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 § 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.
Claims 3, 5, and 7-9 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.
In claim 3, line 5, “from about 25 5o 45 degrees” is improper range within a range language (“about” defines one range and “25 to 25 degrees” defines another range) that is indefinite in that the metes and bounds of the claim are not well defined.
Claim 5, line 2, clam 7, lines 1-2, claim 8, lines 1-2, and claim 9, lines 1-2, similarly include indefinite range within a range language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 4, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Linger (USPN 6,105,989).
Regarding claim 1, Linger teaches a device (“anti-rattle device 10”) for preventing relative movement of a mounting tube 12, 18, within a trailer hitch receiver tube 14 (Figure 1), the device comprising: a plate member 26, 28, having a planar portion 28 and an angled portion 32, the planar portion including an aperture 34 configured to receive the mounting tube 12 and the angled portion 32 including a threaded aperture 36; and a threaded fastener (bolt 38) disposed in the threaded aperture (see Figure 1 and col. 3, lines 1-52).
Regarding claim 4, Linger teaches the aperture 34 is square (see Figures 1 and 5a-5d; col. 2, lines 51-52).
Regarding claim 6, Linger teaches the plate member is formed of a sheet material (“formed by stamping a sheet of steel” and bending the angled portion; see col. 2, lines 62-64).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 5, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linger in view of Varner (PGPub 2006/0186638).
Regarding claims 2 and 5, the angled portion of Linger is disposed at an angle of about 90 degrees rather than 120-140 degrees with respect to the planar portion.
Varner shows a device (for example “engagement device 301” comprising a threaded base 302, 304, and engagers 222, 86, 88; see para [0101], Figures 1J, 11A, 14A, 14B, ) for preventing relative movement of a mounting tube 24, 30, within a trailer hitch receiver tube 22 (Figure 1, 11A), the device comprising: a plate member 301 (Figures 1J, 12, 14A, 14B, appear to show a plate member 301 extending around insert 30) having a planar portion 301 (portion that holds engagers 222 and that is mounted to insert 30) and an angled portion 302, 304 (Figures 1J, 14A, 14B), the planar portion including an aperture configured to receive the mounting tube 30 (Figure 14B) and the angled portion 302 including a threaded aperture (for example, threaded holes in bases 86,88, for threaded shafts 82, 84; Figure 2B; para 0084], or in Figure 14A, 14B, threaded base supports 302, 304, on engagement device 301, para [0101]),; and a threaded fastener (bolt 86, 88) disposed in the threaded aperture. As seen in Figure 3D, for example, planar portion of the engagement device extends vertically from the horizontally oriented “hitch mount”. An angled portion, that has a threaded hole for receiving a threaded shaft, is positioned at the upper end of the planar portion, as illustrated in Figure 3D, and is oriented at approximately 135 degrees with respect to the planar portion (the threaded fastener is oriented at about a 45 degree angle relative to the planar portion in that view). The threaded fastener is positioned so as to engage a corner of the distal end of the flange 68 of the “receiver hitch” at an angle that applies both a tension force and a binding movement to provide a stable, anti-wobble effect (para [0084], last 15 lines).
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 Linger device for preventing relative movement such that the angled portion is oriented at between 120 and 140 degrees (about 135 degrees) relative to the planar portion and the threaded fastener is angled at between 25 and 45 degrees (about 45 degrees) relative to the planar portion, in view of Varner, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to apply force along two axes to provide a stable anti-wobble effect.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, the angled portion 32 of Linger is not triangular or rectangular. However, Varner shows, in Figure 14B, angled portions 302, 304, that are positioned at upper corners of the planar member and that are generally rectangular. Also, since the angled portions are at the upper corners of the planar member, it would be very simple to bend the corners to form triangular angled portions. Therefore, 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 Linger device such that at least one angled portion is rectangular, as shown in Figure 14B of Linger, or triangular, which would be a straightforward modification of the planar member of Linger, in order to provide angled portions as taught by Varner that produce a stable anti-wobble effect.
Regarding claim 13, Linger shows only one threaded aperture on the angled portion. Varner shows at least one embodiment having a pair of threaded apertures on the angled portion (as seen in Figure 1J). 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 Linger device such that the angled portion includes two threaded apertures, as taught by Varner, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to increase the pressure applied by the anti-rattle device for a more secure connection.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Linder and Varner teaches the claimed method. Linger teaches a method of stabilizing a trailer hitch, the method comprising: providing a device 26 comprising (a) a plate member 26 having a planar portion 28 and an angled portion 32, the planar portion including an aperture 34 configured to receive a mounting tube 18 and the angled portion 32 including a threaded aperture 36; and (b) a threaded fastener 38 disposed in the threaded aperture; sliding the device onto a mounting tube such that the mounting tube extends through the aperture in the planar portion (col. 2, lines 51-55); sliding the mounting tube 18 into a receiver tube 14 of a trailer hitch (col. 2, line 51 -55); positioning the plate member adjacent to but not touching a distal end of the receiver tube (space between plate member 26 and receiver tube 22 shown in Figure 4a, for example); and threading the threaded fastener into the threaded aperture until a distal end of the threaded fastener contacts the receiver tube.
Linger does not teach that the threaded fastener applies pressure to a corner of the distal end of the receiver tube. However, Varner teaches a method of stabilizing a trailer hitch where a threaded fastener applies pressure to a corner of the distal end of the receiver tube so as to engage a distal end of the flange 68 of the “receiver hitch” at an angle that applies both a tension force and a binding movement to provide a stable, anti-wobble effect (para [0084], last 15 lines). Therefore, 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 Linger device for preventing relative movement such that the threaded fastener engages a corner of the distal end of the receiver flange, in view of Varner, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to apply force along two axes to provide a stable anti-wobble effect.
Claim(s) 3,7, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linger (USPN 6,105,989).
Regarding claim 3, Linger teaches that the aperture 34 configured to receive the mounting tube 18 surrounds the mounting tube 18 with a small clearance (col. 2, lines 52-54; “opening 34 having dimensions that are slightly larger than the dimensions of the mount shank 18”) that allows the device to slide along the mount shank/mounting tube, but it does not specify that the spacing is from about 0.007 to 0.25 inch. However, it would have been an obvious engineering selection to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure aperture of the Linger anti-rattle device such that the small spacing is spacing between .007 and .25 inch, in order to allow the device to slide smoothly along the mounting tube without an excessive gap that would lead to additional rattle.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Linger is silent regarding the thickness of the sheet material of device 26. It does, however, show in Figure 4a, for example, that the sheet material of the device 26 is approximately the same thickness as the thickness of the mounting tube and receiver and it is well known that conventional hitch mounts have a thickness of between .25 and .5 inches. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device from sheet material having a thickness of about 0.25 to 0.5 inch, in view of what is shown in the Linger drawings and what is well known in the art, in order to construct the device with adequate strength for its purpose.
Regarding claim 10, Linger does not specify the number of threaded in the threaded aperture. However, it would have been a matter of obvious engineering design selection to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide at least three threads in order to provide adequate hold and spread the load between the threaded fastener and aperture, so as to avoid stripping the threads while in use.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linger in view of Wyers (PGPub 2018/0134105)
Linger fails to specify that the threaded fastener has a diameter of from about 0.25 to 0.5 inch.
Wyers teaches an anti-rattle device having a threaded fastener (threaded bolt ends 3, 4) with a diameter of 6/16 or .375 inch (see Figure 1 and para [0031]; d8 is the diameter of the threaded end 3, 4, and d8=6/16).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the threaded fastener of Linger with a diameter of 6/16 or .375 inch (which is between .25 and .5 inch), in view of Wyers, in order to appropriately size the threaded fastener used in a hitch anti-rattle device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tambornino teaches a hitch mount having a wall thickness of .31 inches.
Motzling teaches an anti-rattle device using a threaded fastener having a .375 inch diameter.
Kravitz, Breslin, Ezra, Epp, and Verheul teach hitch anti-rattle devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ab/