the fastening direction, the pushing surface slides on the inclined surface and is offset with the inclined surface, the bending body is elastically compressed toward the column, and the bending body does not rebound until the buckle body slides into the next adjacent positioning groove via the inclined surface and the pushing surface (the structures shown in Figs. 1-3 and 15 would operate in this manner).
Regarding claim 23, Wang et al. further discloses wherein when the second buckle element rotates relative to the first buckle element to release the rope from the column along the releasing direction, the limiting surface slides on the stopping surface and is offset with the stopping surface, the bending body is elastically compressed toward the column (sliding of driving parts 51 towards the base of the clamping parts allows for elastic compression towards the column as shown in Fig. 15), and the bending body does not rebound until the buckle body slides into the next adjacent positioning groove via the limiting surface and the stopping surface (the buckle as shown can be operated in this manner insomuch as full rebound is not allowed until passing into the adjacent groove).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. as applied to claim 16 above.
Regarding claim 19, Wang et al. discloses the invention except for wherein the operating portion is made of nylon, the second matching portion and the column are made of polyoxymethylene, and the first buckle element is made of nylon. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a tough, impact resistant material like nylon for the exterior facing materials like the first buckle element and operating portion. Furthermore, the interior components experiencing wear from friction with the interior components and with the wrapped rope would require a material with high hardness and wear resistance that can be provided by polyoxymethylene. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fiegener (US 2025/0043853) for a lace adjuster with an odd number of pawl wheels such that the tightening and loosening would have different resistances.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5735. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
/MICHAEL S LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights