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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 8/18/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is overlap in the claims. This is not found persuasive because the applicant has not stated the invention are not distinct and it is clear the independent claims are distinct although they share similar subject matter.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-14 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.
The following claims are vague, indefinite, awkwardly, confusingly worded and/or lacking properly antecedent basis:
“its” in claims 1 , 8, and 13 is recited and the limitations must be positively recited with proper antecedent basis.
“it” in claims 6 and 13 is recited and the limitations must be positively recited with proper antecedent basis.
“their” in claims 13 is recited and this is narrative term that refers to a human. The limitation must be positively recited which renders the claim awkwardly worded.
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 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a1) as being anticipated by Bartos 2019/0144249 A1.
Bartos discloses the claimed invention as recited in claims as shown below:
1. A trailer stacking device for lifting and stacking trailers comprised of: two masts 18 & 18’; two support frames 30 &40; two trailer supports 32 & 42; wherein each of the support frames is moveably attached to a respective mast; wherein each of the trailer supports is attached to a respective support frame; wherein each of the support frames and its respective trailer support may be selectively vertically raised or vertically lowered in relation to the mast to which the support frame is moveably attached.
3. The trailer stacking device of claim 1 wherein at least one of the masts is a moveable mast that includes means for movement to a desired location such that the moveable mast may be positioned at a desired distance apart from the other mast in order to accommodate various lengths of trailers to be stacked. The mast can be moved to whatever
Claim(s) 1, 3, 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a1) as being anticipated by Smith et al 2020/037354 A1.
Smith et al disclose the claimed invention as recited in claims as shown below:
1. A trailer stacking device for lifting and stacking trailers comprised of: two masts 12 is four mast as shown in Fig.1; two support frames 20 on each; two trailer supports 18 on each ; wherein each of the support frames is moveably attached to a respective mast; wherein each of the trailer supports is attached to a respective support frame; wherein each of the support frames and its respective trailer support may be selectively vertically raised or vertically lowered in relation to the mast to which the support frame is moveably attached.
3. The trailer stacking device of claim 1 wherein at least one of the masts is a moveable mast that includes means for movement to a desired location such that the moveable mast may be positioned at a desired distance apart from the other mast in order to accommodate various lengths of trailers to be stacked. The mast can be moved to whatever
8. A trailer stacking device for lifting and stacking trailers comprised of: four masts12 is four mast as shown in Fig.1;; four support frames 20 on each; four trailer supports 18 on each; wherein each of the support frames is moveably attached to a respective mast;
wherein each of the trailer supports is moveably attached to a respective support frame; wherein each of the support frames and its respective trailer support may be selectively vertically raised or vertically lowered in relation to the mast to which the support frame is moveably attached.
10, The trailer stacking device of claim 8 wherein two of the masts are stationary masts affixed to the ground and two of the masts are moveable masts that include means for | movement to a desired location such that the moveable masts may be positioned at a desired distance apart from the stationary masts in order to accommodate various lengths of trailers to be stacked. The mast can be moved to whatever
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-5, 6-7, 9, 11-14 would be allowable if the 112 rejections are overcome, 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. The 892 form discloses prior art being made of record.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE D WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4499. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6;30-4;30.
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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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.
LEE D. WILSON
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
Ldw
/LEE D WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 September 17, 2025