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 1-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 4, it is thought that –at least one—should be added before “deflector” for consistency with the recitation of “at least one deflector device” on line 2.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong US 2013/0076066 in view of Dayton US 9,132,869 and Fish US 3,209,850.
Regarding claim 1, in the embodiment of Fig. 9, Wong discloses:
A fairing assembly for a commercial vehicle (para. [0038], line 4), the fairing assembly comprising at least one deflector device (two deflector members 22; annotated Fig. 9 below; one on each side of the trailer in a symmetrically oriented manner, comprising a driver’s side member as pointed out in annotated Fig. 9 below and a passenger’s side member (not shown), yet symmetrically disposed on the opposite side of the trailer from the driver’s side member) configured to be mounted to a body of the commercial vehicle (via C-Bracket 80 as shown in Fig. 8; see para [0058], lines 7-11) at an outer edge of the downward facing bottom surface thereof (as shown in Fig. 8) and to be arranged in front of rear wheels (the rear set of wheels shown in Fig. 6) which are naturally mounted on an axle of the commercial vehicle, wherein the deflector device (which is made up of a driver’s side deflector member and a passenger’s side deflector member) comprises at least two air guiding surfaces (one on the driver’s side deflector member facing inwardly as pointed out in annotated Fig. 9 below and one on the passenger’s side deflector member also facing inwardly and therefore facing the driver’s side deflector member) facing each other, the air guiding surfaces extending towards each other in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle towards the rear of the commercial vehicle (in that they both taper towards the longitudinal center of the trailer bottom surface as they extend rearwardly) thereby bounding at least one channel (as pointed out in annotated Fig. 2 below) for air flowing under the commercial vehicle (between the left and right sets of rear wheels as can be understood from comparing Figs. 8 and 9), the channel tapering in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle towards the rear in that the width of the channel decreases as the air guiding surfaces get closer together since they both taper towards the longitudinal center of the trailer bottom surface as they extend rearwardly.
PNG
media_image1.png
815
782
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, the embodiment of Fig. 9 of Wong discloses that the deflector members are mounted to the trailer body rather than to a frame of the commercial vehicle. Also, Wong does not disclose that the axle in front of which the deflector is arranged is a drive axle of the commercial vehicle.
Notwithstanding, Dayton discloses skirts or deflector members (96; Fig. 4; col. 7, lines 57-58) which are mounted to a frame assembly (44; Fig. 4; col. 7, line 54-58) which is mounted to longitudinal frame members (82; Fig. 4; col. 7, lines 58-62).
In addition, Fish discloses a trailer with the axle of the rearmost set of rear wheels being a drive axle (82; annotated Fig. 2 below). See col. 3, lines 39-44.
PNG
media_image2.png
449
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, 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 to mount the deflector members of the embodiment of Fig. 9 of Wong utilizing the teachings of Dayton to mount the trailer longitudinal frame members instead of to the trailer body with a reasonable expectation of success for a more solid and secure attachment since the frame supports the body. Also, 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 to construct the axle of the rearmost set of rear wheels of Wong, as modified by Dayton, to be a drive axle as taught by Fish with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide the commercial vehicle with increased power when moving heavy loads.
Regarding claim 2, Wong, as modified by Dayton and Fish, disclose:
The fairing assembly according to claim 1, as explained above, wherein the deflector device comprises at least one mounting device (the frame assembly (44; Fig. 4; col. 7, line 54-58; of Dayton) by which the deflector device is mountable to respective longitudinal members of the frame.
Regarding claim 5, Wong, as modified by Dayton and Fish, disclose:
The fairing assembly according to claim 1, as explained above, wherein the air guiding surfaces are formed by respective deflectors (one on the driver’s side deflector member facing inwardly as pointed out in annotated Fig. 2 above of Wong and one on the passenger’s side deflector member also facing inwardly and therefore facing the driver’s side deflector member) of the deflector device.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong US 2013/0076066 in view of Dayton US 9,132,869 and Fish US 3,209,850.
Regarding claim 1, in the embodiment of Fig. 4, Wong discloses:
A fairing assembly for a commercial vehicle (para. [0038], line 4), the fairing assembly comprising at least one deflector device (two deflector members as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 below; one on each side of the trailer in a symmetrically oriented manner, comprising a driver’s side member as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 below and a passenger’s side member (not shown), yet symmetrically disposed on the opposite side of the trailer from the driver’s side member) configured to be mounted to the underside of the commercial vehicle (see para. [0044], lines 3-4 and para. [0052], lines 2-3) and to be arranged in front of rear wheels (the rear set of wheels pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 below) which are naturally mounted on an axle of the commercial vehicle, wherein the deflector device (which is made up of a driver’s side deflector member and a passenger’s side deflector member) comprises at least two air guiding surfaces (one on the driver’s side deflector member facing inwardly as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 below and one on the passenger’s side deflector member also facing inwardly and therefore facing the driver’s side deflector member) facing each other, the air guiding surfaces extending towards each other in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle towards the rear of the commercial vehicle (in that they both taper towards the longitudinal center of the trailer bottom surface as they extend rearwardly) thereby bounding at least one channel (analogous to how the channel is bounded with respect to the embodiment in annotated Fig. 9 above) for air flowing under the commercial vehicle (between the left and right sets of rear wheels), the channel tapering in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle towards the rear in that the width of the channel decreases as the air guiding surfaces get closer together since they both taper towards the longitudinal center of the trailer bottom surface as they extend rearwardly. The fairing assembly comprises at least two side fairings, one on each side of the trailer as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 below.
PNG
media_image3.png
982
1223
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, the embodiment of Fig. 4 of Wong discloses that the deflector members are mounted to the underside of the trailer rather than to a frame of the commercial vehicle. Also, Wong does not disclose that the axle in front of which the deflector is arranged is a drive axle of the commercial vehicle.
Notwithstanding, Dayton discloses skirts or deflector members (96; Fig. 4; col. 7, lines 57-58) which are mounted to a frame assembly (44; Fig. 4; col. 7, line 54-58) which is mounted to longitudinal frame members (82; Fig. 4; col. 7, lines 58-62).
In addition, Fish discloses a trailer with the axle of the rearmost set of rear wheels being a drive axle (82; annotated Fig. 2 below). See col. 3, lines 39-44.
Therefore, 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 to mount the deflector members of the embodiment of Fig. 4 of Wong utilizing the teachings of Dayton to mount the trailer longitudinal frame members instead of to the underside of the trailer with a reasonable expectation of success for a more solid and secure attachment since the frame supports the body. Also, 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 to construct the axle of the rearmost set of rear wheels of Wong, as modified by Dayton, to be a drive axle as taught by Fish with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide the commercial vehicle with increased power when moving heavy loads.
Regarding claim 3, Wong, as modified by Dayton and Fish, disclose:
The fairing assembly according to claim 1, as explained above, wherein the fairing assembly comprises at least two side fairings, one on each side of the trailer as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 above.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong US 2013/0076066 in view of Dayton US 9,132,869 and Fish US 3,209,850, as applied above to claim 3 and further in view of Graham US 7,093,889.
Regarding claim 4, Wong, as modified by Dayton and Fish, disclose:
The fairing assembly according to claim 3, as explained above, where the deflector device includes two deflector members as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 above of Wong; one on each side of the trailer in a symmetrically oriented manner, comprising a driver’s side member as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 above of Wong and a passenger’s side member (not shown), yet symmetrically disposed on the opposite side of the trailer from the driver’s side member as well as two side fairings one on each side of the trailer as pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 above of Wong. A rear end of the driver’s side fairing is adjacent to a front end of the driver’s side deflector member as can be seen in annotated Fig. 4 above.
However, the manner in which the ends of the deflector member and the side fairing (pointed out in annotated Fig. 4 above of Wong) are connected, namely a fixing device, is not disclosed.
However, Graham discloses a fairing (“device 7”; Fig. 1; as disclosed in col. 3, line 18) for a commercial vehicle (1; Fig. 1; as disclosed in col. 3, line 15) including adjacent sheets (17, 18; Fig. 1) that are overlapped and secured by rivet fixing devices 29 (Fig. 5; col. 4; lines 24-27) Note that the adjacent sheets 17, 18 (Fig.1 of Graham) are analogous to the adjacent deflector device 84 (Fig. 4 of Wong) and side fairing 92 (Fig. 4 of Wong).
Therefore, 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 to provide the deflector device of Wong, as modified by Dayton and Fish, with least one fixing device, namely rivets, by which the deflector device is mounted to the side fairings as taught by Graham with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent a gap between the deflector device and the side fairings that would otherwise negatively impact the streamlining effect of the fairing assembly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The new references directly address arguments presented with respect to the prior art used in the first office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph D. Pape whose telephone number is (571)272-6664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 AM-3:30 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, 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.
/Joseph D. Pape/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612