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
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.
Claim(s) 1, 11 – 14, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (GB 2 198 395 A) in view of Ludwig et al. (US 2009/0020661 A1).
As for claim 1, Turner discloses a cart comprising: a deck (3); a plurality of wheels (26) on the deck to support rolling movement of the deck; an upright support frame (14) at a rear end of the deck, a rearward support ledge at a rearward end of the deck, said rearward support ledge having a plurality of spaced upwardly opening slots (5), a forward support ledge at a forward end of the deck, said forward support ledge having a plurality of spaced upwardly opening slots (5); and a rearward guide flange (4A) extending forwardly from said upright support frame, said rearward guide flange having a plurality of spaced forwardly opening slots (see Fig. 1), wherein respective sets of spaced slots are aligned in cooperating planar relation and are configured to receive and vertically support a plurality of planar construction components in spaced parallel relation (Figs. 2 and 5).
Turner discloses the plurality of upwardly opening slots formed directly on the deck, rather than on upright support flanges disposed on the rearward and forward ends of the deck. However, the slots of Turner serve the same purpose as the claimed slots. Simply providing an intermediate frame member (i.e., the claimed upright support flange) between the slots and the deck would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in order to arrange the planar construction components as desired on the cart. Furthermore, Turner does not disclose each slot having flexible bumper surfaces, though does suggest that rubber wedges (19) may be arranged as needed. Ludwig et al. disclose a cart for planar construction components, wherein each surface for receiving and vertically supporting a planar construction component comprises flexible bumper surfaces (380). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the slots of Turner to include the flexible bumper surfaces of Ludwig et al. to protect the planar construction components from damage. The slots of Turner are substantially U-shaped. The bumpers (380) of Ludwig et al. follow the contours of the surfaces to which they are applied. Therefore, when applying the bumpers of Ludwig et al. to the slots of Turner, it would be obvious to form said bumpers in U-shape as well.
As for claims 11 – 14, Turner fails to disclose stacking seats. Ludwig et al. disclose a plurality of upwardly facing tubular stacking seats (496) and a like plurality of downwardly facing stacking seats (498), said stacking seats each configured and arranged to receive a vertically extending support leg (482). An upright support frame includes pass though guides (470) arranged to receive the vertically extending support leg. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cart of Turner to include the stacking features of Ludwig et al. for compact storage, or to increase the load capacity of the cart.
As for claim 19, as noted above, the slots of Turner are substantially U-shaped. Merely modifying the slots to have a horizontal bottom portion would have predictable results.
Claim(s) 3 – 8 and 15 – 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (GB 2 198 395 A) in view of Ludwig et al. (US 2009/0020661 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Haenszel (US 6,123,208).
As for claims 3 – 8, Turner and Ludwig et al. meet all the limitations of the claimed invention, but do not disclose forklift fork guides. Haenszel discloses a cart comprising forklift fork guides (75) on the underside of the left, right, front, and rear sides of the deck (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the cart of Turner to include forklift fork guides to facilitate convenient and efficient shipment and maneuvering of the rack.
As for claims 15 – 18, Ludwig et al. disclose a plurality of upwardly facing tubular stacking seats (496) and a like plurality of downwardly facing stacking seats (498), said stacking seats each configured and arranged to receive a vertically extending support leg (482). An upright support frame includes pass though guides (470) arranged to receive the vertically extending support leg. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cart of Turner to include the stacking features of Ludwig et al. for compact storage, or to increase the load capacity of the cart.
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (GB 2 198 395 A) in view of Ludwig et al. (US 2009/0020661 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Breeden et al. (US 5,564,723).
Turner and Ludwig et al. meet all the limitations of the claimed invention, including a stabilizer bar having a plurality of slots in a rearward facing surface (see 4C, 4D), but do not disclose a strap channel. Breeden et al. disclose a cart comprising a strap (27) and channels (29, 33, 56) for guiding the strap. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cart of Turner to include the straps and channels of Breeden et al. to further secure the construction components on the cart.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is 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: the prior art does not teach or suggest a U-shaped bumper element including left and right channels which slide over a respective U-shaped flange slot, in combination with the other claim elements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 15, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Turner and Ludwig fail to teach the construction of the flanges and bumpers as claimed. Initially, it is noted that the claims are directed to a cart, and limitations directed to the wooden panel materials are considered statements of intended use and are not given patentable weight. It is maintained that modifying the cart of Turner to have U-shaped slots rather than V-shaped slots would have predictable results, as would providing said slots in an intermediate frame member, rather than directly on the deck. Ludwig discloses bumper elements explicitly designed to protect fragile sheets of construction materials on while on a cart. It would have been well within the general skill of a worker in the art to arrange flexible bumper material as needed to protect the materials stored on the cart. Newly added claim 20, directed to structural details of how the bumper elements engage the slots, has been indicated as allowable.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Katy M Ebner whose telephone number is (571)272-5830. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9 a.m. - 3 p.m.
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, J. 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.
/Katy M Ebner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights