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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
Figure 1A should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Reference to specific claims, for example, claim 1 in page 1, line 7 and page 4, line 19 and claim 20 in page 5, line 2, is improper and should be avoided.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 23, 25, and 28-29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 23, lines 3-4, “winch drum line receiving outer surface” should read ---line receiving outer surface--- for consistency.
In claim 25, line 5, “drum” should read ---winch drum--- for consistency.
In line 3 of claim 28 and line 2 of claim 29, “Al” acronym should be defined. For example, “Al” should recite ---aluminum---.
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 25, 28-32, 34-35, 37-38, and 42-44 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 claims 25, 29-32, and 37, “it” in line 3 of claim 25, line 1 of claims 29-32, and lines 1-2 of claim 37 renders the claim indefinite because the claim is unclear as what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. Applicant may want to change “it” to ---the winch drum---.
Regarding claims 28-29, the phrase "e.g." in lines 2-3 of claim 28 and lines 1-2 of claim 29 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 34, “their” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because the claim is unclear as what claimed structure “their” refers to in the claim. Applicant may want to change “their” to ---the ribs or protrusions---.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "the winch base surface" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 37-38, the phrase "preferably" in line 3 of claims 37 and 38 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Claims 37 and 42, recites “a winch drum” in lines 3-5 of claim 37 and line 2 of claim 42 – however claim 23 already set forth “a winch drum” – therefore it is unclear if the second recitation is meant to refer to the first recitation or introduce an additional winch drum. For purposes of examination, the second recitation is being interpreted as “the winch drum”.
Claim 42 recites the limitation "the deck" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 43-44, “it” in line 3 of claim 25 and line 1 of claims 29-32, 37, and 43-44 renders the claim indefinite because the claim is unclear as what claimed structure “it” refers to in the claim. Applicant may want to change “it” to ---the winch---.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 23 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the entire combination of elements set forth including for disclosing the intervals, or distances between ribs or protrusions varying in a non-repetitive manner at least within respective groups comprising at least three protrusions or ribs or between consecutive groups of at least three ribs or protrusions.
Cobden (US7226042B2) is the closest prior art and teaches a winch drum (2; Figures 1-2) for rotation about a rotation axis and comprising: a line receiving outer surface (6) with a number of protrusions or ribs (16); extending substantially from an upper end (B) of the winch drum line receiving outer surface towards a lower end (I, A) of the winch drum line receiving outer surface; the ribs or protrusions are asymmetrically distributed; the ribs or protrusions being disposed around the winch drum at radially spaced apart varying intervals; and the intervals, or distances between ribs or protrusions varying in a non-repetitive manner (Figures 1 and 3), but fails to teach at least within respective groups comprising at least three protrusions or ribs or between consecutive groups of at least three ribs or protrusions.
Claims 24-44 would be allowable because they are dependents of claim 23.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references listed on form PTO-892 are cited for their relevance to the disclosed invention and demonstration of the state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/HENRIX SOTO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights