DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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 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 522 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.
Claims 8, 10-11, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palmer et al (US 6390761).
Regarding claim 8: Palmer discloses a bedslide assembly (Figs. 1-4; col. 1, line 37-col. 2, line 8). Palmer discloses a bottom frame 40 (Fig. 4; abstr.; col. 2, lines 62-64). Palmer discloses the bottom frame 40 includes at least one rail 41 (Fig. 4; abstr.; col. 2, lines 62-64). Palmer discloses a top frame 60 that includes at least one rail 61 (Fig. 4; abstr.; col. 3, lines 1-8). Palmer discloses a deck 81 attached to the top frame (Fig. 8; col. 3, lines 41-46). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the bottom frame engages the at least one rail of the top frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited engagement). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the top frame is slidable along the at least one rail of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited sliding engagement). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the top frame is extendable from the at least one rail of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited extendable engagement). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the bottom frame is longer than the at least one rail of the top frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited lengths – 41 longer than 61). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the top frame does not retract to a rear portion of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited retracting engagement – portion of bottom frame near 46 is exposed when the top frame is completely retracted). Palmer discloses that the top frame and the deck extend outward from the bottom frame, but do not retract over an entirety of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited engagement – portion of bottom frame near 46 is exposed when the top frame is completely retracted).
Regarding claim 10: Palmer discloses that a portion of the at least one rail of the bottom frame is exposed from the deck when the deck and the top frame are fully retracted (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited engagement – portion of rail 41 is seen near 46 when the top frame is completely retracted).
Regarding claim 11: Palmer discloses a static deck 21 that is attachable to the rear portion of the bottom frame (Fig. 4; col. 2, lines 56-59).
Regarding claim 12: Palmer discloses a second deck 21, 22 located on the bedslide assembly, that the deck and the top frame are movable with respect to the bottom frame and the second deck (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited relationship; col. 2, lines 56-59).
Regarding claim 14: Palmer discloses that the deck and the top frame are movable with respect to the bottom frame and the static deck (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited relationship).
Regarding claim 15: Palmer discloses that the deck is selectively removable and replaceable with a plurality of different sized decks attachable to the top frame (Figs. 3, 8-13; col. 3, lines 9-19 – various decks 80A, 81, 82, 84 are illustrated in various coverages).
Regarding claim 16: Palmer discloses a bedslide assembly (Figs. 1-4; col. 1, line 37-col. 2, line 8). Palmer discloses a bottom frame 40 that includes at least one rail 41 Fig. 4; abstr.; col. 2, lines 62-64). Palmer discloses a top frame 61 that includes at least one rail 61 (Fig. 4; abstr.; col. 3, lines 1-8). Palmer discloses a deck 81attached to the top frame (Fig. 8; col. 3, lines 41-46). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the bottom frame engages the at least one rail of the top frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited engagement). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the top frame is slidable along the at least one rail of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited sliding engagement). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the top frame is extendable from the at least one rail of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited extendable engagement). Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the bottom frame is longer than the at least one rail of the top frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited lengths – 41 longer than 61).
Regarding claim 17: Palmer discloses that the at least one rail of the top frame does not retract to a rear portion of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited retracting engagement – portion of bottom frame near 46 is exposed when the top frame is completely retracted).
Regarding claim 18: Palmer discloses that the top frame and the deck extend outward from the bottom frame, but do not retract over an entirety of the bottom frame (Figs. 4-7 – illustrate the recited engagement – portion of bottom frame near 46 is exposed when the top frame is completely retracted).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are allowed.
Claims 9, 13 and 19 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.
Sliding frames for trucks and trailers as well as their structure are well known in the art. Representative art which appears close to the claimed invention includes Palmer et al (US 6390761), Agarwal et al. (US 20210129922), Ferkul (US 20180118077), Williams (US 9227547), Bluhm (US 201630094929), Brockhaus (US 4950123), and Herbert (US 20040007889). In general, this art, alone or in combination, discloses various recited features, including but not limited to, a bedslide assembly, a top and bottom frame with at least one rail, a deck on the top frame, that the rails engage one another, that the top frame rail is extendable from the bottom frame rail, that the top frame is slidable, and that the top frame does not retract to the very rear of the bottom frame. However, this art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the specifically combined structural components and positional interconnection relationships. Specifically, the art does not disclose the specifically recited combination having offset structure and a combination having a second movable deck. It could be argued that the individual structure is generally known in the art and thus, could just be assembled to disclose the claimed invention. However, the instant invention clearly and specifically recites structural relationships, steps, and combinations, which require a greater effort than just cobbling together known structures. Further, the claimed structures are sufficiently detailed to be distinguishable when configured as claimed. The examiner can find no motivation to combine or modify the references which would define a fully functioning apparatus as claimed in the instant application. Thus, it would not have been within routine skill to glean the specifically combined limitations of the instant invention, from the art, without the benefit of hindsight reasoning or extensive experimentation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARAS P BEMKO whose telephone number is (571)270-1830. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 (EDT/EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Coy can be reached on 571-272-5405. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Taras P Bemko/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
2/4/2026