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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 18 of claim 1, it is believed “a clamp assembly (7)” should be changed to --the clamp assembly (7)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2-3 and 6 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the intermediate bar assembly" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is believed that the assembly being referenced in this claim is “the side rail assembly”, as the side rail assembly is recited later in the claim and the figures do not indicate that the intermediate bar assembly is directly connected to the large front bar. When applying prior art, Examiner interprets this limitation as the side rail assembly.
Claim 3 contains the trademark/trade name ”Velcro”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to describe a hook and loop fastener and, accordingly, the describe is indefinite.
Claim 6 contains the trademark/trade name “torx”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to describe a star drive bolt and, accordingly, the description is indefinite.
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.
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 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninness et al. (US Pat 6,257,647) in view of Schrader et al. (US Pat 8,087,713), Dylewski, II (US PG Pub 2021/0016646), and Wolf et al. (US Pat 8,128,149).
Regarding claim 1, Ninness et al. disclose a built-in roll cover for a pickup truck 3, includes a flexible cover 1 and a support frame, wherein: the flexible cover 1 is connected with the support frame, the support frame includes a large front bar assembly 5, a side rail assembly 7 and a rear bar assembly 9, the large front bar assembly 5 is connected to the rear bar assembly 9 through the side rail assembly 7 (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 2-17); the side rail assembly 7 is connected to the car rail 17 through the clamp assembly 11 (see Figures 2 and 4; Col. 3, lines 6-8); the large front bar assembly 5 includes a large front bar 5 and a large front bar plug strip 25, the large front bar 5 is provided with a large front bar groove 27, the large front bar plug strip 25 is connected with the flexible cover 1, the large front bar plug strip 25 is engaged with the large front bar groove 27 (see Figures 2-3; Col. 3, lines 18-31); the rear bar assembly 9 is connected to the side rail assembly 7 through a rear bar fixing assembly, the rear bar fixing assembly includes a rear bar joint 9’ and a rear bar fixing base 7’, the rear bar fixing base 7’ is connected with the side rail assembly 7, the rear bar joint 9’ is engaged with the rear bar assembly 9 (see Figures 2 and 6-7; Col. 3, lines 45-56).
Ninness et al. fail to disclose that the flexible cover is a layer of leather and the clamp assembly includes a left clamp and a right clamp, the left clamp and the right clamp are connected by a clamp bolt and a T-shaped screw; the left clamp has a left clamp block in the upper part, a left connecting block in the lower part, and a nut groove in the middle; the right clamp has a right clamp block in the upper part, a right connecting block in the lower part, and a waist hole in the middle; the clamp bolt passing through the waist hole to connect the left clamp block with the right clamp block, the nut of the clamp bolt is located in the nut groove; the T-shaped screw passes through the left connecting block and the right connecting block to connect the left clamp with the right clamp, the T-shaped screw is connected with a torx nut.
Schrader et al. disclose a tonneau cover 14 made from leather (see Col. 3, lines 50-55) and secured to a bed 18 of a vehicle 20.
Dylewski, II discloses a tonneau cover 14 having a large front bar assembly 26, side rail assemblies 28, 30, and flexible panels 18, 20, 22, 24 (see Figures 1-2; Paragraphs 69-76); the side rail assemblies 28, 30 are connected to the side wall 4 of the truck 12 by a clamp assembly 156 (see Figure 7 and 28). The clamp assembly 156 includes a left clamp 350 and a right clamp 352, the left clamp 352 and the right clamp 350 are connected by a clamp bolt 336 and a T-shaped screw 348 (see Figure 28; Paragraph 134); the left clamp 352 has a left clamp block 338 in the upper part, a left connecting block in the lower part, and a nut groove 334 in the middle; the right clamp 350 has a right clamp block 328 in the upper part, a right connecting block in the lower part, and a waist hole 325 in the middle (see Figures 28-37; Paragraphs 134 and 142); the clamp bolt 336 passing through the waist hole 325 to connect the left clamp block 338 with the right clamp block 328, the nut of the clamp bolt 336 is located in the nut groove 334; the T-shaped screw 348 passes through the left connecting block and the right connecting block to connect the left clamp 352 with the right clamp , the T-shaped screw 348 is connected with a star shaped nut (see Figures 28-36; Paragraphs 134 and 138). The T-shaped screw 348 provides an adjustable means of clamping that can accommodate different vertical flanges on various truck beds (see Paragraph 134). The right connecting block has a blocking strip (see annotated Figure 28 above).
PNG
media_image1.png
494
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wolf et al. disclose a tonneau cover 120 for a truck 170 supported by side rails 103, a front rail 104 and a rear rail 102 (see Figures 1-2; Col. 2, lines 39-62). The front rail 104 is secured to the side rail 103 by a T-shaped screw 153 with a rectangular head (see Figure 3a; Col. 3, lines 18-35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the flexible cover of Ninness et al. from leather, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Schrader et al., because it is readily available and economical.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the clamp assembly of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., to include a left clamp and a right clamp, the left clamp and the right clamp are connected by a clamp bolt and a T-shaped screw; the left clamp has a left clamp block in the upper part, a left connecting block in the lower part, and a nut groove in the middle; the right clamp has a right clamp block in the upper part, a right connecting block in the lower part, and a waist hole in the middle; the clamp bolt passing through the waist hole to connect the left clamp block with the right clamp block, the nut of the clamp bolt is located in the nut groove; the T-shaped screw passes through the left connecting block and the right connecting block to connect the left clamp with the right clamp, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide an adjustable means of clamping that can accommodate different vertical flanges on various truck beds, as taught by Dylewski, II.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the T-shaped screw of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al. and Dylewski, II, as a star shaped nut, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Dylewski, II, to provide a means of adjusting the clamp without the need for special tools.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the right connecting block of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al. and Dylewski, II twice, with a blocking strip, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Dylewski, II, to make the clamp vertically and horizontally adjustable without affecting its performance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a bolt with a rectangular head as the T-shaped screw of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al, and Dylewski, II thrice, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Wolf et al., to reduce the instance of unwanted rotation and tightly secure the T-shaped screw in place.
Regarding claim 6, Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., disclose a built-in roll cover according to claim 1, wherein, the rear bar joint 9’ is provided with a convex part 45, the rear bar fixed base 7’ is provided with a concave part 33, the convex part 45 matches the concave part 33 (see Col. 3, lines 45-56).
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., in view of Garska (US PG Pub 2013/0341960).
Regarding claim 2, Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., disclose the built-in roll cover according to claim 1.
Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., fail to disclose the large front bar is connected to an intermediate bar assembly through a front bar fixing assembly, the front bar fixing assembly includes a front bar fixing joint and a fixing base; the front bar fixing joint is provided with a first insertion part and a second insertion part, the first insertion part is plugged with the large front bar, the second insertion part is plugged with the fixing base and the fixing base connected to the side rail assembly by fixing screws.
Garska discloses a tonneau cover assembly 30 having a support frame with a front bar assembly and a side rail assembly. The front bar assembly has a front bar 40 which is connected to the side rail assembly 38 through a front bar fixing assembly 62 (see Figures 1-2 and 12-14; Paragraph 32), the front bar fixing assembly 62 includes a front bar fixing joint 66 and a fixing base 64 (see Figure 14); the front bar fixing joint 66 is provided with a first insertion part 61 and a second insertion part, the first insertion part 61 is plugged with the large front bar 71, the second insertion part is plugged with the fixing base 64 and the fixing base 64 connected to the side rail assembly by fixing screws 63 (see Figure 14, annotated Figure 14 below; Paragraphs 33-38). The corner bracket is able to pivot to enable users to adjust the angle for different vehicle uses (see Paragraph 33).
PNG
media_image2.png
635
436
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the large front bar of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., to an intermediate bar assembly through a front bar fixing assembly that includes a front bar fixing joint and a fixing base, with a reasonable expectation of success, to enable users to adjust the angle for different vehicle uses by pivoting, as taught by Garska.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the front bar fixing joint of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al. Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., and Garska, with a first insertion part and a second insertion part, so that the first insertion part is plugged with the large front bar and the second insertion part is plugged with the fixing base and the fixing base connected to the side rail assembly by fixing screws, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide a secure means of connecting the bar assemblies that is also able to be adjusted for use on different vehicles, as taught by Garska.
Regarding claim 5, Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., and Garska twice, disclose the built-in roll cover according to claim 2, wherein, the side rail assembly 7 is connected with an intermediate bar assembly 21 (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 2-12), the intermediate bar assembly 21 includes an intermediate bar 21 and an intermediate bar joint 31, both ends of the intermediate bar 21 are connected to the side rail assembly 7 through the intermediate bar joints 31 (see Figures 2 and 4; Col. 3, lines 32-44), the central part of the intermediate bar 21 protrudes upwards (see Figures 2 and 4; Col. 3, lines 9-12).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., in view of Verkindt et al. (US Pat 4,991,640).
Regarding claim 3, as understood, Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., disclose the built-in roll cover according to claim 1, wherein, the side rail assembly 7 includes a plurality of side rails 7 located on both sides of the car rail 17 (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 6-16), the side rails 7 are set longitudinally along the car body (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 6-16), the large front bar 5 is connected with the side rail 7 near the end of the car cab 15 (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 18-44), the rear bar assembly 9 is connected with the end of the side rail 7 close to the tail 23 of car (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 45-53).
Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., fail to disclose the layer of leather is connected to the side rail through a hook and loop fastener.
Verkindt et al. disclose a tonneau cover having a flexible cover 22, a support frame 20 and a fastening system to secure the flexible cover 22 to the support frame 20 (see Figure 1; Col. 3, line 65-Col. 4, line 4). The fastening system includes a bar groove 40 and a plug strip 43 in addition to a hook and loop fasteners 34, 44, 46, 48 (see Figure 4; Col. 4, lines 59-68). The fastening system provides a secure means of fastening that is resistant to “wind whip buffeting and separation by the wind generated by the vehicle’s movement” (see Col. 4, lines 63-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the layer of leather of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., to the side rail using a hook and loop fastener, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide a secure means of fastening that is resistant to wind whip buffeting and separation by the wind generated by the vehicle’s movement, as taught by Verkindt et al..
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., and Verkindt et al., in view of Wheatley et al. (US Pat 7,188,888).
Regarding claim 4, Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., and Verkindt et al., disclose the built-in roll cover according to claim 3.
Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., and Verkindt et al., fail to disclose the side rail 7 comprises a first side rail and a second side rail, the first side rail and the second side rail are connected with each other through an intermediate connecting block, the intermediate connecting block is provided with a slot, and both ends of the intermediate connecting block are respectively connected to the first side rail and the second side rail through bolts.
Wheatley et al. disclose a built-in roll cover for a pickup truck, comprising a flexible cover 14 and a support frame 16, wherein: the flexible cover 14 is connected with the support frame 16, the support frame 16 includes a large front bar assembly 20, a side rail assembly and a rear bar assembly 32, the large front bar assembly 20 is connected to the rear bar assembly 32 through the side rail assembly (see Figure 1; Col. 4, lines 34-46); wherein the side rail assembly is connected to the car rail 108, 110 through the clamp assembly 300 (see Figure 7; Col. 7, lines 16-29); the side rail assembly includes a plurality of side rails 22, 34, 44 located on both sides of the car rail 108, 110; wherein, the side rail 22 is connected to side rail 34 by an intermediate connecting block 400, the intermediate connecting block 400 is provided with a groove 430, or “slot”, the intermediate connecting block 400 is fixedly connected to the side rail 22, 34 (see Figures 1 and 14-25; Col. 9, lines 34-61; Col. 10, lines 21-31). A bolt 204 is used to fixedly connect members of the front latch assembly 200 (see Col. 6, lines 50-54). The plurality of side rails 22, 34, 44 in the side rail assembly allows for the cover to be folded while remaining attached to the side rail assembly (see Col. 4, lines 34-52)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the side rail assembly of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., and Verkindt et al., to include a first and second side rail located on both sides of the car rail and connected by an intermediate connecting block, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow the cover to be folded while remaining connected to the side rail assembly, as taught by Wheatley et al..
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the intermediate connecting block of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., Verkindt et al., and Wheatley et al., with a slot, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow an interlocking configuration between the first side rail and the second side rail that enables folding of the side rail assembly, as taught by Wheatley et al..
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the intermediate connecting block of Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, Wolf et al., Verkindt et al., and Wheatley et al. twice, to the side rail using bolts, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Wheatley et al., to provide a fixed connection means that is well known, economical and easy to implement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 22, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 6 of Remarks, filed July 22, 2025, Applicant writes “deletes the trademarks ‘Velcro’ and ‘Torx’ in the claims”; however, “torx” is used in claim 1 and “Velcro” is used in claim 3 of the amended claim language, therefore the rejection is maintained.
On pages 8-9 of Remarks, filed July 22, 2025, Applicant asserts that the clamp assembly of Dylewski, II is distinct from the clamp assembly presented by Applicant and points to the nut groove as being a distinguishing feature. While Examiner agrees that the nut groove of Dylewski, II is distinct from the nut groove presented by Applicant, the claim language does read over the Dylewski, II reference and does not capture the distinct features that are pointed to in the arguments presented by Applicant. The claim language of claim 1 recites “a nut of the clamp bolt is located in the nut groove”, which is met by the Dylewski, II reference, making the rejection appropriate. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 as being anticipated by Ninness et al., as modifed by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., is maintained. Examiner would urge Applicant to include language discussing the nature and structure of the nut groove to limit rotation of the nut as presented in the Remarks to overcome the current rejection.
On page 10 of Remarks, filed July 22, 2025, Applicant asserts that blocking strip of Dylewski, II is distinct from the blocking strip presented by Applicant. While Examiner agrees that the blocking strips are different, the claim language does not recite a specific structure or purpose of the blocking strip, thus, any structure that blocks could be applied to read on the claim language, making application of the Dylewski, II reference appropriate. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 as being anticipated by Ninness et al., as modified by Schrader et al., Dylewski, II thrice, and Wolf et al., is maintained. Examiner would urge Applicant to include language describing the structure of the blocking strip and its interaction with the rectangular head in the claim language to overcome the current rejection.
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 VERONICA M CONDO whose telephone number is (571)272-9415. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-3pm EST.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at (571) 270-5500. 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.
/VERONICA M CONDO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights