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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 13-21 are pending. Claims 1-12 are cancelled.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 1-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 17 December 2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 March 2023 was filed before the mailing date of the first Office Action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 13, 15-16, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chambers (US 0446326 A) in view of Charbonneau (US 7114904 B2).
In regards to claim 13, Chambers teaches a rail cleaning assembly (as seen in Fig. 1)
a frame (23, 21, 13) (Fig. 2) configured to be mounted (as seen in Fig. 2) to a cart wheel (22) that rollingly engages a rail (as seen in Fig. 3) along the length of the rail; and
at least one cleaning element (52), the at least one cleaning element (52) secured to the frame (23, 21, 13) and positioned to engage the rail (as seen in Fig. 2), thereby removing debris accumulated on the rail (pg. 3, col. 1, lines 27-29) as the wheel (22) rollingly engages the rail.
Chambers does not teach a push-back storage system.
Charbonneau teaches a push-back storage system (10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rail cleaning assembly of Chambers to include being utilized in a push-back storage system as taught by Charbonneau with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of reducing debris on the rails of a push-back system and increasing the efficiency of the carts (see Charbonneau, col. 2, lines 35-36).
In regards to claim 15, the combination of Chambers as modified by Charbonneau above teaches the rail cleaning assembly of claim 13, wherein the at least one cleaning element (52) (Chambers, Fig. 2) is configured to be positioned in front and/or behind the wheel (Chambers, as seen in Fig. 2).
In regards to claim 16, the combination of Chambers as modified by Charbonneau above teaches the rail cleaning assembly of claim 13, comprising
While Chambers does not explicitly teach a pair of cleaning elements, a first cleaning element in front of the wheel and a second cleaning element behind the wheel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a cleaning element on either side of the wheel with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of further ensuring the removal of debris from the rails, since it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B).
In regards to claim 19,
a rail cleaning assembly (as seen in Fig. 1), comprising:
a frame (23, 21, 13) (Fig. 2) mounted (as seen in Fig. 2) on one of the cart wheels (22);
at least one cleaning element (52), the at least one cleaning element (52) secured to the frame (23, 21, 13) and positioned to engage a rail (as seen in Fig. 2) of the at least at least one pair of rails, thereby removing debris accumulated on the rail (pg. 3, col. 1, lines 27-29) as the wheel (22) rollingly engages the rail.
Chambers does not teach a push-back storage system, comprising:
an elongated storing lane defining opposite front and rear ends;
at least one pair of spaced-apart parallel elongated rails extending between said front and rear ends of said storing lane and being inclined downwardly from said rear end towards said front end;
at least one cart rollably carried by said pair of rails and rollable along said pair of rails between said storing lane front and rear ends, said cart comprising a load-bearing frame rollably carrying a number of wheels each engaging a corresponding one of said rails; and
Charbonneau teaches a push-back storage system (10) (Fig. 1), comprising:
an elongated storing lane (20) (Fig. 3) defining opposite front (20a) and rear ends (20b);
at least one pair of spaced-apart parallel elongated rails (26, 28, 30, 32) extending between said front (20a) and rear ends (20b) of said storing lane (20) and being inclined downwardly (as seen in Fig. 1) from said rear end (20b) towards said front end (20a);
at least one cart (50, 52, 54, 56) rollably carried by said pair of rails (26, 28, 30, 32) and rollable along said pair of rails (26, 28, 30, 32) between said storing lane (20) front (20a) and rear ends (20b), said cart (50, 52, 54, 56) comprising a load-bearing frame (50d, 52d, 54d, 56d) rollably carrying a number of wheels (50e, 52e, 54e, 56e) each engaging (as seen in Fig. 4) a corresponding one of said rails (26, 28, 30, 32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rail cleaning assembly of Chambers to include being utilized in a push-back storage system as taught by Charbonneau with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of reducing debris on the rails of a push-back system and increasing the efficiency of the carts (see Charbonneau, col. 2, lines 35-36).
In regards to claim 21, the combination of Chambers as modified by Charbonneau above teaches the system of claim 19, comprising a plurality (Chambers, as seen in Fig. 2) of rail cleaning assemblies (52), each of the rail cleaning assemblies mounted to a different (Chambers, as seen in Fig. 2) cart wheel (22).
Claim(s) 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chambers (US 0446326 A) in view of Charbonneau (US 7114904 B2) and Bowman (US 5671838 A).
In regards to claim 14, the combination of Chambers as modified by Charbonneau above teaches the rail cleaning assembly of claim 13, wherein the at least one cleaning element (52) (Chambers, Fig. 2) comprises a base (37) and a cleaning portion (bristles of brush 52), the base (37) being secured to the frame (23, 21, 13) (Chambers, as seen in Fig. 2)
Chambers does not teach an extremity extending downwardly positioned to engage the rail.
Bowman teaches an extremity (116) extending downwardly positioned to engage the rail (102) (as seen in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rail cleaning assembly of Chambers to include an extremity extending downwardly positioned to engage the rail as taught by Bowman with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of ensuring the cleaning element contacts the rail (col. 2, lines 30-32).
In regards to claim 20, the combination of Chambers as modified by Charbonneau above teaches the system of claim 19, wherein the at least one cleaning element (52) (Chambers, Fig. 2) comprises a base (37) and a cleaning portion (bristles of brush 52), the base (37) being secured to the frame (23, 21, 13) (Chambers, as seen in Fig. 2)
Chambers does not teach an extremity extending downwardly positioned to engage the rail.
Bowman teaches an extremity (116) extending downwardly positioned to engage the rail (102) (as seen in Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rail cleaning assembly of Chambers to include an extremity extending downwardly positioned to engage the rail as taught by Bowman with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of ensuring the cleaning element contacts the rail (col. 2, lines 30-32).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to teach the combination of limitations as recited in claim 17. While the combination of Chambers as modified by Charbonneau above teaches the rail cleaning assembly of claim 13, wherein:
a) The frame (23, 21, 13) is L-shaped (Chambers, as seen in Fig. 2);
b) a first arm (13) of the frame (23, 21, 13) extends downwardly (as seen in Fig. 2) and a lower end (21) of the first arm (13) is configured to be mounted (as seen in Fig. 2) to the cart wheel (22);
c) a second arm (23) of the (23, 21, 13) frame extends perpendicularly (as seen in Fig. 2)
d) the second arm (23) of the frame (23, 21, 13) comprises a front end (24) and a back end (the end in contact with the wheel 22)
Chambers does not teach wherein the second arm is extending from the upper end of the first arm and is configured to extend over the cart wheel and wherein at least one of the front and back ends is configured to receive the base. The examiner finds no obvious reason to modify the frame of Chambers to meet the claimed limitation. Furthermore, such a modification would require an improper amount of hindsight, i.e., the modifications necessary would destroy the intended use of Chambers as positioning the second arm at the upper end of the first arm would force the base and cleaning element to no longer be in proximity to the rail.
Thus, claim 17 is non-obvious in view of the prior art of record but is still objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. Claim 18 is also non-obvious due to dependence upon claim 17, but is still objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang (CN 112523155 A) discloses a rolling brush device for snow removal.
Zhang (CN 111778913 A) discloses a track cleaning device.
Huang (CN 109572727 A) discloses a hollow iron track beam inner wall inspection maintenance car with brushes to clean.
Son (KR 20140080074 A) discloses a rail cleaning device for an overhead crane.
Evain (FR 2914611 A1) discloses a rail transit car with a cleaning brush.
Gorniak (US 6851562 B2) discloses a push back storage rack system.
Hall (US 5524776 A) discloses a low inclination push back storage rack system.
Hammond (US 5482422 A) discloses a push back storage rack.
Robertson (US 0626039 A) discloses a brush and sander system for a railcar.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WILLIAM JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11am-7pm.
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, Samuel Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/JAMES WILLIAM JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615