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 § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an
application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kamemizu (US 7,219,939).
In re claim 1, Kamemizu discloses a fairing assembly, comprising: a fairing body (34); and a storage compartment (191) attached to the fairing body (via fixed rails 200), the storage compartment including a frame housing (197) serving as a load-bearing structural member of the fairing body, the frame housing including an upper frame housing member (upper portion of 197 as shown in Figure 12) and a lower frame housing member (lower portion of 197 as shown in Figure 12) that collectively define an interior space; and a retractable drawer (195) defining a storage space sized to receive one or more items therein, the retractable drawer being mounted in the interior space for movement in a longitudinal direction relative to the frame housing between a closed position (as shown in Figure 11) and an open position (as shown in Figure 17); further comprising one or more bias members (212), connected at one end to the retractable drawer and an opposite end to the lower frame housing member, and operable to advance the retractable drawer between the closed position and the open position (see column 3, lines 26-30).
In re claim 8, Kamemizu discloses a fairing assembly, comprising: a fairing body (34); and a storage compartment (191) structurally integrated with the fairing body (via fixed rails 200), the storage compartment including a frame housing (197) serving as a load-bearing structural member of the fairing body, the frame housing including an upper frame housing member (upper portion of 197 as shown in Figure 12) and a lower frame housing member (lower portion of 197 as shown in Figure 12) that collectively define an interior space; and a retractable drawer (195) defining a storage space sized to receive one or more items therein, the retractable drawer being mounted in the interior space for movement in a longitudinal direction relative to the frame housing between a closed position (as shown in Figure 11) and an open position (as shown in Figure 17); further comprising one or more bias members (212), connected at one end to the retractable drawer and an opposite end to the lower frame housing member, and operable to advance the retractable drawer between the closed position and the open position (see column 3, lines 26-30).
In re claims 4 and 11, Kamemizu further discloses a latch member (210) attached to the retractable drawer and moveable by engagement of a user between a latched position to initiate movement of the retractable drawer from the closed position to the open position (column 13, line 63 to column 14, line 18).
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.
Claims 2, 3, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamemizu in view of Munro (US 10,351,066).
In re claims 2, 3, 9, and 10, Kamemizu further discloses wherein the retractable drawer comprises sidewalls having rails (198a) extending in a longitudinal direction along an outer surface thereof to facilitate movement of the retractable drawer between the closed position and the open position, the track having a guide track (200) mounted on an inner surface of sidewalls of the upper frame housing member, operatively connected to the track on the drawer.
Kamemizu does not disclose wherein the track is a gear track comprising one or more rotational gear dampers to provide resistance against the movement of the retractable drawer member between the closed position and the open position
Munro, however, does disclose a vehicle mounted drawer (34) having side panels (33) with a gear track (41, 43) to provide resistance (via dampening device 40) against the movement of the retractable drawer member between the closed position and the open position (column 5, lines 51-59).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the track of Kamemizu such that it comprised the dampened gear track of Munro to resist movement of the drawer when not desired.
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamemizu in view of Wymore (US 2018/0072254).
In re claims 5 and 12, Kamemizu further discloses wherein the upper frame housing has a rear wall and the drawer has a rear wall (as shown in Figure 11), but does not disclose further comprising one or more bumper members mounted on a rear wall of the retractable drawer, and operable to engage the rear wall of the upper frame housing when the retractable drawer is advanced to the closed position.
Wymore, however, does disclose a vehicle drawer (200) having rubber bumpers to absorb heavy impacts from closing the drawer (see [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the track of Kamemizu such that it comprised the rubber bumpers of Wymore to absorb heavy impacts from closing the drawer. It would have further been obvious to place the bumpers between the rear walls of the drawer and frame housing since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-18 and 20 are allowed and Claim 7 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 specific limitations of “the upper frame housing member having an upper wall with an exterior surface that includes one or more load-bearing exterior structural rib members to bear loads applied to the fairing body, and a retractable drawer defining a storage space sized to receive one or more items therein, the retractable drawer being mounted in the interior space for movement in a longitudinal direction relative to the frame housing between a closed position and an open position, and one or more bias members, connected at one end to the retractable drawer and an opposite end to the lower frame housing member, and operable to advance the retractable drawer between the closed position and the open position” is not anticipated or made obvious by the prior art of record in the examiner’s opinion. The Examiner notes that the prior art does not teach an upper wall of the upper frame housing member having an exterior surface having at least one load-bearing structural rib member that bears fairing body loads in combination with a biasing member connected to the drawer and the lower frame housing to bias the drawer into the open position.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the base reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael R Stabley whose telephone number is (571)270-3249. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5:30.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached on (571) 272-6265. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/MICHAEL R STABLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611