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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinel US 7637480 in view of Fujita et al. JP 2001-58951 and Snell et al. GB 2145916A.
PNG
media_image1.png
237
429
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
168
364
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Weinel discloses a vehicle lifting device (10), comprising: a main body, comprising: a first section (40) capable of being removably disposed on at least a portion of a motor vehicle and capable of elevating the motor vehicle to a first predetermined angle in response to inflating the first section, such that the first section has a wedge shape to facilitate elevation of the motor vehicle to the first predetermined angle (40, see Figs. 4-5); and an air inflation unit (50) disposed on at least a portion of the first section to inflate the first section.
Weinel does not specify wherein the vehicle lifting device comprises a second section disposed on at least a portion of the first section and capable of elevating the motor vehicle to a second predetermined angle in response to inflating the second section, such that the second section has a wedge shape to facilitate elevation of the motor vehicle to the second predetermined angle, a third section disposed on at least a portion of the second section and capable of elevating the motor vehicle to a third predetermined angle in response to inflating the third section, such that the third section has a wedge shape to facilitate elevation of the motor vehicle to the third predetermined angle and a fourth section disposed on at least a portion of the third section and capable of elevating the motor vehicle to a fourth predetermined angle in response to inflating the fourth section, such that the fourth section has a wedge shape to facilitate elevation of the motor vehicle to the fourth predetermined angle; and a plurality of adjustable straps disposed on at least a portion of the first section capable of removably connecting the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section to the motor vehicle.
PNG
media_image3.png
424
544
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Fujita teaches a lifting device (1) having a plurality of inflatable wedge shaped sections (8a; see Fig. 4a, 4b above) for adjusting the lifting device to predetermined angles (6 relative to 2, see Figs. 4a and 4b above) and an air inflation unit (10) disposed on at least a portion of at least one of the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section to inflate at least one of the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section.
PNG
media_image4.png
264
466
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The prior art of Snell further teaches the use of multiple inflated lifting sections (4) wherein the lifting device is provided with adjustable straps (11) for removably coupling a lifting device (2) to an object (1) to be lifted.
It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the lifting device of Weinel to include a plurality of lifting wedge shaped sections as taught by Fujita and being provided with adjustable straps as taught by Snell in order to provide lifting the vehicle to predetermined angles by inflating the selected plurality of wedge shaped sections and further provide adjustable straps as a means for properly securing the lifting device to the vehicle while being lifted to avoid slippage.
As for claim 2, the modified Weinel teaches wherein the air inflation unit inflates the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section independently with respect to each other (Snell, pg. 1, lines 64-116).
As for claim 3, the modified Weinell teaches wherein the air inflation unit inflates the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section simultaneously (Snell, pg. 1, lines 64-116).
As for claim 4, the modified Weinell teaches wherein the air inflation unit uses at least one chemical (air) to inflate at least one of the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section.
As for claim 5, the modified Weinell teaches wherein the air inflation unit automatically inflates at least one of the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section after detecting the motor vehicle disposed on at least one of the first section, the second section, the third section, and the fourth section for a predetermined period of time (Snell, pg. 1, lines 88-116).
As for claim 6, the modified Weinell teaches a plurality of fasteners (Snell, 12) disposed on at least a portion of the plurality of adjustable straps (Snell, 11) to removably connect the plurality of adjustable straps to an object, such as a motor vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 28, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art alone or in combination fails to disclose teach or suggest the claimed invention, specifically applicant argues on pg. 7 of remarks, that the prior art fails to teach the “wedged-shaped portions that allow a motor vehicle to be lifted at various predetermined angles.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art of Weinell teaches a “wedge-shaped” portion (40) for lifting a vehicle at a predetermined angle (see Figs. 4-5). The prior art of Fujita further teaches the use of a plurality of inflatable wedge-shaped portions (8a) for lifting an object at select predetermined angles (Figs. 4a-4b) and the prior art of Snell further teaches the use of an adjustable strap for securing a lifting apparatus to an object for lifting an object. It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, that the combination of Weinell in view of Fujita and Snell teaches the claimed “wedged-shaped portions” that allow a motor vehicle to be lifted at various predetermined angles as claimed. For the above reasons, the claims do not overcome the prior art of record.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TYRONE V HALL JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5948. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at (571) 272-4475. 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.
/TYRONE V HALL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723