DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after May 19, 2022, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 18, lines 1-2: “from the locking position to the locking position” should read “from the locking position to the unlocking position”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 20, lines 1-2: “the latch portion includes has a landing surface” should read “the latch portion includes . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 31 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 30. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). 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.
Claims 14-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Brooks et al. (US PUB. 20150210487 A1; hereinafter, “Books”).
Regarding claim 14, Brooks discloses: a locking apparatus (restraint 10; fig. 1-18) for locking to a movable frame (“RIG” 20; [0024]), comprising:
a base (39, fig. 1);
a latch hook (18, fig. 1) pivotable (via pivotal axis 38, fig. 1; [0025]) relative to the base (39) about a pivot pin (“shaft” 42; fig. 1; [0025]) extending in a transverse direction (fig. 1 shows in transverse direction) between a locking position (fig. 4) and an unlocking position (fig. 3); and
a latch apparatus (stop 26 or 26a or 26b [figs. 12, 15 and 16] and actuator 44 constitute a latch apparatus; [0025]) adapted to block the latch hook (via stop 26) on the base (39) in the locking position (position of fig. 4);
wherein the latch hook (18, fig. 1) includes a latch portion (30, fig 9) and a control portion (“via actuator 44 or 44a”, figs. 1 or 15), the latch portion (30) including a capture contour (contour of 80; fig. 8) adapted to receive a profile (figs. 8-9) of the frame (“framework” and [para. 0023 discloses: “the term, "RIG" encompasses the horizontal impact bar plus the framework or structure that connects the bar to the rest of the vehicle 12”]) in the locking position (position of fig. 4);
wherein the latch hook (18) is adapted to pivot (via shaft 42 at pivotal axis 38, fig. 1) from the unlocking position to the locking position (figs. 3 and 4 for unlocking to locking position) in response to a locking force (lifting force; [0029]) applied to the control portion (44, and para. 0027 discloses that the control portion 44 subsequently lifts the stop 26 to its holding position; thus, applied to the control portion); and
wherein the latch apparatus (26) is adapted to move into a blocking position (fig. 4 and [0027]) to automatically (via stop 26) block the latch hook (18) in response to the locking position being reached (see position in fig. 4).
Regarding claim 15, Brooks further discloses that the latch hook (18) is adapted to pivot (via shaft 42 at pivotal axis 38, fig. 1) from the locking position (fig. 4) to the unlocking position (fig. 3) in response to the latching apparatus ( stop 22 and actuator 44) moving out ( fig. 3 shows moving out) of the blocking position and in an absence of a locking force (“back down force”; [0030]) on the control portion (44) [ para. 0030 discloses that motor rotates the barrier 18 freely
(equivalent to in an absence of a locking force) back down from its first blocking position (fig. 7) to its stored position (figs. 3 and 4); thus, in an absence of a locking force by back down force; on the control portion.]
Regarding claim 16, Brooks further discloses that the latch portion (30, fig 11) extends at least approximately perpendicular (fig. 11 shows at least approximately perpendicular; also see 112(b) rejection above) to the control portion (44; see fig. 13).
Regarding claim 17, Brooks further discloses that the latch portion (30) extends perpendicular (fig. 3 shows latch portion extends perpendicular) to the control portion (44).
Regarding claim 18, Brooks further discloses that the latch hook (18) is adapted to pivot (via shaft 42 at pivotal axis 38, fig. 1) from the locking position (fig. 4) to the unlocking position (fig. 3 position) by a gravitational force (“freely”; [0030]) acting on the latch hook (18) and/or the latch portion (30).
Regarding claim 19, Brooks further discloses that the latch hook (18) is adapted to pivot (via shaft 42 at pivotal axis 38, fig. 1) from the locking position (fig. 4) to the unlocking position (fig. 3 position) by a spring force (fig. 12 and [0026]) acting on the latch hook (18) [ para. 0026 discloses: “one or more springs 40 that urge the main body 39 upward, and a shaft 42 pivotally connecting the barrier 18 to the main body 39 such that the barrier 18 can rotate about the axis 38 relative to the main body 39”; thus, the latch hook is adapted to pivot from the locking position to the unlocking position by a spring force acting on the latch hook.)
Regarding claim 20, Brooks further discloses that the latch portion (30) includes extending inclined) to a longitudinal direction (fig. 6 and arrow 68 configuration shows to a longitudinal direction) and inclined to a vertical direction (with respect to vertical dock face 14, inclined to a vertical direction as depicted in fig. 6).
Regarding claim 21, Brooks further discloses that the control portion (44) includes a control contour (control contour 94 of 44a, fig. 13) adapted to interact with the latch apparatus (stop 26 or 26a or 26b [figs. 12, 15 and 16] and actuator 44 constitute a latch apparatus; [0025]) to move the latch apparatus out of the blocking position (see fig. 15) during a pivot movement
(via shaft 42) of the latch hook (18) from the unlocking position into the locking position (figs. 814 to fig. 15 position).
Regarding claim 22, Brooks further discloses that the control contour (control contour 94 of 44a, fig. 13) is adapted to interact with the latch apparatus (26a and 44a constitute a latch apparatus, fig. 15) to move the latch apparatus into the blocking position (fig. 15) in response to the locking position being reached (fig. 15 locking position).
Regarding claim 23, Brooks further discloses that the control portion (44a and 26a) includes a bore (bore at 96) adapted to interact with the latch apparatus to engage a latch pin (pin 96, [0033]) of the latch apparatus into the bore (bore of 96) in response to the latch hook (18) being in the locking position (fig. 15) and the latch apparatus being in the blocking position (see fig. 15 where pin 96 is engaged in the locking position and the latch being in the blocking position); also [para. 0033 discloses: “in the illustrated example, an actuator 44a pivots the member 94 about a pin 96 supported by a main body 39a such that the actuator 44a pivots the stop 26a between a release position (fig. 14) and a holding position (fig. 15”); thus, the latch apparatus to engage a latch pin of the latch apparatus into the bore in response to the latch hook being in the locking position and the latch apparatus being in the blocking position.])
Regarding claim 24, Brooks further discloses that the latch apparatus (stop 26 or 26a or 26b [figs. 12, 15 and 16] and actuator 44 constitute a latch apparatus; [0025]) is movable in the transverse direction, and the bore extends in the transverse direction (see figs. 14 and 15 where bore and latch apparatus, both extends in the transverse direction.)
Regarding claim 25, Brooks further discloses that the latch apparatus (26a and 44a including 96 and 94, fig. 14) is movable out of the blocking position (fig. 14 position) against a spring force (via return spring 920, fig. 9) [para. 0027 discloses that the spring 40 holds the main body 39 at a raised preparatory position (equivalent to the blocking position) to receive the RIG 20.]
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 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brooks in view of Harrington. (US PAT. 8596949 B2).
Regarding claim 26, Brooks does not appear to teach that the latch hook includes a sensor adapted to detecting a profile of the frame; however,
Harrington in another ‘constant torque vehicle restraint’ similar to Brooks teaches that a sensor (“a sensor”; [col. 6, lines 1-5]) adapted to detecting a profile of the frame [ col. 6, line 1-5 teaches: “sensor activates when the hook 50 reaches its uppermost position 69 to indicate that the hook did not engage the ICC bar 5 to lock the trailer to the loading dock 10”; thus, latch hook includes a sensor adapted to detecting a profile of the frame.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a sensor adapted to detecting a profile of the frame as taught by Harrington into the locking apparatus of Brooks in order to advantageously optimize the system where their combination represents no more than the predictable use of prior-art elements according to their established function. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such sensors are routinely adapted for different target surfaces, geometries, or profiles through straightforward adjustments such as repositioning, modifying the detection threshold, or integrating the sensor into an alternative mounting structure. As such, the reference provides sufficient teaching, or motivation to adapt the disclosed sensor to perform the claimed detection function and doing so would have constituted the predictable use of known sensor technology to achieve an expected result.
Claims 27-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brooks in view of Blum et al. (US PAT. 10507733 B2; hereinafter, “Blum”).
Regarding claim 27, Brooks further discloses a system (vehicle restrain system 10 with actuator 44 and drive unit 50; [0027]; note that any vehicle constitutes some system when associated with motor or electrical means]), comprising:
a driverless transport vehicle, including: a drive device (drive unit 50; [0027];
an electrical energy store adapted to supply power to the drive device [ para. 0027 discloses that the latch apparatus (44 holds the stop 26) at its release position, and a drive unit 50 (e.g., hydraulic motor, electric motor, hydraulic cylinder, etc., as shown in fig. 5) retracts the latching hook 18 to its stored position relative to the base 39]; and
at least one locking apparatus (10 or 10a or 10b) as recited in claim 14.
Brooks discloses the locking apparatus, drive unit, but does not appear to explicitly disclose a drive less transport vehicle that includes at least one locking apparatus and a control unit (“control panel”, fig. 1) adapted to control the drive device (50); however,
Blum teaches a drive less transport vehicle (“self-driving and /or remotely controlled vehicle”, col 2, line 50-55) that includes at least one locking apparatus [ col 2. Line 50-55 teaches that a self-driving and/or remotely controlled vehicle and to control the coupling device (locking apparatus) for automated electrical coupling of the electrically drivable motor vehicle.]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the modified Brooks to integrate the teaching of Blum and thereby incorporate a known locking apparatus of Brooks into a drive less transport vehicle of Blum in order to advantageously optimize the system as well as mechanism to align to the present technology where their combination represents no more than the predictable use of prior-art elements according to their established function.
Regarding claim 28, Brooks as modified above further teaches that the vehicle includes a support surface (ramp portion 58, 60 and track 36, fig. 2 and [0028]) adapted to receive goods (RIG 20, fig. 2) to be transported by the vehicle (vehicle) [para. 0028 discloses: “In cases where the RIG 20 is exceptionally low, an articulated lead-in ramp extension 60 is used in some examples to guide the RIG 20 onto the ramp 58; the vehicle includes a support surface adapted to receive goods, such as RIG 20 to be transported by the vehicle.]
Regarding claim 29, Brooks as modified above further teaches that the vehicle includes a plurality of rollers (“set of rollers” 62 on the base 39; [0028]) arranged below the support surface (“below the truck bed”, [0002]) and adapted to roll on a floor (Truck is intended to roll on a floor), the rollers rotatable about a rotation axis parallel to the floor and pivotable about a pivot axis perpendicular to the floor (Truck rollers or wheels have rotation axis parallel to the floor and pivotable about a pivot axis perpendicular to the floor); also [para. 0002 teaches that a safe practice to help restrain the truck from accidentally moving too far away from the dock. This is often accomplished by a hook-style vehicle restraint that engages what is often referred to in the industry as a truck's ICC bar (Interstate Commerce Commission bar) or RIG (Rear Impact Guard). An I CC bar or RIG comprises a bar or beam that extends horizontally across the rear of a truck, below the truck bed; thus, a plurality of rollers is arranged below the support surface and adapted to roll on a floor
Regarding claim 30, Brooks as modified above further teaches that the locking apparatus is attached to a column (14, [0023]) that extends perpendicular to a floor (fig. 5 shows 14 extends perpendicular to a floor) on which the vehicle is movable [para. 0023 discloses: “from a dock face 14 of a loading dock 16 while cargo is being added to and/or removed from the vehicle 12; thus, the locking apparatus is attached to a column that extends perpendicular to a floor on which the vehicle is movable.]
Regarding claim 31, Brooks as modified above further teaches that the locking apparatus is attached to a column (14, [0023]) that extends perpendicular to a floor (fig. 5 shows 14 extends perpendicular to a floor) on which the vehicle is movable [para. 0023 discloses: “from a dock face 14 of a loading dock 16 while cargo is being added to and/or removed from the vehicle 12; thus, the locking apparatus is attached to a column that extends perpendicular to a floor on which the vehicle is movable.]
Regarding claim 32, Brooks as modified above further teaches that the support surface (surface of 39 or surface of 14, fig. 5) includes a plurality of profiles (fig. 5 shows plurality of profiles- 36, 62, 40) that are joined and/or welded together [ para. 0026 teaches that a support surface 39 comprising the plates 32, 34 mounted for vertical travel; note that: “mounted” as depicted in fig. 5 is interpretated to have fasteners.]
Regarding claim 33, Brooks as modified above further teaches that the profiles (36, 62, 40; fig. 5) are arranged around a perimeter of the support surface (14, fig. 5; also [ as shown in fig. 5, profiles 36, 62, 40 are arranged around the perimeter of the support surface 14.])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US PAT. 5052200 A to Claar discloses: A locking device for lock components, for example on vehicles, with two rotary closures which are arranged at a distance from one another and are connected by means of a mechanical transmission element to form a synchronously rotating closure unit and which interact with two catch bolts assigned to the two rotary closures, each located in a housing having an orifice adapted to receive the catch bolts.
US 20170066607 A1 to Timothy discloses: this invention relates to restraining hooks for impactable vehicle rotating hook style vehicle restraints for use at loading docks. Impactable, rotating hook style vehicle restraints are used as a safety precaution to keep a parked vehicle from prematurely departing loading docks.
US 6033174 A to James discloses: a vehicle restraint having a fixed member such as a frame mounted to a dock face and a hook movable relative to the fixed member for engaging a portion of a vehicle and restraining movement of the vehicle away from the dock. A non-contact sensor is employed to determine engagement of the hook with a portion of the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NABIN KUMAR SHARMA whose telephone number is (703)756-4619. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday: 8:00am - 5 PM 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, Neacsu Valentin can be reached on (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.
/NABIN KUMAR SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611