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 .
The following correspondence is a non-final Office Action for application no. 19/191,135, for a MULTI-DIAMETER RETAINER, filed on 4/28/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending.
The Requirement for Restriction/Election dated 6/16/2026 is WITHDRAWN.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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) 1-3, 5-8, 10, 11, 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ratzlaff et al. (U.S. Pat. 11,054,063).
Regarding claim 1, Ratzlaff teaches a multi-stop retainer configured to secure objects of varying diameters, the multi-stop retainer comprising: a lid coupled to a base via a hinge at a first end and comprising a ratchet coupler at a second end of the lid, wherein the ratchet coupler comprises a first latch and a second latch; a first leg member coupled to the base and comprising a first plurality of mechanical stops along its length that are configured to interface with the first latch; and a second leg member coupled to the base and comprising a second plurality of mechanical stops along its length that are configured to interface with the second latch, and wherein the first leg member and the second leg member are parallel relative to one another, and wherein the lid is configured to pivot via the hinge to define a pocket configured to be sized for securing an object via the ratchet coupler, the first leg member, and the second leg member.
[AltContent: textbox (J-shaped latch)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (pocket)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (2nd latch)][AltContent: textbox (2nd leg member)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st leg member)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Mechanical stops)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st latch)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Ratchet coupler)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (hinge)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (base)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (lid)]
PNG
media_image1.png
560
782
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 1, wherein the ratchet coupler is configured to engage the first leg member and the second leg member simultaneously.
Regarding claim 3, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of mechanical stops is uniformly spaced.
Regarding claim 5, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 1, further comprising a flexible retention structure (104) disposed within the pocket and configured to enhance slide resistance.
Regarding claim 6, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 1, wherein each of the first latch and the second latch is a J-shaped latch (see figure above).
Regarding claim 7, Ratzlaff teaches a multi-stop retainer (see figure above) configured to secure objects of varying diameters, the multi-stop retainer comprising: a lid coupled to a base via a hinge at a first end and comprising a ratchet coupler at a second end of the lid; and a pair of leg members, wherein each of the pair of leg members comprises a plurality of mechanical stops along its length, and wherein the plurality of mechanical stops is configured to interface with the ratchet coupler to define a pocket configured to be sized for securing an object.
Regarding claim 8, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 7, wherein the ratchet coupler is configured to engage each of the pair of leg members simultaneously.
Regarding claim 10, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 7, wherein the plurality of mechanical stops is uniformly spaced.
Regarding claim 11, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 7, further comprising a flexible retention structure (104) disposed within the pocket and configured to enhance slide resistance.
Regarding claim 15, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 7, wherein the ratchet coupler comprises a first latch and a second latch.
Regarding claim 18, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claim 15, wherein each of the first latch and the second latch is a J-shaped latch (see figure above).
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ratzlaff et al. (U.S. Pat. 11,054,063) in view of Stuart (U.S. Pub. 2022/0316536).
Regarding claims 4 and 9, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claims 1 and 7, but does not teach that the first plurality of mechanical stops is non-uniformly spaced or wherein the plurality of mechanical stops is non-uniformly spaced. Stuart, however taches a ratchet mechanism wherein the teeth are arranged in a non-uniform manner wherein the teeth are not equidistant from one another in order to provide an adjustable locking mechanism. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the first plurality of mechanical stops as non-uniformly spaced or the plurality of mechanical stops as non-uniformly spaced in order to allow for varied contact points to adapt to variations within the object held within the retainer, in view of Ratzlaff.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ratzlaff et al. (U.S. Pat. 11,054,063) in view of Ward (U.S. Pat. 5,367,750).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Ratzlaff teaches the retainer of claims 11, but does not teach that the flexible retention structure is a resilient ridge extending laterally across a majority of a width of the lid or that the flexible retention structure is a linear protrusion extending transversely relative to a width of the lid. Ward, however, teaches a retainer wherein the flexible retention (40) structure is a resilient ridge extending laterally across a majority of a width of the lid or that the flexible retention structure is a linear protrusion extending transversely relative to a width of the lid in order to engage the wiring (16) and prevent the wiring from popping out of the seat. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to construct the flexible retention structure is a resilient ridge extending laterally across a majority of a width of the lid or that the flexible retention structure is a linear protrusion extending transversely relative to a width of the lid assist in holding the object securely in place and prevent undesired movement, in view of Ratzlaff.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USP 5305978, 6978973, 8328457, 10655374 (multi-stop retainers).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKEISHA J. SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-5781. The examiner can normally be reached Normal hours: M/Th 7-4; T 9-5; W 7-3; F 7-4.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/NKEISHA SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights