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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 of figures 1-3, corresponding to claims 1-7, in the reply filed on June 22, 2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, e.g., "comprising", "said", and "characterized," should be avoided. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “a top surface of the head” (line 2) should be replaced with -- the top surface of the head --. Appropriate correction is required.
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 5-6 are 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 5, the recitation “the head portion of the strap comprises a crossbar” (line 2) has rendered the claim indefinite because the specification has disclosed the crossbar (134) as a feature of the head (120; see paragraph [0032]) and not the head portion of the strap (110). As best understood, the crossbar is examined as a feature of the head, i.e., the head comprises a crossbar. Clarification and appropriate correction are required. Claim 6 depends from claim 5 and therefore is also rejected under this section.
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, and 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Caveney et al., US 3,908,233.
Regarding claim 1, Caveney discloses an apparatus comprising: a set of teeth (215) located on a strap (201); and a head (220) located on a head portion of the strap (201), the head (220) comprising: a pawl (250) comprising at least one tip (255) configured to fasten the strap (201) to the head portion of the strap (201) when engaged (figure 8) with the set of teeth (215) on the strap (201); and a protrusion (260) that is movably coupled to the head (220) and that extends beyond a bottom surface (230) of the head (220).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, Caveney discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the head
Regarding claim 6, as best understood, Caveney discloses the apparatus of claim 5, wherein the crossbar (235) is set back from a front portion (241) of the head (220) such that the opening (240) extends from the front portion of the head (220) into a bottom side (region near exit surface 230) of the head (220).
Regarding claim 7, Caveney discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the protrusion (260) is integrated with the pawl (250).
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 Caveney et al., US 3,908,233 in view of McCormick, US 3,924,299.
Regarding claim 2, Caveney discloses the apparatus of claim 1 except for wherein the protrusion is configured to move toward a top surface of the head in a manner that reinforces engagement of the pawl with the set of teeth on the strap [when the protrusion is pressed against an object held by the strap]. Caveney discloses the protrusion (260) is actuated to release engagement of the pawl from the set of teeth on the strap when the protrusion (260) is pressed against the strap.
McCormick teaches a cable tie in which force acting on the tie causes the pawl (28) to pivot in a manner that increases engagement between the pawl and the strap teeth (13), wherein tension in the strap tending to withdraw it from the head pivots the pawl (28) to more firmly grip the strap, and wherein this reinforcing action is found to prevent loosening of the tie that would otherwise result from pressures acting on the head through a lever action.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protrusion (260) of Caveney such that a force exerted on the protrusion by an object held by the strap is translated through the pawl to move it further into locking engagement as taught by McCormick in order to resist inadvertent loosening of the tie under load and to prevent the pawl from disengaging under an extreme force.
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 apparatus, 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 cable tie taught by the combination of Caveney and McCormick, 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 3, the combination of Caveney and McCormick teaches the apparatus of claim 2, Caveney further discloses wherein the protrusion (260) comprises one or more joints (251) configured to enable the protrusion (260) to move toward the top surface of the head (220).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caveney et al., US 3,908,233 in view of Vaccaro et al., US 2022/0255301.
Regarding claim 4, Caveney discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Caveney does not explicitly disclose wherein the head portion of the strap comprises at least one kink dimensioned such that the head portion of the strap provides more strain relief than a middle portion of the strap.
Vaccaro teaches a flexible main body (402) for holding cables, the body comprising a wrapping strap portion (402a) and a mounting head portion (402b), wherein a plurality of undulations (407) are present between the mounting portion and the wrapping portion, wherein said undulations are provided to relieve the elevated stress concentrated at the junction relative to the remainder of the flexible strap portion. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the (head portion of the ) strap of Caveney to include at least one kink (a plurality of undulations) as taught by Vaccaro in order to relieve stress concentration and reduce the risk of fracture at the head portion of the strap.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for similar art cited. For example, US 3,127,648 discloses a flexible strap with teeth locking against teeth on a pivoted pawl within a tie head; US 10,427,849 disclose a cable tie with a pivoted pawl having lever end to be actuated by a user; and US 2012/0054988 discloses a cable tie with a pivoted pawl having a protrusion at a distal end of the pawl for lever actuation.
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
Prosecution Insights