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 because reference numbers 416 and 4416 are both referred to as memory in Paragraph 00211. Examiner suggests amending 416 to 4416 for the purpose of clarity. Additionally, the drawings to do not contain a reference numeral 416. 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
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 6-7 recite “wherein the actuator to be activated to move the cross-frame along the track to move the lock jaw and the utility connector simultaneously”. Examiner suggests “wherein the actuator is activated”, “wherein the actuator can be activated” or equivalent for the purpose of grammatical accuracy and clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crochet (US 3981517 A).
In regards to claim 18: Crochet teaches a docking (Generally shown in Figure 5) assembly for a vehicle (10), the docking assembly comprising:
a mounting interface (32) to be coupled to the vehicle (coupled to drawbar 13); and
a receiver (19) rotatably coupled to the mounting interface (via pivot 31), the receiver rotatable about a pitch axis (axis about 31 is the pitch axis) relative to the mounting interface, the receiver being pyramid-shaped (See shape of 19 in Figure 5), the receiver to receive a plug (56) on a second vehicle (23) to mechanically couple the vehicles (See Figure 1).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alguera (US 2018/0370306 A1) in view of Luo (CN 109131415A).
In regards to claim 12: Alguera teaches a docking assembly (10) for a vehicle (Abstract: first sentence), the docking assembly comprising:
a mounting interface (26b) to be coupled to the vehicle;
an interface component (28) coupled to the mounting interface, the interface component to mate with a second interface component (17) on a second vehicle (Paragraph 158);
a utility connector (32) slidably coupled to the interface component (Paragraph 0205: “On the one hand, insertion connector component 32 is movable toward the towing vehicle under the compression of outer spring 102, and on the other hand insertion connector component 32 is movable along trajectory ST away from the towing vehicle under the compression of inner spring 100.”), the utility connector to provide at least one of an electrical connection or a fluid connection with a second utility connector on the second vehicle (Paragraph 0169); and
an actuator to move the hitch connection and the utility connector simultaneously (Paragraph 0136).
Alguera fails to teach wherein the interface component is rotatably connected to the mounting component at a joint comprising an axis and wherein the connection between the two interfaces comprises a lock jaw rotatably coupled to the mounting interface that engages a lock pin on the second interface. Rather, Alguera teaches a pintle hook and pin arrangement. However, Luo teaches a lock jaw (3 and 4) that engages a lock pin (1) wherein both the lock jaw and pin are rotatably connected (via 6 and 16 respectively) to mounting components (12 and 17). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally have a rotatable lock jaw and pin connection as in Luo with the connection mechanism of Alguera to allow for more rotational degrees of freedom thereby allowing the towed and towing vehicles to rotate relative to one another creating a smoother ride for the vehicles when traveling over uneven ground or rough terrains.
In regards to claim 14: The docking assembly of claim 12 is taught by Alguera in view of Luo. The combination further teaches wherein the interface component has a slot (slot between lock jaws 3 and 4 in Figure 2 of Luo) to receive a lock pin (1 of Luo, See Figures 1 and 2) on the second interface component (15 of Luo), and wherein the lock jaw is disposed adjacent the slot.
In regards to claim 15: The docking assembly of claim 12 is taught by Alguera in view of Luo. The combination further teaches wherein the utility connector is disposed above the interface component (See Figure 1 of Alguera wherein the utility connector is above the hitch connection components).
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crochet in view of Alguera. The docking assembly of claim 18 is taught by Crochet. Crochet fails to teach a utility connector coupled to the receiver to provide at least one of electrical connection or fluid connection with a second utility connector on the second vehicle. However, Alguera teaches first and second utility connectors (38 and 32) for creating an electrical or fluid connection between first and second vehicles (Paragraph 0169). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally have first and second utility connectors as in Alguera on the receiver and plug respectively of the first and second vehicles of Crochet to allow for electrical or fluid connection between the two vehicles thereby suiting the connection to a wider variety of needs and purposes for the user by allowing additionally versatility in functions of the towed vehicle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 are allowed. Claim 1 recites a compliance mechanism on a docking assembly that is operable between three modes: a first locked mode, a second rotatable mode with a bias toward the central position, and a third freely rotatable mode. The prior art fails to teach or suggest these three modes together. References such as Delgado (US 2020/0317008 A1) teach connections that allow for free rotation in multiple axes and locking of the rotation, but no intermediate mode that also allows for biasing. Additional art such as Richter (US 2022/0088980A1) teaches biased connections that allow for rotation and a locked configuration, but fail to teach a third mode of selectively removing the bias and allowing for free rotation. Additionally, the references relied upon in the rejections above failed to teach or suggest the three modes as recited in independent claim 1. Claims 2-11 depend from claim 1 and are also allowed.
Claims 13, 16, 17, and 19 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.
Claim 13 recites a track, a cross frame slidably coupled to the track, the utility connector coupled to the cross frame, and a link between the cross-frame and the lock jaw wherein the actuator moves the cross-frame along the track which moves the lock jaw and the utility connector simultaneously. The combination of Alguera and Luo, relied upon for the rejection of claim 12, fails to teach this limitation. It is unclear how or if the combination could be modified with the additional structure recited in the claims and there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so.
Claim 16 recites wherein the interface component is a pyramid-shaped receiver. Reference 18 of Alguera could be considered a pyramid-shaped receiver. However, reference 18 is not relied upon as the interface component in the rejection of claim 12. The rejection of claim 12 relies upon the combination of the pintle hook 28 of Alguera with rotatable connection 6 of Luo for the interface component. This is neither a receiver nor pyramid shaped. There would be no motivation to modify the arrangement of the combination of Alguera and Luo to have the interface component be a pyramid shaped receiver. Claim 17 depends from claim 16 and is also considered to have allowable subject matter.
Claim 19 recites first and second springs between the mounting interface and first and second receiver walls to bias the receiver to a central position. Claim 20 depends from claim 18. The Crochet reference used in the rejection of claim 18 fails to teach this limitation in the claims. Additionally, it is unclear how or why springs would be added to the receiver walls of Crochet. To add springs between the receiver walls (19) and the mounting interface (32) may render the connector unusable and at the very least be a nuisance to the movement of operation of the connector. Additional art failed to teach this limitation in the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Salter (US 2023/0391152 A1) teaches a hitch connection with an integral electrical connection. Vega (US 11608127 B1) teaches a hitch connection with several degrees of rotation and an electrical connection. DeLizo (US 2021/0380182) teaches a mechanical gladhand for automating the connection of utility lines between vehicles. Doran (WO 2021/089879 A1) teaches a tractor hitch assembly with a pyramid shaped receiver and pin connection. Moore (US 2021/0061376 A1) and Smith (US 2021/0053407 A1) teach an automatic coupling of air or electric lines on a tractor trailer. Lannen (US 2016/0243908A1) teaches a semi-autonomous trailer hitch with several degrees of freedom. Russell (US 2011/0175324 A1) teaches a hitch device with a lock and roll capability. Ritter (US 7828249 B2) teaches an autonomous docking system between two vehicles, specifically space or aquatic vehicles. Wulff (US 2009/0014982 A1) teaches a roll hitch using a bearing assembly. Luders (DE 20 2004 002 252 U1) teaches a hitch coupling with a utility connection arrangement. Greaves (US 6764092 B1) teaches a tow bar with adjustable pitch. Stunde (DE 102 58 065 A1) teaches a trailer coupling with integrated supply line connections. Gauvin (US 5632350 A) teaches an articulated connection between two vehicles. Embree (US 2976061) teaches a pyramid shaped hitch receiver. Minton (US 2847233 A) and Weber (US 2133065 A) teach trailer hitches with a receiver and plug connection and multiple pivot axes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL R HYMEL whose telephone number is (571)272-0389. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 7:30-4:30.
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 at (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 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.
/A.R.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU, Ph.D./Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights