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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yabushita et al. 2021/0155146.
In Re Claim 1, Yabushita et al. teach a conveyance system (100) comprising a conveyance vehicle (20) comprising a first connector (142), and a cargo bed (10) comprising a second connector (141) complementary to the first connector, wherein the first connector is disposed on an upper surface of the conveyance vehicle with its connector surface facing downward, (Fig. 2, Fig. 7-10) and the second connector is disposed on a lower surface of the cargo bed with its connector surface facing upward. (Fig. 7-10)
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yabushita et al. and in view of Mountz et al. 2006/0210382.
In Re Claims 2 and 3, Yabushita et al. teach the system of Claim 1 as discussed above.
Yabushita et al. do not teach wherein the first connector is a pin-type connector and the second connector is a socket-type connector, or the first connector is a socket-type connector, and the second connector is a pin-type connector.
However, Mountz et al. teach wherein the first connector is a pin-type connector (110, Fig. 4a) and the second connector is a socket-type connector (350, Fig. 4a), or the first connector is a socket-type connector, and the second connector is a pin-type connector; and wherein the second connector includes two terminal patterns (top quadrant and right quadrant combined is the first terminal pattern and the remaining two quadrants combined is the second terminal pattern, Fig. 4b) arranged on the same plane, and one of the terminal patterns is disposed in point symmetry with the other terminal pattern with respect to a center point on the plane. (Fig. 4b)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to use pin and socket connectors in the system of Yabushita et al. as taught by Mountz et al. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to have a self aligning connector.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yabushita et al./Mountz et al. and in view of Moore et al. 2022/0227435.
In Re Claim 4, Yabushita et al./Mountz et al. teach the system of Claim 3 as discussed above.
Yabushita et al./Mountz et al. do not teach wherein rollers are provided on both sides of the first connector.
However, Moore et al. teach wherein rollers (rollers shown on inside of 600 outside of 604 and 606 in Figures 10 and 16) are provided on both sides of the first connector (608).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to add rollers the system of Yabushita et al./Mountz et al. as taught by Moore et al. with a reasonable expectation for success in order to have make self alignment easier.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Itozawa et al., Lavoie and Diehr teach Conveyance systems comprising conveyance vehicles comprising a first connector on a conveyance vehicle and a second connector on a cargo bed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLENN F MYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 PM.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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.
GLENN F. MYERS
Examiner
Art Unit 3652
/GLENN F MYERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3652