Office Action Predictor
Application No. 18/230,116

TRAILER TESTER

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 03, 2023
Examiner
PHAN, MINH Q
Art Unit
2852
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

76%
Career Allow Rate
624 granted / 825 resolved
Without
With
+-10.6%
Interview Lift
avg trend
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
33 pending
858
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§103
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. Claims 1-13 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rybolt (US Pub. No. 2012/0146653) in view of Lietzow et al. (US Patent No. 5,198,798). Regarding claims 1-4 and 7, Rybolt teaches a trailer tester for testing a trailer plug, a trailer cable and one or more lights on a trailer, comprising: a tester plug (14) configured to be physically and electrically connected to the trailer plug; a battery receiver configured to be removably coupled to a rechargeable battery pack (para. 28); and a main body (10), including: a plurality of switches (22, 24, 26, 28 and 30), wherein each switch includes a positive terminal configured to be connected through the battery receiver to a positive voltage terminal of the rechargeable battery pack, a negative terminal configured to be connected through the battery receiver to a negative voltage terminal of the rechargeable battery pack, and an output terminal configured to be electrically connected to one of the one or more lights on the trailer through a tester cable and the tester plug (Fig. 3); wherein a first output terminal of a first switch of the plurality of switches is configured to be electrically connected to a left turn signal light of the trailer through the tester plug (Fig. 3, pin B) [claim 2]; wherein a second output terminal of a second switch of the plurality of switches is configured to be electrically connected to a left brake light of the trailer through the tester plug (Fig. 3, pin C) [claim 3]; wherein a third output of a third switch of the plurality of switches is configured to be electrically connected to a running light of the trailer through the tester plug (Fig. 3, pin E) [claim 4]; wherein each of the plurality of switches is manually switched back and forth between providing a positive voltage or a ground to a corresponding light on the trailer (para. 31) [claim 7]. Rybolt does not specifically teach a controller configured to wirelessly transmit an identification of a configuration of the plurality of switches to a mobile electronic device. Lietzow teaches a trailer tester comprises a controller (26) configured to wirelessly transmit an identification of a configuration of the plurality of switches to a mobile electronic device (the taillight module 150 is configured to provide feedback on whether the selected function has been activated, and each selected function implied a configuration(s) of at least one or more of the solid-state switches 28, col. 5, ll. 3-9). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a wireless controller as taught by Lietzow within said trailer tester in order to facilitate a wireless testing of the trailer lighting assembly. Regarding claim 5, Rybolt, as modified by Lietzow, teaches the invention as claimed in claim 4 above. Rybolt further teaches the output terminal (pin C) of the second switch is both electrically connected to both the left and the right brake light of the trailer (para. 31). The combination of Rybolt and Lietzow does not specifically teach a separate output terminal of a fourth switch of the plurality of switches is configured to be electrically connected to a right brake of the trailer, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate an additional switch to separately control the right brake light of the trailer as claimed since it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding claim 6, Rybolt, as modified by Lietzow, teaches the invention as claimed in claim 5 above. Rybolt further teaches a fifth output terminal of a fifth switch of the plurality of switches is configured to be electrically connected to a right turn signal of the trailer through the tester plug (Fig. 3, pin D). Regarding claims 8 and 17, Rybolt teaches a trailer tester, comprising: a tester plug (14) that is connected to a tester cable that is connected to the trailer tester, configured to be physically and electrically connected to a trailer plug that is connected to a trailer cable that is connected to a trailer; a battery receiver configured to be removably couple to a rechargeable battery pack (para. 28); and a main body (10), including: a switch module (Fig. 3) comprising: a positive electrical input configured to be electrically connected to a positive terminal of the rechargeable battery pack; a negative electrical input configured to be electrically connected to a negative terminal of the rechargeable battery pack; and a plurality of switches (22, 24, 26, 28 and 30), wherein each switch is capable of independently routing a positive or a negative electrical signal to a corresponding output post. Rybolt does not specifically teach a controller in electrical communication with the wireless transmitter and receiver and in electrical communication with the switch module, wherein the controller is configured to transmit an identification of a configuration of the plurality of switches to the mobile electronic device. Lietzow teaches a trailer tester comprises a controller (26) in electrical communication with the wireless transmitter (14A) and receiver (14B) and in electrical communication with the switch module (28), wherein the controller is configured to transmit an identification of a configuration of the plurality of switches to the mobile electronic device (the taillight module 150 is configured to provide feedback on whether the selected function has been activated, and each selected function implied a configuration(s) of at least one or more of the solid-state switches 28, col. 5, ll. 3-9). It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a wireless controller as taught by Lietzow within said trailer tester in order to facilitate a wireless testing of the trailer lighting assembly. Regarding claims 9-12, Rybolt, as modified by Lietzow, teaches the invention as claimed in claim 8. Lietzow further teaches the wireless transmitter and receiver is configured to wirelessly receive a new switch setting from the mobile electronic device (col. 4, ll. 23-26) [claim 9]; wherein the controller is configured to receive the new switch setting from the wireless transmitter and receiver; wherein the controller is configured to transmit the new switch setting to the switch module; wherein the switch module is configured to alter the plurality of switches to match the new switch setting (col. 5, ll. 10-24) [claims 10-12]. Regarding claims 13 and 18, Rybolt, as modified by Lietzow, teaches the invention as claimed in claim 8. Lietzow further teaches the controller is configured to receive a switch setting from the switch module (the taillight module 150 is configured to provide feedback on whether the selected function has been activated, and each selected function implied a configuration(s) of at least one or more of the solid-state switches 28, col. 5, ll. 3-9). Claim(s) 14-15 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rybolt in view of Lietzow, and further in view of Ruiz et al. (US Pub. No. 2023/0333152). Regarding claims 14-15 and 19-20, Rybolt, as modified by Lietzow, teaches the invention as claimed in claims 13 and 18, respectively. Lietzow further teaches the controller is configured to communicate the switch setting to the wireless transmitter, and the wireless transmitter is configured to transmit the switch setting to the mobile electronic device (col. 3, ll. 3-9). The combination of Rybolt and Lietzow does not specifically disclose the wireless transmitter is a wireless transmitter and receiver, however wireless transmitter and receiver is well-known in the art according to the teach of Ruiz (para. 32). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a wireless transmitter and receiver as taught by Ruiz for the separate wireless transmitter and wireless receiver in order to obtain a lighter and compact tester assembly. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rybolt in view of Lietzow, and further in view of Sarlo (US Patent No. 4,547,722). Regarding claim 16, Rybolt, as modified by Lietzow, teaches all the claimed limitations except for a fuse box electrically connected within the tester cable. Sarlo teaches a trailer tester comprising: a fuse box (Fig. 4, item 24) electrically connected within the tester cable. It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a fuse box as taught within said tester cable in order to protect the tester from overcurrent damage. Response to Arguments Applicant’s argument, filed 07/24/2025, regarding the new language has changed the grounds of rejection to include new references as cited in the claim rejection above. 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 MINH Q PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3898. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm. 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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. MINH Q. PHAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2852 /MINH Q PHAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 03, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 24, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12595876
SIX-AXIS AGILE SHOOTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591176
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TREATING A RELIEF PRECURSOR WITH LIQUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585083
LENS APPARATUS, IMAGE PICKUP APPARATUS, METHOD OF CONTROLLING LENS APPARATUS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578365
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETECTING A VOLTAGE DROP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572097
FIXING DEVICE AND IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (-10.6%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 825 resolved cases by this examiner