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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Comments
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 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.
Column and line (or Paragraph Number) citations have been provided as a convenience for Applicants, but the entirety of each reference should be duly considered. Any recitation of a Figure element, e.g. “Figure 1, element T should be construed as inherently also reciting “and relevant disclosure thereto”.
Specification
The amendment filed 10/21/25 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
FIG.4 introduces new matter into the application which was not provided in the original disclosure. Applicant is attempting to add features but does not provide a black box for all of the elements.
Claims 1 and 16 newly recite that the transmission is configured to transmit a rotational force from the manual actuation element to the carrying wheel which does not find support in the disclosure as originally presented. Applicant has not pointed to any portion of the disclosure which sets forth that a ‘rotational force’ is transmitted to the carrying wheel.
Claims 1 and 16 newly recite that the ECU is configured to control the actuator according to the detected pinch and according to the lateral inclination state which is not disclosed in conjunction in the specification as originally filed. That is, the specification appears to outline one embodiment where the ECU is capable of controlling the actuator in relation to a lateral inclination (via sensors) and in a further embodiment for the rack to be stopped when a pinch is sensed either via sensors or current resistance from the actuator. No disclosure is apparent for both configurations.
Claims 1 and 16 newly recite the actuator is “automatically controlled” when the user operates the operation unit which is not apparently supported.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10/21/25. These drawings, specifically with regard to FIG.4, are unacceptable as the figure introduces new matter into the disclosure.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 13. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
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 transmission configured to transmit a rotational force from the manual actuation element to the carrying wheel of claims 1 and 16; and the ecu which is configured to control the actuator according to the lateral inclination state and a detected pinch of claims 1 and 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). As set forth above, it is believed from the telephone interview that the drive unit is to be considered a hand turned crank/wheel such as is known from a conventional library rack system. No electrically controllable actuator is shown. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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, 16, 22-23, 28-29, and 33-40 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 16 recite a transmission configured to transmit a rotational force from the manual actuation element to the carrying wheel. This is unclear because the claim does not provide a discernable boundary on what performs the function to transmit a rotational force. There is nothing recited in the claim to explain the rotational force and it does not follow from the structure. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to draw a clear boundary between what is and is not covered by the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(g) for more information.
Claims 1 and 16 further recite the ECU is configured to control the actuator according to the detected pinch and according to the lateral inclination state is unclear because no apparent explanation is set forth in the specification for how this is accomplished. The specification, for example at [0008], states that the actuator is controlled according to the lateral inclination state of the vehicle so that the lateral inclination of the commercial vehicle becomes minimal or about zero. It is unclear how the actuator (26) which is set forth “for slidingly moving the at least two racks along the at least one guide rail” ([0008]) can impact the vehicle such that the lateral inclination thereof becomes zero. Further explanation is requested.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 16, 22-23, 28-29, and 33-40 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
the primary reason for the indication of allowance subject matter for the claims in this application is the inclusion of the specific electrically controllable actuator and electronic control unit which is configured to control the actuator (for slidingly moving the at least two racks along the at least one guide rail, [0008]) according to the detected pinch and to control the same actuator (until the lateral inclination of the commercial vehicle becomes minimal or about zero, [0008]) according to the (current) lateral inclination state of claims 1 and 16 in combination with the other elements recited which is not found in the prior art of record.
Claims 1 and 16 recite the electrically controllable actuator. The recited actuator can be controlled to both (1) adjust the sliding positioning of the racks along the guide rails within the commercial vehicle and (2) adjust a current detected lateral inclination of the commercial vehicle to attempt to maintain a lateral inclination of the commercial vehicle that is minimal or about zero. No such single electrically controllable actuator capable of accomplishing both tasks can be found in the prior art of record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) as amended have been considered but are moot.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 HILARY L GUTMAN whose telephone number is 571.272.6662. 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, PAUL DICKSON can be reached on 571.272.7742. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HILARY L GUTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights