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Claims 10 and 22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 June 5, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 4 of figures 18-29, directed to claims 1-9, 11-21 and 23, in the reply filed on June 5, 2026 is acknowledged. However, claims 2 and 13 are further withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species since they encompass the non-elected species 1 of figures 1-11 because the lever (18) is “pivotally coupled” to the drive gear (42) while the elected species 4 (of figures 18-29) has the lever (318) integrally connected with the drive gear (320).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11, 12, 14-21 and 23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,250,998. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims 1 and 5 read on the instant application claims 1 and 12 since both sets recite a lever driven spool operably coupled to a tension line, the spool configured to rotate about a first axis to wind the tension line and to unwind in a second rotational direction, with a lever selectively coupled to the spool to drive rotation and a release mechanism configured to selectively release the spool in response to manual forces applied to the release mechanism; reference claim 3 reads on the instant application claims 4-7 and 16-19; reference claims 2 and 17 read on the instant application claims 8, 9, 20, 21 and 23; reference claim 5 reads on the instant application claim 5; reference claim 8 reads on the instant application claim 11; and reference claim 3 reads on the instant application claim 14.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “release mechanism” in claims 1, 3-9, 11-12, 14-21 and 23. For the elected species 4 of figures 18-29, the corresponding structure is the lever (318), axially translatable along the first axis (E-E) against the bias of a spring (338), configured to simultaneously disengage the driving gear (320) from the first driven gear (310) and disengage the second gear (311) from the ratchet gear (313) as disclosed in paragraph [0172].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “a force to the parallel to” (line 2) should be replaced with -- a force parallel to --. 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 15-17 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.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the first set of teeth" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 16-17 depend from claim 15 and therefore are 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9, 11, 12, 14, 18-21 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Persson, US 10,836,300.
Regarding claim 1, Persson discloses an adjustment device (1) for use with at least one tension line (7), the adjustment device comprising: a rotatable spool (2) operably coupled to the at least one tension line (7), the spool (2) configured to rotate about a first axis (T) in a first rotational direction to wind the at least one tension line (7) around the spool (2), and wherein the spool (2) is further configured to rotate about the first axis (T) in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction to unwind the at least one tension line (7) from the spool (2), the spool (2) provided with a driven gear (6a) having a first set of teeth arranged coaxially about the first axis (T); a drive gear (6b) coupled to the driven gear (6a), the drive gear (6b) having a second set of teeth arranged coaxially about the first axis (T); a lever component (11) selectively coupled to the driven gear (6a) to drive rotation of the spool (2) in the first rotational direction; and a release mechanism (13b, 8) that is configured to selectively release the spool (2) such that the spool is free to rotate in either the first rotational direction or the second rotational direction in response to manual forces applied to the release mechanism (13b, 8).
Regarding claim 3, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, wherein the lever component (11) is configured to rotate about the first axis (T).
Regarding claim 4, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, wherein the release mechanism decouples the drive gear (6b) from the driven gear (6a).
Regarding claim 5, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the drive gear (6b) from the spool (2).
Regarding claim 6, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the lever component (11) from the driven gear (6a).
Regarding claim 7, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the lever component (11) from the spool (2).
Regarding claim 8, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) is operated by applying a force parallel to the first axis (T).
Regarding claim 9, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 8, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) is operated by applying the force to the lever component (11).
Regarding claim 11, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 1, further comprising a housing (4, 26a, 26b) extending over the spool (2) and drive gear (6b).
Regarding claim 12, Persson discloses an adjustment device (1) for use with at least one tension line (7), the adjustment device comprising: a rotatable spool (2) operably coupled to the at least one tension line (7), the spool (2) configured to rotate about a first axis (T) in a first rotational direction to wind the at least one tension line (7) around the spool (2), and wherein the spool (2) is further configured to rotate about the first axis (T) in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction to unwind the at least one tension line (7) from the spool (2), a drive gear (6b) coupled to the spool (2), the drive gear (6b) having a second set of teeth, each having a height extending in a direction perpendicular to a direction of a tension on the at least one tension line (7); a lever component (11) pivotal relative to the spool (2) and configured to rotate on the first axis (T), the lever component (11) selectively coupled to the spool (2) to drive rotation of the spool (2) in the first rotational direction; and a release mechanism (13b, 8) that is configured to selectively release the spool (2) such that the spool (2) is free to rotate in either the first rotational direction or the second rotational direction in response to manual forces applied to the release mechanism (13b, 8).
Regarding claim 14, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 12, wherein the lever component (11) is configured to rotate about the first axis (T).
Regarding claim 15, as best understood, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 12, wherein the spool (2) is provided with a driven gear (6a) having a second set of teeth engaged by a first set of teeth (15).
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 15, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the drive gear (6b) from the driven gear (6a).
Regarding claim 17, as best understood, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 15, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the lever component (11) from the driven gear (6a).
Regarding claim 18, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 12, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the drive gear from the spool.
Regarding claim 19, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 12, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) decouples the lever component (11) from the spool (2).
Regarding claim 20, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 12, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) is operated by applying a force parallel to the first axis (T).
Regarding claim 21, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 20, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) is operated by applying the force to the lever component (11).
Regarding claim 23, Persson discloses the adjustment device according to claim 12, wherein the release mechanism (13b, 8) is operated by applying a force to the lever component (11).
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 2021/0030120 discloses a reel closure device having a spool and pawl disc with coaxially arranged teeth that engage and disengage along the axis of rotation to selectively lock and release the spool; and US 6,289,558 discloses a footwear lacing system having a release lever and gear wheels with a ratchet mechanism.
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