Obviousness

The obviousness of US patent 11656067, "Tape measure with tape blade profile increasing tape standout," can be analyzed under 35 U.S.C. § 103 by identifying combinations of prior art references that would render the claimed invention obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA). The patent itself provides significant information regarding prior art and the underlying principles that guide its invention.

The patent states that the invention "relates specifically to a tape measure... that includes a tape measure blade with a profile shape that increases tape standout". It further explains that "Applicant has determined that by shaping the tape blade to a relatively aggressive or steep curved profile shape... tape standout can be increased and tape droop can be decreased greatly even when utilizing relatively thin and/or relatively narrow pieces of steel for the tape blade". This establishes that the general concept of using a steeper or more aggressive curved profile to increase rigidity and standout is a known or readily ascertainable principle in the field.

The prior art identified in the patent includes:

• Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7116 (27 mm flat width, 0.13 mm steel thickness, 108-112 inches standout).
• Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7135 (27 mm flat width, 0.12 mm steel thickness, 110-114 inches standout).
• Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7526 (32 mm flat width, 0.13 mm steel thickness, 142-146 inches standout).
• Prior Art Tape No. 1 (31.75 mm flat width, 0.13 mm steel thickness, 145 inches average standout).
• Prior Art Tape No. 2 (31.75 mm flat width, 0.13 mm steel thickness, 149 inches average standout).
• Prior Art 2 (CAWB 55deg) (32 mm flat width, 0.13 mm thickness, specific profile with a calculated standout).

The main independent claims of US11656067 generally revolve around specific combinations of tape blade flat width, steel thickness, curved profile parameters (curved height H1, curved width W1, and angle A), and resulting standout distances.

Obviousness Argument 1: Claims related to narrow tape blades (flat width < 27.94 mm) with high standout.

• Claimed Invention: A tape measure with a flat width less than 27.94 mm and a standout greater than 115 inches. This may include a curved height (H1) greater than 6.3 mm, a curved width (W1) less than 22.5 mm, and an angle A less than 90 degrees.
• Combination of References:
  • Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7116 or 48-22-7135 (primary references): Both have a flat width of 27 mm (less than 27.94 mm) and standouts of 108-112 inches and 110-114 inches, respectively, which are close to, but do not exceed, 115 inches. Their profiles (e.g., 48-22-7116 with Angle A 96.26 deg, H1 5.904 mm, W1 23.4 mm) are less aggressive than the claimed parameters.
  • Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7526, Prior Art Tape No. 1, or Prior Art Tape No. 2 (secondary references/general knowledge): These wider prior art tapes (31.75 mm or 32 mm flat width) achieve higher standouts (142-149 inches) and exhibit more aggressive or steeper profiles (e.g., 48-22-7526 has Angle A 58.48 deg, H1 8.986 mm). The patent explicitly teaches that a "steep curved profile shape... increases rigidity and buckle resistance, and in particular, tape standout is greatly increased".
• Motivation to Combine: A person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would be motivated to improve the standout of narrow tape blades (e.g., 27 mm flat width) beyond the 108-114 inches offered by existing products, to enhance utility or meet competitive market demands for longer standout. Recognizing that wider prior art tapes achieve significantly greater standout through more aggressive profiles, and understanding the general principle that a "more curved" profile increases rigidity and standout, a POSITA would be motivated to apply this principle to narrow blades.
• Obviousness Rationale: A POSITA, starting with a narrow tape blade like the 27 mm Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7116, and seeking to increase its standout, would have a reasonable expectation of success in modifying its profile to be more aggressive. This modification would involve reducing the Angle A (e.g., below 90 degrees), increasing the curved height H1 (e.g., above 6.3 mm), and reducing the curved width W1 (e.g., below 22.5 mm). The patent's own "Tape D" (27 mm flat width) demonstrates this exact modification resulting in 133-135 inches of standout with an Angle A of 72.42 deg, H1 of 7.5385 mm, and W1 of 21.151 mm, thereby meeting the claimed parameters and standout. This is a predictable alteration of known elements to achieve an improved, but expected, result.

Obviousness Argument 2: Claims related to low tape blade steel thickness (< 0.13 mm) with high standout.

• Claimed Invention: A tape measure with a metal thickness of less than 0.13 mm and a standout greater than 115 inches. This may include a curved height (H1) greater than 6.3 mm, a curved width (W1) less than 22.5 mm, and an angle A less than 90 degrees.
• Combination of References:
  • Milwaukee Electric Tool Prod. No. 48-22-7135 (primary reference): This tape blade has a steel thickness of 0.12 mm (less than 0.13 mm), but its standout is 110-114 inches, falling short of 115 inches. Its profile parameters (Angle A 91.12 deg, H1 6.281 mm, W1 22.8 mm) are less aggressive than the claimed ranges.
  • General knowledge in the art (as taught by the patent): The patent states, "Applicant has determined that as steel thickness T1 of tape blade 14 decreases, the degree of curvature of tape blade 14 increases to achieve a certain level of standout to account for the lower rigidity of the thin steel". This principle directly informs a POSITA on how to compensate for the reduced rigidity of thinner steel.
• Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to achieve standout greater than 115 inches with thin steel blades (e.g., 0.12 mm) to potentially reduce material costs or weight while maintaining or improving performance. Given the understanding that thinner steel has lower rigidity, and explicitly being taught that increasing the degree of curvature can compensate for this, a POSITA would be motivated to modify the profile of the 48-22-7135 tape to be more aggressive to achieve the desired standout.
• Obviousness Rationale: Starting with a thin blade like 48-22-7135, a POSITA seeking greater standout would modify its profile by increasing H1 (e.g., above 6.3 mm), decreasing W1 (e.g., below 22.5 mm), and decreasing Angle A (e.g., below 90 degrees). The patent's own "Tape B" and "Tape C," both having 0.11 mm steel thickness (less than 0.13 mm), demonstrate achieving standouts of 160-162 inches and 159-164 inches, respectively, by implementing aggressive profiles that fall within the claimed H1, W1, and Angle A ranges. This confirms that such modifications lead to the claimed result with a reasonable expectation of success.

Obviousness Argument 3: Claims related to specific ratios of curved width to flat width, and curved height to flat width, with high standout (> 150 inches).

• Claimed Invention (Flat width < 32 mm): A ratio of the curved width to a flat width of the elongate metal core less than 0.74, a ratio of the curved height to the flat width of the elongate metal core greater than 0.29, and a standout distance greater than 150 inches.

• Combination of References:

  • Prior Art Tape No. 1 or Prior Art Tape No. 2 (primary references): These tapes have a flat width of 31.75 mm (less than 32 mm) and standouts of 145 inches and 149 inches, respectively. Their ratios (e.g., Prior Art Tape No. 1 has CW/FW of 0.744913386 and CH/FW of 0.289244094) are very close to, but do not meet, the claimed thresholds for both ratios and standout.
  • General knowledge in the art (as taught by the patent): The patent states that "the ratio of W1 to flat tape width is substantially less than is typical, and... the ratio of H1 to flat tape width is substantially larger than is typical" for improved standout. This teaches that adjusting these ratios in the direction of the claimed ranges leads to better standout.

• Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to achieve standout greater than 150 inches for tape blades with flat widths close to 32 mm. Given the patent's own teaching that manipulating the curved width to flat width ratio and curved height to flat width ratio in the direction of "substantially less than typical" and "substantially larger than typical" respectively, improves standout, a POSITA would be motivated to adjust these ratios for Prior Art Tape No. 1 or 2 to achieve the desired performance.

• Obviousness Rationale: Optimizing the known design parameters of curved width and curved height relative to flat width to achieve an expected improvement in standout is within the routine skill of a POSITA. The patent's own "Tape A," "Tape B," and "Tape C" (30 mm flat width) demonstrate that achieving CW/FW ratios less than 0.74 and CH/FW ratios greater than 0.29 results in standouts greater than 150 inches, indicating that these targeted modifications are effective and predictable.

• Claimed Invention (Flat width >= 32 mm): A ratio of the curved width to a flat width of the elongate metal core less than 0.70, a ratio of the curved height to the flat width of the elongate metal core greater than 0.31, and a standout distance greater than 150 inches.

• Combination of References:

  • Prior Art 2 (CAWB 55deg) (primary reference): This tape blade has a flat width of 32 mm. Its ratios (CW/FW of 0.7059375 and CH/FW of 0.305) are very close to the claimed thresholds, and its calculated standout is presented as being less than Prototypes 1 and 2, suggesting it's below 150 inches.
  • General knowledge in the art (as taught by the patent): The principle that "standout can be increased by making the profile of the tape blade more curved" is a guiding principle. The patent also describes "Prototypes 5 and 6" (35 mm and 38 mm flat width, respectively), which exhibit the claimed ratios (e.g., Prototype 5 has CW/FW of 0.672285714 and CH/FW of 0.319428571) and achieve standouts greater than 15 feet (180 inches).

• Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to improve the standout of a 32 mm flat width tape blade, such as Prior Art 2, to achieve standout greater than 150 inches. Given the explicit teaching that increasing curvature increases standout, a POSITA would be motivated to adjust the profile ratios (CW/FW, CH/FW) to make the curve "more aggressive" or "steeper" beyond that of Prior Art 2.

• Obviousness Rationale: The adjustment of known parameters like curved width and curved height relative to flat width, in a direction known to improve rigidity and thus standout, is a predictable modification for a POSITA seeking to enhance tape measure performance. The patent's own Prototypes 5 and 6 demonstrate that achieving CW/FW less than 0.70 and CH/FW greater than 0.31 results in standout greater than 150 inches, confirming the effectiveness of these modifications. Reaching these specific numerical thresholds through routine optimization of known design parameters would be obvious.

In conclusion, the various claims of US patent 11656067 defining specific tape blade profiles for increased standout would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art. This is due to the combination of existing prior art tape measures, the widely understood principle that increased blade curvature enhances rigidity and standout (a principle explicitly stated within the patent itself), and the motivation to improve performance characteristics like standout in existing tape measure designs. The specific numerical ranges defining the inventive profiles, while achieving improved performance, represent an optimization within predictable parameters, rather than an unexpected result.