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 .
This is the first action on the merits for application 18/402,912. Claims 1-17 are currently pending in this application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 3, “coupling device” should be changed to - -coupling devices- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 2, “coupling devices”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 10, “the folded position” should be changed to - -a folded position- - for claim consistency as this limitation is referring to a folded position of the “bed frame” rather than the folded position of the first support legs recited in Claim 1, lines 6-7. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 10, “the unfolded position” should be changed to - -an unfolded position- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 12, “trailer maintain”” should be changed to - -trailer to maintain- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 14, “frame allow”” should be changed to - -frame to allow- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “the first side member” should be changed to - -a first side member- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “an extended position” should be changed to - -the extended position- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 6, “an extended position”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “a folded position” should be changed to - -the folded position- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, lines 6-7, “a folded position”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1, “the first support leg” should be changed to - -the first support legs- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 5, “first support legs”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1, “the first support leg” should be changed to - -the first support legs- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 5, “first support legs”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “a floor surface” should be changed to - -the floor surface- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 11, “a floor surface”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “the frame” should be changed to - -the bed frame- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 2, “a bed frame”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1, “using e-track bed system” should be changed to - -using an e-track bed system- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “to e-track mounting rail” should be changed to - -to an e-track mounting rail- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 6, “the folded position” should be changed to - -a folded position- - for claim consistency as this limitation is referring to a folded position of the “first support legs” rather than the folded position of the bed frame recited in Claim 17, lines 2-3. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 8, “automatically rotate” should be changed to - -automatically rotating- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: lines 9-10, “the floor surface” should be changed to - -a floor surface- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 13, “a floor surface” should be changed to - -the floor surface- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 17, lines 9-10, “floor surface”). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-16 are 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 2 recites the limitation "one of the end members" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, as there has been no previous recitation of “end members”, it is unclear what this limitation is referring to.
Claims 3-16 are indefinite due to their dependence from indefinite Claim 2.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Each of the limitations of Claim 12 have been previously recited Claim 1 (see, in particular, Claim 1, lines 11-12). Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 17 are allowed.
Claims 2-11 and 13-16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 disclose nor render obvious an e-track bed system wherein the first support legs are locked in the extended position and contact a floor surface of the trailer to maintain the bed frame in the folded position, in combination with the other elements required by independent Claim 1.
The prior art does not disclose nor render obvious a method of using an e-track bed system including locking two first support legs rotatably coupled to the bed frame in an extended position to maintain the bed frame in the folded position, in combination with the other method steps required by independent Claim 17.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have no rationale, absent hindsight, to modify the prior art to derive the claimed invention since the above-mentioned limitations, in combination with the other claim limitations, are considered new and nonobvious improvements over the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WANG et al. (US 2025/0072622 A1) discloses a folding sofa bed with leg rest (see Figs. 2-3).
GROS (US 2023/0271543 A1) discloses a utility deck storage device (see Fig. 2B).
RIFKIN (US 2022/0212568 A1) discloses a furniture fastening system for vehicles (see ABSTRACT).
HUANG (US 2022/0079349 A1) discloses a foldable bed (see ABSTRACT).
SCHLANKER (US 2016/0084000 A1) discloses a murphy bed retractable cover system (see Figs. 9-10).
LIM et al. (US 2003/0121099 A1) discloses a folding bed (see Figs. 1-3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN YOUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-4781. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 pm (CST).
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, Jacob S Scott can be reached at (571)270-3415. 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.
EDWIN YOUNG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/Edwin A Young/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655