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 Objections
Claims 1 and 14-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 11-12, “the pair of supports” has no antecedent basis in the claims. Previously, Applicant has recited “a plurality of supports.”
In claims 14 and 15, “the distal surface of each slider member” has no antecedent basis in the claims. It appears that Applicant has intended claims 14 and 15 to each depend from claim 3. This is how the claims will be examined for the purpose of applying prior art.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuhnle (US 8,757,694).
With respect to claim 1, Kuhnle discloses a removable divider apparatus for a pickup truck bed, the apparatus comprising:
a barrier 100 comprising a pair of panels 102 and 104, each panel of the pair of panels having a first edge and a second edge as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 1 of Kuhnle:
[AltContent: textbox (second side)][AltContent: textbox (first edge)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first side)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (second edge)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
450
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
each panel of the pair of panels having a first side and a second side being positioned opposite each other and each extending between the first edge and the second edge (as indicated above), the first edges of the pair of panels being pivotably interconnected (“The left base 102 is rotatably connected to the right base 104,” Kuhnle, col. 3, lines 28-29),
the barrier being positionable in an expanded condition in which the first sides of the pair of panels are oriented coplanar with each other and face a same direction with respect to each other (as shown in Fig. 1 of Kuhnle); and
a plurality of supports 106 and 108 being coupled to the barrier, each support of the pair of supports being coupled to an associated panel (102 or 104) of the pair of panels, each support of the plurality of supports 106 and 108 being pivotable between a stored position in which the support lies against the second side of an associated one of the pair of panels 102 or 104 (as shown in Fig. 2 of Kuhnle) and a deployed position in which the support extends away from the panel (as shown in Fig. 1 of Kuhnle), the plurality of supports 106 and 108 being capable of spacing the barrier above a support surface when each support 106 and 108 of the plurality of supports is positioned in the deployed position (for example if the barrier were placed in the inverted position, as shown in Fig. 8 of Kuhnle) on a surface.
With respect to claim 2, Kuhnle discloses that the barrier is positionable in a folded condition in which the first sides of the pair of panels 102 and 104 face opposite directions with respect to each other (as shown in Fig. 2 of Kuhnle).
With respect to claim 6, this claim does not recite any further structure of the removable divider apparatus, instead, this claim recites structure of the pickup truck intended to be used with the apparatus. Since Kuhnle discloses the barrier as mentioned above with respect to claim 1, Kuhnle also meets all the structural limitations of the apparatus of claim 6.
With respect to claim 7, Kuhnle discloses that each support of the plurality of supports 106 and 108 comprises a pair of spaced legs as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 1 of Kuhnle:
[AltContent: textbox (plurality of legs)]
[AltContent: textbox (plurality of legs)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
450
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 3-5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhnle (US 8,757,694), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Payne (US 2015/0307016).
With respect to claim 3, Kuhnle discloses the claimed removable divider apparatus except for the pair of slider members. However, Payne teaches a similar removable divider apparatus including a pair of slider members 15/15, each slider member 15 of the pair of slider members being coupled to an associated panel of a pair of panels 12 and 13 (as shown in Figs. 1-2 of Payne), each slider member 15 of the pair of slider members being movable alternately toward and away from the second edge of the associated panel (as shown in Fig. 2 of Payne), the pair of slider members 15/15 being positionable to adjust a length of the barrier (Payne, paragraph [0028]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Payne with the apparatus disclosed by Kuhnle for the advantage of adjusting the total length of the barrier so that it can fit into differently sized truck beds.
With respect to claim 4, Kuhnle discloses that the length of the barrier when in the expanded condition is such that the barrier is configured to extend between a pair of sidewalls of the pickup truck bed (as shown in Fig. 20 of Kuhnle).
With respect to claim 5, Payne discloses that a distal surface of each slider member of the pair of slider members with respect to the associated panel being shaped such that the distal surface is configured to conform to an inner surface of an associated sidewall of the pair of sidewalls of the pickup truck (as shown in Fig. 5 of Payne).
With respect to claim 14 (interpreted as depending from claim 3), Payne discloses that the distal surface of each slider member 15 of the pair of slider members extends between and is oriented perpendicularly to a pair of opposing edges of the slider member as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 2 of Payne:
[AltContent: textbox (opposing edge)][AltContent: textbox (opposing edge)][AltContent: textbox (distal surface)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
256
311
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhnle (US 8,757,694), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Spehar (US 5,009,170).
With respect to claim 8, Kunle discloses the claimed removable divider apparatus except for a pair of inner supports, each inner support of the pair of inner supports being coupled to an associated panel of the pair of panels adjacent to the first edge of the associated panel and except for wherein each inner support of the pair of inner supports is couplable to an associated outer support of the pair of outer supports when the inner support and the associated outer support are positioned in the stored position such that the inner support and the associated outer support are retained in the stored position.
Kuhnle discloses that the plurality of supports 106 and 108 includes a pair of outer supports, each outer support of the pair of outer supports being coupled to an associated panel of the pair of panels adjacent to the second edge of the associated panel (as shown in Fig. 1 of Kuhnle).
Spehar teaches a similar construction that can be used as a removable divider apparatus including a pair of outer supports 30/40/30 and 30/404/30, each outer support 30/40/40 of the pair of outer supports being coupled to an associated panel 20 of a pair of panels 20 ad 20 adjacent to the second edge of the associated panel 20 (as shown in Fig. 2 of Spehar; and
a pair of inner supports 50/50/60/60/42 and 50/50/60/60/42, each inner support of the pair of inner supports being coupled to an associated panel 20 of the pair of panels adjacent to the first edge of the associated panel (as shown in Figs. 1-2 of Spehar);
wherein each inner support 50/50/60/60/42 of the pair of inner supports is couplable to an associated outer support 30/40/30 of the pair of outer supports when the inner support and the associated outer support are positioned in the stored position such that the inner support and the associated outer support are retained in the stored position.
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Spehar with the removable divider apparatus disclosed by Kuhnle for the advantage of providing additional support to the pair of panels when the apparatus is used as a table.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhnle (US 8,757,694), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Block (US 2,903,313).
With respect to claim 10, Kuhnle discloses the claimed removable divider apparatus except for the barrier lock being coupled to the barrier to selectively retain the barrier in the expanded condition.
However, Block teaches a similar apparatus including a pair of panels 34a and 38a further comprising a barrier lock 184/180/206 being coupled to the barrier to selectively retain the barrier in the expanded condition (Block, col. 5, lines 56-75 and col. 6, lines 1-25; Figs. 16-18).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Block with the removable support apparatus disclosed by Kuhnle for the advantage of the barrier lock which maintains the pair of panels in the opened/use position preventing the panels from rotating with respect to one another to a non-use orientation.
With respect to claim 11, Block teaches that the barrier lock 184/180/206 comprises a pair of brackets 180 and 206 and a lock slider 184, each bracket of the pair of brackets 180 and 206 being coupled to an associated panel of the pair of panels 38a and 34a (as shown in Figs. 16-17 of Block), the lock slider 184 being slidably coupled to and positioned within one bracket 180 of the pair of brackets, the lock slider being slidable to insert into another bracket 206 of the pair of brackets, thereby preventing the pair of panels from pivoting with respect to each other (as shown in Fig. 18 of Block).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhnle (US 8,757,694), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang (US 2024/0349883).
With respect to claim 12, Kuhnle disclose the claimed removable divider apparatus except for the plurality of support locks, each support lock of the plurality of support locks being coupled to the barrier and an associated support of the plurality of supports.
However, Yang teaches a similar apparatus with support 25/20 including a plurality of support locks 30 (Yang, paragraph [0024]; Fig. 3), each support lock 30 of the plurality of support locks being coupled to a barrier 50 and associated support of the plurality of supports 25/20.
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Yang with the removable divider apparatus disclosed by Kuhnle for the advantage of the support locks which ensure that the plurality of supports maintain the supporting position when in use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 13, and 15 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.
Claims 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection to claim 16, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the plurality of support pins, each support pin of the plurality of support pins being coupled to an associated inner support of the pair of inner supports, each support pin of the plurality of support pins being biased to engage an associated outer support of the pair of outer supports to couple the associated inner support with the associated outer support.
Claim 13 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for each support lock of the plurality of support locks comprising: a locking pin being coupled to the associated support; and a bias member being coupled to the barrier, the bias member having a hole for receiving the locking pin.
Claim 15 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the distal surface forming an acute angle with one of the pair of opposing edges and an obtuse angle with another of the pair of opposing edges.
Claims 16-18 have been indicated as allowable primarily for each support lock of the plurality of support locks comprising: a locking pin being coupled to the associated support; and a bias member being coupled to the barrier, the bias member having a hole for receiving the locking pin.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J COLILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-2157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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.
/Daniel J Colilla/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612