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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/29/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 1, that Scheucher teaches a door coupled to a front face of the enclosure and not coupled to an upper portion of the enclosure. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As Applicant stated, the enclosure of Scheucher could be pivoted in such a manner that the door can be on an upper portion of the enclosure.
Applicant further argues that Scheucher teaches away from this potential positioning of the enclosure due to either an inadequacy of cooling the motherboard or due to the location of the batteries being suspended over the motherboard. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Scheucher teaches the use of fans for cooling the system (Fig.1, 117; ¶0115: fans create negative pressure to expel warmer air and draw in cooler air) which would continue to function if the enclosure is positioned where the door is on an upper portion of the enclosure. Furthermore, Scheucher teaches the rack system (Fig.1C, 100C) which is bays are sized to fit the battery (Fig.1G) and each bay has electrical contact guides (Fig.1H, 131). It can be seen from these figures the battery would be restricted from moving towards the motherboard unless properly aligned for insertion into the bay, and the electrical contact guide would prevent a battery from moving further towards the motherboard (angled portion of the guide 131, indicated below, would restrict movement of the battery).
PNG
media_image1.png
414
383
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, regarding the light coupled to the lower portion of the housing, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 11, that Moriarty does not teach the use of the light while the device is positioned upright on the ground surface, and instead teaches hanging the device or turning it upside down to use it as a light. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Moriarty describes element 24 as a “ground-engaging” framework (Col.3, lines 33-36) and does not state the device is unusable as a light when positioned upright, Moriarty merely suggests potential options for using the device as a light by either hanging the device or turning it upside down, which does not preclude the use of the device as a light when positioned upright. A person having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably determine that the device may still be used as a light when positioned upright on a ground surface or elevated surface.
Applicant argues, regarding claim 14, that the prior art fails to teach a light affixed to an exterior surface of the base, the light configured to illuminate an area around the outside of the charging module. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Burch teaches a light (Fig.12, 1220) which is affixed to an exterior surface of the base (Fig.12, 1204) which is configured to illuminate an area around the outside of the charging module (Fig.12: when light 1212 is positioned on the base it illuminates the area around the outside of the housing), and that the mounting arm of the light may use an adhesive for fastening the light (¶0036: mounting arm may be coupled by magnets, Velcro, adhesives, or other suitable fasteners).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher et al. (USPGPN 2014/0225566 A1), in view of Burch et al. (USPGPN 2018/0231238 A1) and Moriarty (US Patent 6,428,181).
Regarding Claim 1, Scheucher teaches a charging module configured to receive a battery pack, the charging module comprising:
a housing (Fig.1, 101) including a plurality of charging bays (Fig.1, 106) spaced about the housing, each charging bay removably receiving the battery pack (Fig.1, 102), the housing including an upper portion and a lower portion;
at least one lid (Fig.1, 107) coupled to the upper portion of the housing, the housing defining an internal compartment in which the charging bays are positioned (Fig.1: housing 101 has an internal compartment where the charging bays are positioned), the lid permitting access to the internal compartment while the lid is in an open position (Fig.1 shows access to the internal compartment when the lid is open).
Scheucher fails to explicitly teach a base coupled to the lower portion of the housing, the base configured to support the charging module on a ground surface; and
a light coupled to the lower portion of the housing, the light extending around a majority of a perimeter of the housing, the light illuminating a space surrounding the charging module while the lid is in the open position.
However, Burch teaches a housing (Fig.9, 904) with a base (Fig.9, leg members protruding from the bottom of housing 904) coupled to a lower portion of the housing for supporting the housing on a ground surface.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher with Burch to include a base for allowing airflow around the bottom side of the housing for cooling purposes and for elevating the housing and its contents from the ground surface to avoid potential liquid intrusion from a puddle or other body of liquid on the ground.
Moreover, Moriarty (Fig.1) teaches a light (12) coupled to the lower portion of a housing (lights 12 are coupled to the lower portion of container 7), the light extending around a majority of a perimeter of the housing (Fig.3: plurality of lights 12 around the perimeter of container 7), and the light illuminating a space surrounding the charging module (Fig.1, 25: cover 25 is transparent for light to illuminate the space around the container 7) while the housing is open (Fig.1, 7: container does not possess a lid and therefore housing is open).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher with Moriarty to include a light coupled to the lower portion of the housing, the light extending around a majority of a perimeter of the housing, the light illuminating a space surrounding the charging module while the lid is in the open position. Doing so allows a single system to provide illumination in combination with power at a job site.
Regarding Claim 3, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches comprising a plurality of ports (F59G, 5923) positioned about the housing, the plurality of ports configured to receive a flow of current from an external power supply to thereby charge at least one battery pack (¶0270 discloses an AC input, which would be understood to charge the battery packs from an external power supply), the plurality of ports positioned between the light and the lid (as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1, the light is coupled to the lower portion of the housing and the lid is coupled to the upper portion of the housing, a plurality of ports located on a side wall of the housing would be between the upper and lower portions of the housing).
Regarding Claim 6, Schuecher, as modified, further teaches wherein the housing includes four external faces extending around the perimeter of the housing (Fig. 1, 101).
Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach the light extends across at least three of the four external faces.
Scheucher, in view of Moriarty, discloses a circular transparent cover which is circular in shape to match the bucket design of the device taught by Moriarty and which extends around the entirety of the external face of the housing. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide a rectangular transparent cover, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Doing so would allow for easier assembly of the system by matching the shapes of the connecting components.
Regarding Claim 7, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein the light illuminates approximately a 360-degree range about the charging module (transparent cover would allow the light to illuminate a 360-range about the charging module).
Regarding Claim 11, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein the housing includes a compartment and a plurality of feet, the plurality of feet configured to engage a ground surface to support the housing (as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1, the internal compartment of Scheucher and base/leg members of Burch).
Scheucher, as modified, teaches a light coupled to the lower portion of the housing and the base coupled to the lower portion of the housing, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the light is coupled to the housing between the compartment and the plurality of feet.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to locate the light between the compartment and the plurality of feet, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would allow the light to be elevated from the ground surface to avoid potential liquid intrusion from a puddle or other body of liquid on the ground.
Claim(s) 2, & 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Burch and Moriarty, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rosenbecker et al. (USPGPN 20110291617 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach comprising a plurality of indicators positioned adjacent the plurality of charging bays, the indicators configured to indicate a status of the battery pack.
However, Rosenbecker teaches a battery charging system which include indicators (Fig.1, 575) to indicate a status of the batteries connected (¶0048: LED indicates charge status of the battery pack).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Burch and Moriarty, with Rosenbecker to include indicators for the battery status, so that a person could quickly determine the battery statuses by visual inspection instead of having to test each battery.
Regarding Claim 10, Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach comprising a plurality of cord wraps coupled to the housing.
However, Rosenbecker teaches a cord wrap (Fig.2, 535) attached to the housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Schuecher, in view of Burch and Moriarty, with Rosenbecker to include a cord wrap to allow for compact cord storage on the charging module.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Deighton and Rosenbecker, to provide a second or third cord wrap since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Doing so would allow for additional storage of a second or third cord, or would provide a backup sord storage if one of the cord storages is damaged beyond a useable state.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Burch and Moriarty, as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Rosenbecker.
Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the base defines a cord wrap portion.
However, Rosenbecker teaches a cord wrap (Fig.2, 535) that is part of the base (Fig.2, 515).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Burch and Moriarty, with Rosenbecker to include a cord wrap on a base to allow for compact cord storage on the charging module.
Claim(s) 14-17 & 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry and Burch.
Regarding Claim 14, Scheucher teaches a charging module configured to receive and recharge a plurality of battery packs, the charging module comprising:
a base (Fig.1, 101) defining an internal chamber in which a plurality of charging bays (Fig.1, 106) are positioned, each charging bay removably receiving a battery pack (Fig.1, 102); and
at least one door (Fig. 1, 107) pivotally coupled to the base (101), the door pivotable between an open position and a closed position and enclosing the internal chamber;
a power inlet port positioned on the base (Fig.59G, 5923), the power inlet configured to receive a flow of current from an external power supply to thereby charge at least one battery pack (¶0270 discloses an AC input).
Scheucher, fails to explicitly teach a light affixed to an exterior surface of the base, the light configured to illuminate an area around the outside of the charging module; and
a pass-through outlet port positioned on the base, the pass-through outlet configured to direct a flow of current from the external power supply, through the charging module and to an external component to thereby provide power for the external component to operate.
However, Burch teaches a light (Fig.12, 1220) which is affixed to an exterior surface of the base (Fig.12, 1204) which is configured to illuminate an area around the outside of the charging module (Fig.12: when light 1212 is positioned on the base it illuminates the area around the outside of the housing), and that the mounting arm of the light may use an adhesive for fastening the light (¶0036: mounting arm may be coupled by magnets, Velcro, adhesives, or other suitable fasteners).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher with Burch to include a light affixed to an exterior surface of the base, the light configured to illuminate an area around the outside of the base. Doing so allows illumination of the surrounding work area from the light.
Moreover, Fry teaches a portable power supply which includes a plurality of ports (Fig.12, 202 & 222), including an AC pass-through port (Fig.13,222) configured to direct a flow of current from the external power supply, through the charging module (Fig.13, 242 & 86) and to an external component to thereby provide power for the external component to operate (Fig.13,202; ¶0053: provide power to an AC-powered peripheral device, ¶0032: peripheral device may be a smartphone and configured to receive AC power).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher with Fry to include an AC pass-through port to allow an AC-input source to both charge a battery connected to the charging module and provide power to an externally connected device.
Regarding Claim 15, Scheucher, as modified, teaches further comprising a padlock (¶0154: door can be securely locked and padlocked), the padlock engaging the door to maintain the door in the closed position.
Regarding Claim 16, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein the external component is a mobile device such that the pass-through outlet is electrically couplable to the mobile device (as disclosed in claim 14, peripheral devices powered by the passthrough outlet may be smartphones and powered by AC power).
Regarding Claim 17, Scheucher, as modified, teaches further comprising a mounting plate (Fig.1B, 124) coupled to a back surface of the base, the mounting plate including mounting interfaces (Fig.1B, 125) configured to interact with an existing structure.
Regarding Claim 44, Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the light extends around a majority of a perimeter of the base.
Scheucher, as modified teaches the claimed invention except it teaches a single light source for directed illumination instead of a light that extends around a majority of a perimeter of the base. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include multiple lights extending around a majority of a perimeter of the base instead of a single light, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Doing so would provide greater illumination around the charging module.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to combine a plurality of lights into one light, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). Doing so would allow for more consistent illumination by removing housing spacing between light sources.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry and Burch, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of McHugh et al. (USPGPN 20190386357 A1).
Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach comprising a heater supported in the base.
However, McHugh teaches a battery heater (Fig.1, 10/10’) which is attachable to a battery charger (Fig.1, 18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry and Burch, with McHugh to include a heater in the charging module to avoid batteries charging at low temperatures to extend the life of the battery.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry and Burch, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Velazquez (USPGPN 20160099603 A1).
Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach the internal chamber further defines a storage compartment adjacent the charging bays.
However, Velazquez teaches a charging container (Fig.1, 100) which includes a dedicated storage space (Fig.1, 206).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry and Burch, with Velazquez to include a storage compartment section to allow storage of additional accessories for transport.
Claim(s) 20, 23, 28, & 45-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez et al. (USPGPN 20110049824 A1), DeMars et al. (US Patent 5803471 A), and Raney (USPGPN 2005/0230928).
Regarding Claim 20, Scheucher teaches a charging system configured to removably receive and recharge a plurality of battery packs, the charging system comprising:
charging modules having a housing (Fig.1, 101) defining an interior compartment having a plurality of charging bays (Fig.1, 106), each charging bay removably receiving the battery pack (Fig.1, 102), the charging modules electrically coupled together (¶0008: separate enclosures are connectable using cables), each of the charging modules including a power inlet port (Fig.59G, 5923) positioned on the housing, the power inlet configured to receive a flow of current from an external power supply to thereby charge at least one battery pack (¶0270 discloses an AC input).
Scheucher fails to explicitly teach a dolly including a pair of rails and a platform rotatably coupled therebetween;
a power panel coupled to the dolly between the rails, the power panel including a power inlet configured to be connected to a power supply; and
plurality of charging modules coupled to the pair of rails, and each of the charging modules including a pass-through outlet port positioned on the housing, the pass-through outlet configured to direct a flow of current from the external power supply, through the charging module and to an external component to thereby provide power for the external component to operate.
However, Fry teaches a portable power supply which includes a plurality of ports (Fig.12, 202 & 222), including an AC pass-through port (Fig.13,222) configured to direct a flow of current from the external power supply, through the charging module (Fig.13, 242 & 86) and to an external component to thereby provide power for the external component to operate (Fig.13,202; ¶0053: provide power to an AC-powered peripheral device, ¶0032: peripheral device may be a smartphone and configured to receive AC power).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher with Fry to include an AC pass-through port to allow an AC-input source to both charge a battery connected to the charging module and provide power to an externally connected device.
Moreoever, Bar-Erez teaches a storage system using a dolly (Fig.1, 17) including a pair of rails (Fig.1, 26), which receives containers (Fig.1, 20) that couple to the dolly rails (Fig.1, 18; containers attach to the dolly by means of mount structures 18 affixed to rails 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the system taught by Scheucher and the dolly taught by Bar-Erez to allow for an easily transportable energy system.
Moreover, DeMars teaches a dolly system (Fig.1, 20) with a rotatably coupled platform (Fig.1, 134).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher with DeMars to use a rotatable platform to allow the dolly to be collapsible into a smaller size for easier storage when not in use.
Lastly, Raney teaches a power assisted dolly which includes a power panel coupled to the dolly between the rails (Fig.1, 120 & 140), the power panel including a power inlet configured to be connected to a power supply (Fig.1, 170; ¶0028: battery charger may be used to recharge power source 140 through recharge port 170).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Bar-Erez, with Raney to include a power panel coupled to the dolly between the rails, including a power inlet. Doing so allows the dolly to have motorized assistance for reducing a user’s work required to push a heavy load.
Regarding Claim 23, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein each charging module (Fig.1N, 100N) of the plurality of charging modules includes a pair of doors (Fig.1N, 153 & 153A) pivotally coupled to the housing (Fig.1N, 152 & 152A), the doors enclosing the interior compartment.
Regarding Claim 28, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein each charging module of the plurality of charging modules includes a back surface (Fig.1B, 101 interior back surface), the back surface having a plurality of mounting features (Fig.1B, 125 & 125A) disposed about the back surface.
Regarding Claim 45, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein the power panel is coupled to the pair of rails (as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1, the power panel of Raney is coupled to the pair of rails).
Regarding Claim 46, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein the power panel is positioned between the pair of rails of the dolly (as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1, the power panel of Raney is coupled between the pair of rails).
Regarding Claim 47, Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein the dolly comprises first and second wheels, and wherein the power panel is positioned between the first and second wheels (as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1, the power panel of Raney is coupled between the first and second of wheels).
Claim(s) 21 & 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of McHugh et al. (USPGPN 20190386357 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the housing supports a heating element and a switch, the heating element activated by the switch.
However, McHugh teaches a battery heater (Fig.1, 10/10’) which is attachable to a battery charger (Fig.1, 18), and includes a heating element (Fig.19, 290) and a switch (Fig.19, 260).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, with McHugh to include a heater and a switch in the charging module. The heater can be used to avoid batteries charging at low temperatures, thus extend the life of the battery, and the switch can used to keep the heater from running continuously.
Regarding Claim 22, Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the switch includes a temperature sensor.
However, McHugh teaches that the heating system comprises temperature sensors (Fig.19: temperature signals 305, 310, 315, & 320 indicate the presence of temperature sensors)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, Raney, and McHugh, with McHugh to include a temperature sensor with the switch to allow the heating process to be controlled by a temperature reading, to allow the temperature to be automatically kept above a predetermined limit.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Ardaman et al. (US Patent 10985578 B1).
Scheucher, as modified, further teaches wherein each charging module of the plurality of charging modules further comprises a door lock (¶0154: door can be locked), the door lock engaging the doors to maintain the doors in a closed position.
Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach an RFID reader and the RFID reader configured to disengage the door lock.
However, Ardaman teaches the use of an RFID reader to unlock a locked door (Col.5, lines 23-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, with Ardaman to include an RFID reader to be used to unlock the door. Doing so allows for a quicker unlocking process by avoiding the manual process of inserting and turning a key, and the challenges that come with using keys (determining the correct key to use or aligning the key for insertion into a lock).
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Perlman et al. (USPGPN 20080190931 A1).
Scheucher, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein each charging module of the plurality of charging modules includes a slot disposed on a back surface of the module, the slot communicating the interior compartment and an exterior of the module, a locking feature extending through the slot and engageable by a lock disposed in the interior compartment for locking the charging module to the dolly.
However, Bar-Erez teaches the containers comprising a slot (Fig.20A, 242) on the back surface of the containers, designed to be used to secure the containers to the dolly (¶0093: rear extension structure 242 is latched to latch structure 203)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, to include the rear slots on the containers, to allow the containers to be secured to the dolly for safer transportation.
Moreover, Perlman teaches a storage container, which has a slot (Fig.5, 21 & 52) communicating the interior compartment with an exterior, and a locking feature (Fig.4, 68) which extends through the slot and engages a lock (Fig.4, 50) disposed in the interior compartment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system taught by Scheucher, in view of Fry, Bar-Erez, DeMars, and Raney, with Perlman to include a slot and locking element that extends through the slot to an internal locking structure. Doing so allows the container to be securely fastened to the dolly avoiding unintended users from removing the container.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN P ONDRASIK whose telephone number is (703)756-1963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
/JOHN P ONDRASIK/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859