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 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “said termination of said back side of said outer wall said defines a track opening” in the second line, should read “and said termination of said back side of said outer wall define a track opening”. 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gredler (US 2017/0334495 A1) hereinafter, Gredler.
Regarding claim 1, Gredler teaches a crawler track cover device for inhibiting debris from falling off of a track (12) of a crawler (T) when the crawler is being transported on a trailer (Figure 1 and paragraph [0029]), said device comprising:
a cover (10) having an outer wall (14) which is elongated along a longitudinal axis of said cover such that said cover has an oblong shape thereby facilitating said cover to conform to the shape of a track on a crawler vehicle (Figure 1), said cover being comprised of a resilient and tear resistant material thereby facilitating said cover to inhibit debris from being dislodged from said track when said cover is positioned over said track wherein said cover is configured to inhibit the debris from striking a vehicle on a roadway when said crawler vehicle is being transported on a trailer (Figure 1, paragraph [0025]- [0026], [0029], and [0032]); and
an elastomeric tube (34; sleeve 34 is part of the bag 10 which is composed of an elastomeric material (silicone), paragraph [0025], [0030], and Figure 3) being attached to said cover for biasing said cover to close around said track when said cover is positioned over said track (paragraph [0029] and Figure 6A).
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) 2-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gredler (US 2017/0334495 A1) in view of Johnson (US 2004/0263941 A1).
Gredler teaches that said cover has a lateral wall (121) lying on a plane being perpendicularly oriented with said outer wall (Figure 1 Annotated);
said lateral wall has a perimeter edge which has a lower side extending between a front curve (122) and a back curve (123).
However, Gredler does not teach that said perimeter edge has a back side extending between said back curve and a top curve.
Johnson teaches that said perimeter edge has a back side (201) extending between said back curve and a top curve (202);
said perimeter edge has an upper side (203) extending between said top curve and said front curve (Figure 8 Annotated);
said upper side slopes downwardly between said top curve and said front curve such that said lateral wall defines an approximately triangular shape with rounded corners; and
said lateral wall is elongated between said front curve and said back curve (Figure 8 Annotated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Gredler’s assembly, in view of Johnson, with a triangular shape cover, to accommodate different sizes and shapes of tracks.
PNG
media_image1.png
606
561
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
533
857
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, modified Gredler teaches that said outer wall has an upper side (141) intersecting said upper side of said perimeter edge of said lateral wall;
said outer wall has a back side (142) which intersects said back side of said perimeter edge of said lateral wall;
said outer wall has a front side (143) which intersects said front curve of said perimeter edge of said lateral wall;
said cover has a lateral panel (16) lying on a plane being oriented parallel to said lateral wall;
said lateral panel has a lower edge which has a lower side (161) extending between a forward side (162) and a rear side (163) of said lower edge, said lower side of said lower edge being spaced from and extending along a line being oriented parallel to said upper side of said outer wall (Annotated Figure 2A);
said rear side of said lower edge is spaced from and extends along a line being oriented parallel to said back side of said outer wall such that said rear side of said lower edge intersects a termination (21) of said back side of said outer wall; and
said forward side of said lower edge extends between said lower side of said lower edge and a termination (21) of said front side of said outer wall (Annotated Figure 2A).
PNG
media_image3.png
342
572
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, modified Gredler teaches that said termination of said front side of said outer wall said and termination of said back side of said outer wall defines a track opening in said cover for receiving said track having said outer wall resting on an outwardly facing surface of said track (Annotated Figure 2A).
Regarding claim 5, modified Gredler teaches that said outer wall has a lip (25) extending between said termination of said back side of said outer wall and said termination of said front side of said outer wall, said lip intersecting said lower side of said perimeter edge of said lateral wall (Gredler Figure 5).
Regarding claim 6, modified Gredler teaches that said elastomeric tube extends along said lip and said termination of said front side and said termination of said back side of said outer wall of said cover such that said elastomeric tube biases said track opening to close around said track when said cover is positioned over said track thereby facilitating said cover to enclose debris on said track (Gredler; Figure 3 and paragraph [0030]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gredler (US 2017/0334495 A1) in view of McCormick (US 1,696,009 A).
Gredler teaches that said elastomeric tube has a hole extending into an interior of said elastomeric tube; and
said assembly includes a pair of drawstrings (36), each of said pair of drawstrings being disposed within said elastomeric tube, each of said pair of drawstrings extending outwardly through said hole in said elastomeric tube such that an end of each of said drawstrings is exposed, said pair of drawstrings being drawable outwardly from said elastomeric tube for tightening said cover around said track for retaining said cover on said track (Figures 3, 6A, paragraphs [0030], and [0033]).
However, Gredler does not teach that said drawstring including a pair of balls each being attached to said end of a respective one of said drawstrings.
McCormick teaches that said drawstring including a pair of balls (35) each being attached to said end of a respective one of said drawstrings (page 2, lines 46-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Gredler’s assembly, in view of McCormick, with a pair of balls each being attached to said end of a respective one of said drawstrings, to prevent the strings from being accidentally drawn entirely from the cover (page 2, lines 46-50).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 are allowed.
Claim 8 is 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: Claims 8 and 9 recite a slide having each of said drawstrings sliding through said slide, said slide having a locking mechanism being biased into a locking condition for engaging said pair of drawstrings to inhibit said pair of drawstrings from sliding through said slide, said locking mechanism being actuatable into an unlocked condition to facilitate said pair of drawstrings to freely slide through said slide.
Since the prior art (e.g. Gredler) teaches cover device that lack said features, the prior art does not anticipate the claimed subject matter.
For illustration purposes, Fig 1 of the examined disclosure shows the cover, which is different than the cover taught by the prior art of record (Fig. Gredler of 1-3 and Fig. 2 of Johnson, etc.)
Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to a skilled artisan to have modified the prior art in order to arrive at the claimed invention without resorting to impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the attached PTO-892 form teach cover devices of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm.
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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611