DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1-5 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parris et al. (US 3591121) and Muirhead (US20010029874).
Regarding claim 1, 3, and 18 Parris discloses a mobility aide transport assembly for use in a cargo hold of a transport vehicle, wherein the cargo hold has curved wall panels (intended use), floor panels extending between the curved wall panels (intended use), and anchor members (intended use), the assembly, comprising: a base panel (117, 119, 121) having opposed top (119) and bottom portions (121) (figs 6-9), the bottom portion configured to face the floor panels of the cargo hold and the top portion configured to support a heavy mobility aide (figs 6-9, abstract); sidewalls (111, 112) coupled to the base panel (figs 6-9) and shaped to extend along and up at least a portion of the curved wall panels of the cargo hold (fig 8), wherein the sidewalls are coplanar with or extend above the top surface to form platform arrangement that can retain solid and fluid materials within the boundary of the base panel (fig 8); a plurality of first tie down anchors (113) coupled to the top portion of the base panel and configured to releasably engage tiedown strap connected to the heavy mobility aide to fixedly retain the heavy mobility aide atop the base panel (figs 6-9, col 4 lines 13-22); a plurality of second tie down anchors (115) coupled to the base panel (figs 6-9) and configured to connect to connection members (153) connected to the anchor members of the cargo hold to releasably retain the base panel in a fixed position relative to the cargo hold's floor panels (figs 6-9, col 5 line 71- col 6 line 3); wherein the base panel is configured to distribute weight of the heavy mobility aide across the area of the panels bottom portion for reduction of the load (Ibs/ft2) to the cargo hold's floor panels supporting the cargo floor weight distribution transport assembly and the heavy mobility aide (figs 6-9).
Parris is silent regarding a plurality of handles coupled to the base panel and configured to be engaged by a user to position the base panel relative to the cargo hold's floor panels.
Muirhead teaches a plurality of handles (320a, 320b) coupled to the base panel (28) and configured to be engaged by a user to position the base panel relative to the cargo hold's floor panels (fig 10, [0085]).
(Claim 5) Muirhead further teaches that the handles (320a, 320b) are movable between a stowed position generally flat with the top portion of the base panel and a raised, deployed position projecting upwardly from the base panel (fig 10, [0085]).
(Claim 3) Muirhead further teaches that he handles (320a, 320b) are attached to the top portion of the base panel (fig 1).
(Claim 4) Muirhead further teaches that the handles are attached to end walls (fig 1).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Parris and Muirhead before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by Parris to include the handle as taught by Muirhead in order to allow a worker to manipulate the pallet ([0085]).
Regarding claim 2, Parris further discloses that the bottom portion of the base panel has integral receiving areas (121) configured to removably receive tines of a lifting assembly used move the cargo floor transport assembly into or out of the cargo hold (figs 6-9).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parris et al. (US 3591121) and Muirhead (US20010029874) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Willems (US 20030101541).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Wittman and Parris is silent regarding the fact that the handles are biased toward the stowed position.
Willems teaches that the handles are biased toward the stowed position (abstract, [0014]).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of the Parris, Willems and Muirhead before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by the combination of Parris and Muihead to include the handle biased to the stowed position in order to protect the handle from other object ([0001]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parris et al. (US 3591121) and Muirhead (US20010029874) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dacus (US 20090095206)
Regarding clam 7, the combination of Parris and Muirhead is silent regarding the fact that the base panel is made of a rigid, flame-retardant material and has a rigid internal honeycomb configuration.
Dacus teaches that the base panel is made of a rigid, flame-retardant material and has a rigid internal honeycomb configuration ([0013] discloses that the base panel is made of aluminum honeycomb).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of the Parris, Dacus and Muirhead before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by the combination of Parris and Muihead to include the fact that the base panel is made of a rigid, flame-retardant material and has a rigid internal honeycomb configuration as taught by Dacus in order to obtain a lightweight, non-deformable unit load design that meets aviation industry standards without sacrificing payload capacity.
Claims 8-11, 13, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wittmann (US 5505140) and Muirhead (US20010029874).
Regarding claims 8 and 10-11, Wittmann discloses a mobility aide transport assembly for use in a cargo hold of a transport vehicle, wherein the cargo hold has wall panels, floor panels extending between the wall panels, and floor anchor members (intended use), the assembly, comprising: a base panel (12) having opposed top (top portion of 12, fig 2) and bottom portions (bottom portion of 12, fig 2), the bottom portion configured to face the floor panels of the cargo hold and the top portion configured to support a mobility aide atop the base panel (fig 2); sidewalls (sidewalls at left and right end of 12, fig 1) coupled to the base panel and shaped to extend adjacent and substantially parallel to the wall panels of the cargo hold (figs 1-2); end walls (end walls at top and bottom end of 12, fig 1) coupled to the base panel and extending between the sidewalls and substantially perpendicular to the wall panels of the cargo area (figs 1-2), wherein at least one of the end walls has a ramp configuration (22, 50) sloping downwardly from the top portion to the bottom portion of the base panel (figs 1-2); a plurality of first tie down anchors (pair of 35 on right, fig 1) recessed in the top portion of the base panel and configured to releasably engage tiedown strap connected to the mobility aide to fixedly retain the mobility aide atop the base panel (figs 1-2, col 7 line 57- col 8 line 18); a plurality of second tie down anchors (pair of 35 on left, fig 1) recessed in the top portion of the base panel and configured to be coupled to the floor anchor members (figs 1-2); wherein the base panel is configured to distribute weight of the mobility aide transport across the area of the panels bottom portion for reduction of the load (Ibs/ft2) to the cargo hold's floor panels supporting the transport assembly and the mobility aide transport (figs 1-2).
Parris is silent regarding a plurality of handles coupled to the base panel and configured to be engaged by a user to position the base panel relative to the cargo hold's floor panels.
Muirhead teaches a plurality of handles (320a, 320b) coupled to the base panel (28) and configured to be engaged by a user to position the base panel relative to the cargo hold's floor panels (fig 10, [0085]).
(Claim 10) Muirhead further teaches that the handles (320a, 320b) are movable between a stowed position generally flat with the top portion of the base panel and a raised, deployed position projecting upwardly from the base panel (fig 10, [0085]).
(Claim 11) Muirhead further teaches that the handles are attached to end walls (fig 10).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Parris and Muirhead before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by Parris to include the handle as taught by Muirhead in order to allow a worker to manipulate the pallet ([0085]).
Regarding claim 9, Wittmann further discloses that the bottom portion of the base panel has integral receiving areas (45) configured to removably receive tines of a lifting assembly used move the transport assembly into or out of the cargo hold (figs 1-2, col 7 lines 40-45).
Regarding claim 13, Wittmann further discloses that the sidewalls and end walls are interconnected to form a sloped frame (see annotated fig 2) around the base panel (fig 2), wherein the slope frame extends downwardly from the top portion to the bottom portion (fig 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
724
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Wittmann further discloses that the sidewalls have integral recesses (49 on sidewalls, figs 1-2) formed therein and configured to provide access to the floor anchor members of the floor panels (figs 1-2).
Regarding claim 16, Wittmann further discloses a plurality of first anchor straps (88, 88’) releasably couplable to the first tie down anchors and to the heavy cargo item to securely affix the heavy cargo item atop the base panel (figs 8-11).
Regarding claim 17, Wittmann further discloses that a plurality of second anchor straps (92,94) releasably couplable to the floor anchor and to either the first tie down anchors or to the heavy cargo item (fig 8).
Claims 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wittmann (US 5505140) and Muirhead (US20010029874) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Dacus (US 20090095206)
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Wittmann and Muirhead is silent regarding the fact that the base panel is made of a rigid, flame-retardant material and has a rigid internal honeycomb configuration.
Dacus teaches that the base panel is made of a rigid, flame-retardant material and has a rigid internal honeycomb configuration ([0013] discloses that the base panel is made of aluminum honeycomb).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of the Wittmann, Dacus and Muirhead before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by the combination of Wittmann and Muihead to include the fact that the base panel is made of a rigid, flame-retardant material and has a rigid internal honeycomb configuration as taught by Dacus in order to obtain a lightweight, non-deformable unit load design that meets aviation industry standards without sacrificing payload capacity.
Regarding claim 14, Wittmann further discloses that the sidewalls and end walls are interconnected to form a shaped frame around the base panel (fig 1-2).
The combination of Wittmann is silent regarding the use of aluminum.
Dacus teaches the use of aluminum ([0035]).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of the Wittmann, Dacus and Muirhead before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by the combination of Wittmann and Muihead to include the use of aluminum as taught by Dacus in order to obtain a lightweight, non-deformable unit load design that meets aviation industry standards without sacrificing payload capacity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANY E AKAKPO whose telephone number is (469)295-9255. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 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, 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 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.
/DANY E AKAKPO/Examiner, Art Unit 3672
3/3/2026