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 .
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 threaded coupling between the handle member and the attachment head member when in a configuration for attachment to the trailer hitch as set forth in claims 1 and 16, and the opposing locking detents (150 and 608) being “selectively displaceable and removably coupled” as set forth in claim 12 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
Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claim 17 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 1-3 and 6-18 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.
Claim 5, filed 3/15/23, indicated “at least one protrusion disposed on the attachment head member and shaped and sized to be received within the at least one notch defined on the locking nut”. Claims 1 and 16 have been amended to state “a locking nut…having at least one notch formed thereon that is shaped and sized to receive the at least one notch formed on the locking nut”. i.e. the claims now state the notch is shaped and sized to receive itself instead of the protrusion. This is considered new matter.
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 and 6-15 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim has been amended at the end to state “and the attachment head member and sh.” It is unclear what the word “sh”, and in addition, what the rest of the claim is intended to state. As such the scope of the claim is unclear.
Claimed Subject Matter
Examiner can find no justification to add the protrusions to the attachment head that help turn the locking nut as previously stated in the Non-Final Office action mailed 7/29/2025. However, based on the 112(a) and 112(b) rejections set forth in this office action the claims cannot be considered allowable at this time.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Drawings
Regarding claimed subject matter not being shown.
The attachment head being threadably coupled to the handle member when the hinge member is rotatably coupled to the handle member with a pin and coupled to the lower surface of the support member as required by claims 1 and 16.
Examiner acknowledges that threads are visible in Figures 2 and 3. However, these threads are never shown as engaging the attachment head. Figures 46 and 48 of the provisional application (63/319,795) shows the rear of the attachment head as a solid plate with no opportunity for threadable engagement. No other figure can be found that identifies an alternate configuration between the handle and the attachment head. Therefore, the objection is maintained.
No arguments were directed to the subject matter of claim 12 indicated as not being shown. Therefore, the objection is maintained.
Regarding the affidavit provided by applicant. Applicant indicates the video referred to as Rockworx ‘1 was publicly available in or around March of 2023 and only available prior to this time to a “small group” and therefore not publicly available.
In April of 2022 Web.Archive.Org scraped the RockWorkx website. The scrape indicates the hyperlink for the video was available to the public. Therefore, examiner cannot ascertain the validity of applicant’s particular statement with respect to availability and as such, the date indicated by Youtube as the published date still applies. https://web.archive.org/web/20220412081553/https://www.rockworkx.com/
PNG
media_image1.png
846
1898
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s affidavit does overcome the rejection under RockWorkx ‘2
Regarding the priority date of the instant invention. As discussed above with respect to the provisional application Figures, the rear of the attachment head is solid and no threaded connection appears visible. Further, paragraph 36 of the provisional never specifically mentions a threaded connection as required. This may be a moot point however because the addition of the subject matter of claim 5 into both claims 1 and 16 further differentiates the claimed invention from the provisional. Neither the protrusions or associated apertures now claimed in claims 1 and 16 are found in the provisional application.
Conclusion
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 EDWARD F LANDRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-5567. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Marivelisse Santiago-Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761