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
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 11, 13, 14, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brallier et al. (US 2009/0200351) in view of Fletcher (4,789,195).
Brallier et al., in reference to claims 1 and 13, discloses a vehicle comprising a truck bed (52) comprising a bed deck and a storage system (50), as shown in Figures 1 and 2. The storage system (50) comprises a rack assembly comprising a housing (50) and a pivot mechanism (82,84) that is mounted to a rear pillar of the vehicle, as shown in Figures 1, 2, 9-11, and 19. The pivot mechanism (82,84) provides a fixed pivot location, as shown in Figures 1 and 2. The rack assembly pivots about the pivot location from a stowed position entirely with the truck bed (52) overhanging the bed deck, as shown in Figure 1, to an extended position at least partially out of the truck bed and overhanging a tailgate of the truck bed, as shown in Figure 2. The rack assembly is configured to pivot between the wheel wells away from the wheel well nearest the rear pillar to the extended position, as shown in Figures 1 and 2.
In reference to claims 2 and 14, the housing comprises a top wall (66) that extends parallel to the bed deck, as shown in Figures 1 and 9. A first side wall extends downward from the top wall (66) and in a vehicle lateral direction with the rack assembly in the stowed position, as shown in Figures 1 and 12. The first wall receives bracket (76), as shown in Figures 11 and 12. A second side wall extends downward from the top wall (66) and outward from the first side wall at least partially in a vehicle longitudinal direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
372
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claims 5 and 17, the housing (50) comprises a third side wall that extends downward from the top wall (66) and between the first and second side walls, as shown in Figure 12.
In reference to claims 6 and 18, the truck bed (52) comprises a wheel well and the third side wall has a wheel well recess that is sized to receive the wheel well nearest the rear pillar with the rack assembly in the stowed position, as shown in Figure 1.
In reference to claim 11, the storage system comprises a locking mechanism (80,94) to lock the housing (50) at an angular location relative to the pivot location, as shown in Figure 8A and 20 and disclosed in paragraph [0051].
However, Brallier et al. does not disclose the housing is sized and configured to extend between the wheel wells of the truck bed and alongside one of the wheel wells nearest the rear pillar in the stowed position.
Fletcher teaches forming a housing that extends above the wheel well (12) and in between the wheel wells (12) when stored alongside one of the wheel wells, as shown in Figures 1 and 5. The interior wall of the housing extends to the truck bed, as shown in Figure 5.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the housing of Brallier et al. with a width wider than the wheel well and a interior wall that extends approximately to the truck bed such that a portion of the housing is located between the wheel wells, as taught by Fletcher, with a reasonable expectation for success to increase the storage volume of the housing.
Claims 3, 4, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Brallier et al. (US 2009/0200351) and Fletcher (4,789,195), as applied to claim 2, in view of Fletcher (D305,315).
Brallier et al., as modified, does not disclose providing bins accessible along the side walls.
Fletcher teaches forming a housing with bins accessible along adjacent side walls, as shown in Figure 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide bins in the housing of Brallier et al., as modified, in the first and second side walls, as taught by Fletcher, with a reasonable expectation for success to provide storage space that organizes stored items to facilitate users quickly finding the desired stored item.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Brallier et al. (US 2009/0200351) and Fletcher (4,789,195), as applied to claim 6, in view of Crandall (7,794,003).
Brallier et al., as modified, does not disclose the claimed height.
Crandall teaches forming a truck bed housing with a height that is equal to the height of the wheel wells, as disclosed on lines 40-42 of column 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the housing of Brallier et al., as modified, with a height equal to the height of the wheel wells, as taught by Crandall, with a reasonable expectation for success to help support boards that are too wide to fit between the wheel wells.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Brallier et al. (US 2009/0200351) and Fletcher (4,789,195), as applied to claim 1, in view of Smith (US 2014/0054339).
Brallier et al., as modified, does not disclose a motor connected to the housing.
Smith teaches operatively connecting a motor to a housing to move the housing, as disclosed in paragraph [0048].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operatively connect a motor to the housing of Brallier et al., as modified, as taught by Smith, with a reasonable expectation for success to help users easily move the housing between the stowed position and the extended position.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Brallier et al. (US 2009/0200351) and Fletcher (4,789,195), as applied to claim 1, in view of Casucci et al. (8,925,777).
Brallier et al., as modified, does not disclose the track system.
Casucci et al. teaches providing a track system (64) to support a housing (20) in the extended position, as shown in Figures 1-10.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a track system to support the housing of Brallier et al., as modified, in the extended position, as taught by Casucci et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to increase the maximum payload of the housing to safely store heavy objects.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Brallier et al. (US 2009/0200351) and Fletcher (4,789,195), as applied to claim 1.
Brallier et al., as modified, does not disclose the claimed percentage of the deck occupied by the housing. The percentage is based on the size of the deck and the size of the housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the housing of Brallier et al., as modified, such that it occupies at least 30 percent of the total area of the deck bed with a reasonable expectation for success to provide sufficient space to store item.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 2/6/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 13 under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Fletcher (4,789,195).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter is: a first sidewall that extends in a vehicle lateral direction and a second sidewall that extends in a vehicle longitudinal direction with the rack assembly in the stowed position, a first end of the first sidewall and a first end of the second sidewall are joined together adjacent the rear pillar, a second end of the first sidewall and a second end of the second sidewall are connected by an arcuate wall, when viewed in plan view, which is not found in the prior art of record. If applicant adopts this language, then similar terms in the dependent claims will need to be amended.
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 GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 March 6, 2026