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 .
Election/Restrictions
claims 5, 7-14, 16-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 9/8/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19 is not disclosed. The second roof portion 43 of applicant changes from closed to open.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 15, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collyer et al. US 20220063733 in view of Kuhm et al. US 5833300.
Collyer et al. is filed as a continuation with a filing date of 3/21/2018 as has a utility vehicle body 10, ROPS structure disclosed and defining a riding space, or first region, roof 20 covering in a first state and removable from the passenger compartment shown in exploded view of figure 4 in a second state using couplers 26,32 and disclosed at paragraph 15.
Collyer et al. lacks the newly claimed section of the second state being opened with the roof attached to the body.
Prior to the filing of applicant, it was known in the vehicle roof art to attach a section of the roof or roof panel 3 via a hinged mechanism 9 to the remainder of the roof 15 allowing the roof panel to fold over the remainder of the roof, thereby allowing increased airflow and improved visibility in the first region.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in Collyer et al. the hinged roof panel 3 of Kuhm et al. for the stated reason
Claims 3-4, Collyer et al. have front cover or windshield 18, rear cover 16 covering the rear compartment and top of the compartment is covered by the roof 20.
Claim 15, Collyer et al. have right and left side covers 14 or doors.
Claim 18, Collyer et al. have tubular ROPS structure with a pair of side ROPS shown in figure 4 and extending longitudinally and the roof 20 is supported by this side ROPS in the first state with roof 20 attached and in the second open state with roof 20 of Collyer et al. as modified above with open folded panel 3 of Kuhm et al.
Claim 19, the first roof portion 20 is removable as stated above and thus changeable and the second roof portion 3 of Kuhm et al. is foldable henge changeable.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collyer et al. in view of Kuhm et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mace, EP3670222, previously cited.
Collyer et al. uses buckle attachments for the top to the ROPS. Prior to filing, it was known in this vehicle top art to attach a panel to a tubular member 100 via a panel attachment “A” and an attachment receiver 112a, 114a surrounding the tubular member as taught by Mace at paragraph 82,88. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in Collyer et al. as modified with an attachment and receiver as taught by Mace in order to dispense with buckle straps for a more secure attachment.
Response to Arguments
The argument that the roof of Collyer et al. is not supported by the side ROPS is traversed. The relationship is shown in figure 1.
No rejection based an the two part roof 22/24 was made and the argument is not relevant.
The disclosure of the attachment of coupler 26 is clear from the disclosure.
No coupler and windshield relationship was used in the rejection.
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 DENNIS H PEDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-6667. The examiner can normally be reached 4:30-1pm.
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 571-270-5550. 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.
/Dennis H Pedder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
DENNIS H. PEDDER
Examiner
Art Unit 3612
DHP
12/15/2025