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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 11, and 13 – 20 have been examined. Claims 4 and 12 have been canceled by Applicant.
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 1 – 3, 6 – 9, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by
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.
Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 9, 16, and 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu-Hui et al. (2011/0285110) in view of Shellenberger (9,254,858) . In regard to claim 1, Xu-Hui discloses a wheeled carrying apparatus comprising a frame structure including a standing frame (Fig. 1, item 100), the standing frame including a leg frame (Fig. 1, item 10), a first wheel mount carrying a first wheel and pivotally connected with the standing frame, the first wheel being rotatable relative to the first wheel mount about a first wheel axis (Fig. 4, item 212), a locking assembly including a first wheel mount latch movably connected with the standing frame (Fig. 4, item 42), the first wheel mount latch being adapted to be engaged with the first wheel mount to rotationally lock the first wheel mount with respect to the standing frame, and adapted to be disengaged from the first wheel mount to unlock the first wheel mount so that the first wheel mount is rotatable relative to the standing frame for changing an orientation of the first wheel axis (Figs. 4 and 5 & paragraph 24), an actuating assembly coupled to the first wheel mount latch (Fig. 3, item 4), and a release mechanism including an operating part provided on the leg frame at a location distant from the first wheel mount latch (Fig. 1, item 45), the release mechanism being operable to cause the actuating assembly to actuate the first wheel mount latch so that the first wheel mount latch disengages from the first wheel mount (paragraph 24).
In regard to claim 2, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the release mechanism is operable to cause the actuating assembly to push or pull the first wheel mount latch so that the first wheel mount latch disengages from the first wheel mount (paragraph 24).
In regard to claim 3, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the locking assembly includes a locking spring connected with the first wheel mount latch, the locking spring being adapted to apply a biasing force for engaging the first wheel mount latch with the first wheel mount (Fig. 4, item 43).
In regard to claim 5, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the operating part is slidably of pivotally connected with the leg frame (paragraph 26).
In regard to claim 6, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the actuating assembly includes a link actuator and a linking part, the link actuator being movably connected with the frame structure, the linking part coupling the first wheel mount latch to the link actuator (Fig. 3, items 451 and 44).
In regard to claim 7, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the link actuator is movable to actuate the linking part, in particular to push or pull the linking part, and to urge the first wheel mount latch to disengage from the first wheel mount (paragraph 24).
In regard to claim 8, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the linking part includes a cable (Fig. 3 & paragraph 27).
In regard to claim 9, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the operating part is coupled to the link actuator via a cable (Figs. 3 and 4).
In regard to claim 16, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the leg frame includes a side segment and a transversal segment fixedly connected with each other, and the operating part is placed on the side segment or the transversal segment (Fig. 1, item 12 and unnumbered crossmember connecting right and left instances of item 12).
In regard to claim 19, Xu-Hui discloses wherein the actuating assembly includes a single cable having two opposite ends respectively connected with the operating part and the first wheel mount latch (Figs. 3 and 4).
In regard to claim 20, Xu-Hui discloses wherein a cavity in the standing frame has an opening that is narrower than an interior of the cavity (Figs. 1 and 3, unnumbered assembly holes for fasteners in the standing frame).
Xu-Hui does not disclose a release mechanism actuated independently from operating the handle frame. In regard to claim 1, Shellenberger discloses a wheeled carrying apparatus comprising a handle frame coupled to a standing frame (Fig. 1, item 17), and a release mechanism operable independently from operating the handle frame (Fig. 1, item 60 & column 4, lines 30 – 50).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention provide the release mechanism of Shellenberger, to the wheeled carrying apparatus of Xu-Hui, in order to allow a user to actuate the release mechanism without folding the apparatus. This increases vehicle utility/user options by allowing release both by folding the apparatus and/or manually actuating the release mechanism.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 – 11 and 13 are allowed.
Claims 14 – 15 and 17 – 18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Xu-Hui et al. (2011/0285110) discloses a wheeled carrying apparatus similar to the instant invention; however Xu-Hui, either alone or in combination, neither discloses nor suggests a wheeled carrying apparatus comprising (in regard to claim 10) a handle frame that is coupled to the standing frame via a bar linkage, the link actuator being movably connected with the bar linkage, (in regard to claim 13) wherein the release mechanism being operable to cause the first wheel mount latch to unlock the first wheel mount via a sliding contact between the ramp surface and the link actuator, (in regard to claims 14 – 15) wherein the operating part includes a barrel pivotally connected with the frame structure, and (in regard to claim 17) wherein the first wheel mount latch has an elongated shape slidably received in a cavity provided in the standing frame, the locking assembly includes a locking spring disposed inside the cavity, and the locking spring has two ends respectively connected with the side segment of the actuating assembly and the first wheel mount latch. These limitations, in combination with each and every other independent claim limitation, are not shown in the currently cited prior art.
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 JOHN DANIEL WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (PT).
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
/JOHN D WALTERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613