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 .
Amendment filed 7/11/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13, 15-16, 18 and 20 remain pending in the present application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the snap-fit feature in claims 1, 10-11, and 20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “between a pair or sidewalls” is grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 13 depends from claim 12 which has been canceled. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant has amended claims 1, 11, 5 and 15 to link a singular “snap-fit feature” which performs the dual function of holding the steps in the retracted and deployed position. Applicant’s original disclosure does not disclose what the snap-fit feature actually is but merely discusses that the steps snap into place when deployed and when retracted. Therefore, Applicant’s amended claim is more limited than what was originally disclosed and constitutes new matter in the Examiner’s position. It is suggested that the Applicant amend the claims to reflect the specification to overcome this issue. .
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 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13, 15-16, 18 and 20 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.
Re. Cl. 1, 10-11 and 20, the limitation “snap-fit feature” renders the claim indefinite in the Examiner’s position. Applicant’s amended claims now require a particular structure (i.e. feature) which performs the function of holding the shutter steps in retracted (ang deployed) position. Applicant does not specifically set forth what the feature is since they only mention the steps snapping into the deployed and retracted positions in the specification and no particular feature is illustrated in the drawings. Therefore, it is unclear what the structure is and how it would perform the specific functions, rendering the metes and bounds of the claim unclear.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 11, 13, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rorke US 9380760 (hereinafter Rorke) in view of Frick US 2011/0139544 (hereinafter Frick).
Re. Cl. 1, Rorke discloses: A ladder/ramp (100), comprising: a pair of siderails (102s, Fig. 1a-b); a plurality of shutter-steps (106, Fig. 1a-3) each rotatably coupled between the pair of siderails so that each shutter-step is rotatable between a deployed position extending outwardly from alignment with the pair of siderails to define a step surface (see Fig. 1a), and a retracted position aligned between the pair of siderails to define a continuous ramp surface (see Fig. 2a); each shutter step having a snap-fit feature (Col. 6, Lines 44-49 and Lines 52-58) configured to hold the shutter step in the retracted position (Col. 6, Lines 44-49).
Re. Cl. 11, Rorke discloses: A method of forming a ladder/ramp (see Fig. 1a-3) comprising: rotatably coupling a plurality of shutter-steps (106, Fig. 1-3) between the pair of siderails (102, Fig. 1a-b) so that each shutter-step is rotatable between a deployed position extending outwardly from alignment with the pair of siderails to define a step surface (see Fig. 1a), and a retracted position aligned between the pair of siderails to define a continuous ramp surface (see Fig. 2a), each shutter step having a snap-fit feature (Col. 6, Lines 44-49 and Lines 52-58) configured to hold the shutter step in the retracted position (Col. 6, Lines 44-49).
Re. Cls. 3 and 13, Rorke discloses: the continuous ramp surface comprises a continuous and smooth non-slip surface (Col. 7, Lines 14-20).
Re. Cls. 5 and 15, Rorke discloses: each snap-fit feature is also configured to hold the shutter-step in the deployed position (Col. 6, Lines 52-58).
Re. Cls. 8 and 18, Rorke discloses: first ends of each of the pair of siderails form a support for engaging an adjacent portion of a vehicle when the ladder/ramp is used as a ladder and when the ladder/ramp is used as a ramp (see Fig. 1a-b, top ends of rails 102 where 118 and 132 are located form supports for engaging a vehicle as shown by 142).
Re. Cls. 1 and 11, Rorke discloses that the shutter steps are attached to the frame using runner hinges (128) and does not disclose a plurality of crossbars fixedly coupled between the pair of siderails and extending along a length of the pair of siderails; the shutter-steps rotatably coupled to a corresponding crossbar and in the retracted position the continuous ramp surface is defined with the plurality of crossbars. Frick discloses a ladder/ramp (Fig. 1) which includes a plurality of siderails (15a, b, Fig. 1); a plurality of crossbars (25, Fig. 3) fixedly coupled between the pair of siderails and extending along a length of the pair of siderails (see Fig. 1-3); the shutter-steps (20) rotatably coupled to a corresponding crossbar and in the retracted position the continuous ramp surface is defined with the plurality of crossbars (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the runner hinges (128) of Rorke with the crossbars of Frick with reasonable expectation of success since it has been held obvious to replace one known means with another to achieve the predictable result of rotatably fixing the steps between siderails. KSR Int’l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. ___, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR)
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rorke in view of Frick as applied above, and in further view of Islava US 4867275 (hereinafter Islava).
Re. Cls. 6 and 16, Rorke discloses that each shitter-step is configured to support at least 150 pounds when in the deployed position (Col. 5, Lines 5-10) and that various adjustments can be made to increase the resiliency or rigidity of the device (Cl. 5, Lines 10-16). Islava discloses a ladder (Fig. 1) which includes panels (14-16, Fig. 1) that are configured to support at least 250 pounds (Col. 3, Lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Rorke device to have its panels configured to support 250 pounds as disclosed by Islava since Rorke discloses that adjustments can be made to increase the resiliency or rigidity of the device from supporting 150 pounds (Col. 5, Lines 10-16) and Islava discloses that it is known to enable the panels to support 250 pounds (Col. 3, Lines 1-4). Such a modification would enable the device to support larger animals or even people.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rorke in view of Frick in view of Levi US 2003/0175101 (hereinafter Levi).
Re. Cl. 10, Rorke discloses: A vehicle (Col. 7, Lines 64-65; car) comprising: a chassis; wheels mounted to the chassis; a vehicle body mounted to the chassis (it is the Examiner’s position that the car discussed in Col. 7, Lines 64-65 would have a chassis, wheels, motor and body as claimed; further, Levi as seen in Figs. 2-6 and Paragraph 0003 supports the Examiner’s position); a ladder/ramp (Fig. 1a) comprising: a pair of siderails (102s, Fig. 1a-b); a plurality of shutter-steps (106, Fig. 1a-3) each rotatably coupled between the pair of siderails so that each shutter-step is rotatable between a deployed position extending outwardly from alignment with the pair of siderails to define a step surface (see Fig. 1a), and a retracted position aligned between the pair of siderails to define a continuous ramp surface (see Fig. 2a); each shutter step having a snap-fit feature (Col. 6, Lines 44-49 and Lines 52-58) configured to hold the shutter step in the retracted position (Col. 6, Lines 44-49).
Re. Cl. 20, Rorke discloses: A method for adapting a vehicle for use with a ladder/ramp (see Fig. 1b), the method comprising: providing the vehicle comprising a chassis, wheels mounted to the chassis, a motor mounted to the chassis and a vehicle body mounted to the chassis (Col. 7, Lines 64-65; car; it is the Examiner’s position that the car discussed in Col. 7, Lines 64-65 would have a chassis, wheels, motor and body as claimed; further, Levi as seen in Figs. 2-6 and Paragraph 0003 supports the Examiner’s position); providing a ladder/ramp (Fig. 1a) comprising a pair of siderails (102s, Fig. 1a-b); a plurality of shutter-steps (106, Fig. 1a-3) each rotatably coupled between the pair of siderails so that each shutter-step is rotatable between a deployed position extending outwardly from alignment with the pair of siderails to define a step surface (see Fig. 1a), and a retracted position aligned between the pair of siderails to define a continuous ramp surface (see Fig. 2a); each shutter step having a snap-fit feature (Col. 6, Lines 44-49 and Lines 52-58) configured to hold the shutter step in the retracted position (Col. 6, Lines 44-49).
Re. Cls. 10 and 20, Rorke discloses that the shutter steps are attached to the frame using runner hinges (128) and does not disclose a plurality of crossbars fixedly coupled between the pair of siderails and extending along a length of the pair of siderails; the shutter-steps rotatably coupled to a corresponding crossbar and in the retracted position the continuous ramp surface is defined with the plurality of crossbars or a storage rack on top of the vehicle body and the ladder ramp carried by the storage rack (Cl. 11) or mounting a storage rack on a top of the vehicle body to hold the ladder ramp (Cl. 20). Frick discloses a ladder/ramp (Fig. 1) which includes a plurality of siderails (15a, b, Fig. 1); a plurality of crossbars (25, Fig. 3) fixedly coupled between the pair of siderails and extending along a length of the pair of siderails (see Fig. 1-3); the shutter-steps (20) rotatably coupled to a corresponding crossbar and in the retracted position the continuous ramp surface is defined with the plurality of crossbars (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the runner hinges (128) of Rorke with the crossbars of Frick with reasonable expectation of success since it has been held obvious to replace one known means with another to achieve the predictable result of rotatably fixing the steps between siderails. KSR Int’l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. ___, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR)
Re. Cls. 10 and 20, Rorke does not disclose a storage rack on top of the vehicle body and the ladder ramp carried by the storage rack (Cl. 11) or mounting a storage rack on a top of the vehicle body to hold the ladder ramp (Cl. 20). Levi discloses a vehicle (see Fig. 2-6 and discussed in Paragraph 0003 as being a motor vehicle such as a truck or van) configured for use with the ladder/ramp (see Fig. 2-6, the vehicle is configured for use with the ladder/ramp according to claim 1 in the same manner as it is shown used with the ladder shown in phantom lines), the vehicle further comprising: a chassis; wheels mounted to the chassis; a motor mounted to the chassis; a vehicle body mounted to the chassis (see Fig. 2-6 and Paragraph 0003; it is the Examiner’s position that the vehicle is shown as having wheels and the motor vehicle (truck or van) discussed in the disclosure would inherently include a chassis, wheels mounted on the chassis, a motor mounted to the chassis and a vehicle body mounted to the chassis); and a storage rack (10, Fig. 7a) on top of the vehicle body (see Fig. 2-6), the storage rack including a portion (see 19 and 41, Fig. 7a) configured to hold the ladder/ramp (see Fig. 2-6 in the same manner as shown holding the ladder in phantom lines).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle disclosed in Rorke to include the rack as disclosed by Levi with reasonable expectation of success since Levi states that such a modification provides a movable ladder rack which can be used to readily raise and lower a ladder onto and from the roof of a motor vehicle (Paragraph 0003). Such a modification would enable the user to transport the ladder and more easily use/deploy it when required to be used.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13, 15-16, 18 and 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Austin US 524661, Sprague US 1791330, Smart US 2024/0426130, Wang US 2023/0323698, Frick US 2011/0139544, Deakin US 2003/0178456, and Wurth US 8776947 disclose other known ladder assemblies which are presented to the Applicant for their consideration.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..
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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632