DETAILED ACTION
Elected Invention
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (snow flap for snowmobile and snowmobile with snow flap) in the reply filed on March 23, 2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claims Subject to Examination
Claims 1-12 of this application are subject to examination. Claims 13-49 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Construction in Examination
During examination, the pending claims are normally interpreted according to the broadest reasonable interpretation standard (hereinafter, the “BRI standard”). That is, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP 2111 et seq.
An exception to the BRI standard occurs when the applicant acts as their own lexicographer. For this exception to apply, the applicant must clearly set forth a special definition of a claim term in the specification that differs from the plain and ordinary meaning it would otherwise possess. See MPEP 2111.01, subsection IV.
Another exception or special case occurs when a claim recites a means-plus-function limitation that must be interpreted in accordance with 35 USC 112 ¶ 6, or 35 USC 112(f). See MPEP 2181. According to the guidance provided by Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc), 35 USC 112 ¶ 6 applies when the claim term fails to recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, and/or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function.
Examiner’s Claim Construction
The current claim limitations are construed under the BRI standard. No explicit claim construction is deemed to be necessary.
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.
GROUND 1: Claims 3, 4, 6, 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 3 is directed to a snow flap. See the preambles of claims 1 and 3. However, claim 3 requires that “the first portion extends rearward a predetermined angle from…a tunnel.” Since the tunnel is not part of the claimed invention (i.e., the snow flap), the scope of claim 3 is unclear. The snow flap alone cannot be limited to the claimed angle since the angled relationship depends upon its attachment to an unclaimed mount on an unclaimed snowmobile. It is unknown whether the claim should be interpreted as requiring a snow flap that is capable of being attached to support structure at a predetermined angle, or whether this should be viewed as an optional limitation since it depends on unclaimed subject matter.
In claim 3, “from a of a tunnel” (l. 2) is confusing due to grammatical errors or the omission of an intended word.
Claim 6 recites “the second portion may be folded and retained…” The expression “may be” is hypothetical and fails to state an explicit requirement. Thus, the scope of the claim is unclear. It is unknown whether the claim should be interpreted as requiring a second portion that is capable of being folded and retained, or whether this should be viewed as an optional limitation since it only states a hypothetical possibility.
Claim 7 introduces “a first longitudinal edge” (l. 2) and “a second longitudinal edge” (l. 3). Claim 1 previously introduces “a first edge” (ll. 2-3) and “a second edge” (l. 3). Since the ordinal numbers “first” and “second” are repeated in claim 7, the claim inaccurately suggests that the edges recited in claim 7 are the same edges as those of claim 1. It is unclear whether the edges recited in claim 7 are the same edges as those of claim 1 or different edges.
In claim 10, the term “the lower portion of the C-channel” (l. 1) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 4 is included in the rejection because of its dependency.
Specification Objections
The title of the invention is not descriptive of the elected invention. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The specification is objected to because:
In the abstract, “The first portion” (ll. 1-2) should read “The snow flap”.
In the abstract, “may include a second material, said” (l. 2) should read “that may include a second material, the”. Legal phraseology, such as “said”, should not appear in the abstract.
In the abstract, “The portion” (l. 3) should read “The snow flap”.
In ¶ 0012, “from a of a tunnel” (l. 4) is confusing due to grammatical errors or the omission of an intended word.
In ¶ 0049, “accessor” should read “accessory”.
In ¶ 0064, “behind the seat 40 and under the seat 36” (ll. 8-9) is confusing because two different reference numbers are used for “the seat”, and the specification does not previously identify any “seat 36” (though ¶ 0108 later refers to “the passenger seat 36”).
In ¶ 0066, “A light assembly 62 is also illustrated near the rear end 14 of the snowmobile 10” (ll. 1-2) is inaccurate because none of the drawing figures show the light assembly 62 near the rear end 14 of the snowmobile 10. Rather, the light assembly 62 is shown by itself in Figs. 3A-3B.
In ¶ 0067, “rack platform” (l. 1) should read “rack platform 66”.
In ¶ 0067, “The rack platform 66 and the storage rack 68” (l. 2) is confusing since the sentence is incomplete.
In ¶ 0068, “FIG. 6” (l. 1) should read “FIG. 1F”.
¶ 0072 should end with a period.
In ¶ 0073, “edge 224” should read “edge 228”.
In ¶ 0078, “a generally circular wall 252” (l. 3) and “circular wall 252” (l. 7) are inaccurate because the wall 252 is not circular. Note that ¶ 0071 describes the channel 212 as generally C-shaped.
In ¶ 0078, “direct of” (l. 4) should read “direction of”.
In ¶ 0079, “circular wall 252ʹ” (l. 3) and “circular wall 252” (l. 4) are inaccurate. See explanation above.
In ¶ 0079, “wall 252” (l. 4) should read “wall 252ʹ”.
In ¶ 0079, “channel 212” (l. 5) should read “channel 212ʹ”.
In ¶ 0081, “locked portion” (l. 2) should read “locked position”.
In ¶ 0082, “FIG. 2I” should read “FIG. 2L”.
In ¶ 0088, “control module 364” (l. 4) should read “control module 64”.
In ¶ 0101, “Fig 4B shows the receiver 420 without a latch pin 430 therein” is inaccurate because reference number 420 does not appear in Fig. 4B. Further, this explanation is confusing because a latch pin 430 has not been mentioned previously, and Fig. 4A also shows the pin housing 410 without a latch pin 430 therein.
In ¶ 0102, “rack 66” (l. 1) should read “rack platform 66”.
In ¶ 0103, “The receiver 420 is used to form a latch pin 430” (ll. 5-6) is inaccurate because the receiver 420 and the latch pin 430 are separate structures. It appears the receiver 420 should be described as being used to receive (or house) a latch pin 430.
In ¶ 0105, “The base 432 has a pin portion 434” is inaccurate because the base 432 and the pin portion 434 are distinct parts of the latch pin 430. It appears the base 432 should be described as supporting the pin portion 434, or as having the pin portion 434 extending therefrom.
In ¶ 0107, “the base portion 436” (ll. 10-11) should read “the base portion 432”.
In ¶ 0108, “In FIGS. 5A and 5B, the accessories 38A are gas tanks” is inaccurate because only one accessory (gas tank) 38A is shown in Figs. 5A and 5B.
In ¶ 0117, “rack platform 566” (l. 2) should read “rack platform 66”.
In ¶ 0121, “FIGS. 6A-6f” (l. 1) should read “FIGS. 6A-6E”.
In ¶ 0121, “accessory holders 610A” (l. 2) is inconsistent with “the accessory holder 610A” (l. 4) and “the accessory holder 610B” (l. 8).
In ¶ 0121, “first mount 620 and a second mount 620E” (ll. 9-10) should read “first mount 620A and a second mount 620B”.
In ¶ 0122, “about a rotation pin 633” (l. 2) should read “about respective rotation pins 633”.
In ¶ 0123, “fasteners 656A, 656B” (l. 8) should read “fasteners 654A, 654B”.
In ¶ 0123, “mount 620” (l. 10) should read “mount 620A”.
In ¶ 0124, “holder 610” (l. 3) should read “holder 610B”.
In ¶ 0124, “mount 620. The accessory holder” (l. 4) should read “mount 620A. The accessory holders”.
Drawing Objections
The drawings are objected to because:
In Fig. 1A, the left occurrence of reference number 14 is improper because reference number 14 is used in the specification to identify the rear end of the snowmobile. See ¶ 0061.
In Fig. 1A, reference number 29 is improper because it does not appear in the specification. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters not mentioned in the description shall not appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 1A, the left occurrence of reference number 34 is improper because reference number 34 is used in the specification to identify the snow flap at the rear end of the snowmobile. See ¶ 0063.
In Fig. 1A, reference number 36 should be changed to 66. See Figs. 4A-4C; ¶ 0101.
In Fig. 1A, reference number 36A is improper because it does not appear in the specification. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters not mentioned in the description shall not appear in the drawings. Note that reference number 36 is used to label/identify the passenger seat (which is not shown in Fig. 1A). See Figs. 1F and 5A; ¶ 0108.
Reference number 38 (see ¶ 0064) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings. Note that reference numbers 38A, 38B, 38C are used to label/identify accessories. See Figs. 1B, 5A-5D; ¶ 0108.
Reference number 51 (see ¶ 0065) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 1B, reference number 36 should be changed to 66. See Figs. 4A-4C; ¶ 0101.
In Fig. 1D, reference number 22 should be changed to 42. See Figs. 1A-1B; ¶ 0064.
In Fig. 1E, the lead lines for reference numbers 22 are not directed to the shock absorbers. See Figs. 1A-1C; ¶ 0062.
In Fig. 1E, reference number 36 should be changed to 66. See Figs. 4A-4C; ¶ 0101.
In Fig. 1F, the right occurrence of reference number 36 should be changed to 66. See Figs. 4A-4C; ¶ 0101.
In Fig. 1F, reference number 38A is improper. Note that reference number 38A is used to label/identify an accessory in the form of a gas tank. See Figs. 1B and 5A-5D; ¶ 0108. Note also that the structure labeled by reference number 38A in Fig. 1F appears to be labeled by reference number 38B in Fig. 1B.
In Fig. 1F, the lower occurrence of reference number 68 is improper because reference number 68 is used in the specification to identify the storage rack secured to a rear portion of the chassis 20. See Figs. 1F and 5A; ¶ 0067. In Fig. 1F, it appears that the lower occurrence of reference number 68 should be changed to 60. See ¶ 0065.
In Fig. 2A, the lead line for reference number 232 is not directed to the first laterally extending edge of the flexible second portion 230. See Figs. 2D-2E; ¶ 0073.
In Fig. 2B, the lead line for reference number 232 is not directed to the first laterally extending edge of the flexible second portion 230. See Figs. 2D-2E; ¶ 0073.
In Fig. 2C, reference number 212 does not label the laterally extending channel in the mount 210. See Fig. 2G; ¶ 0071. Instead, in Fig. 2B, the lead line for reference number 212 is directed to the oval profile at the first laterally extending edge 222 of the first portion 220. See Figs. 2A-2B.
In Fig. 2C, the lead line for reference number 238 is not directed to the second lateral edge of the flexible second portion 230. See Figs. 2B and 2D; ¶¶ 0074, 0076-0077.
In Fig. 2D, reference number 234 is improper because it does not appear in the specification. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters not mentioned in the description shall not appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 2D, reference number 236 is improper because it does not appear in the specification. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters not mentioned in the description shall not appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 2F, reference number 230 does not label the flexible second portion. See Figs. 2C-2D; ¶¶ 0071, 0073. Instead, in Fig. 2F, the lead line for reference number 230 is directed to one of the arrows 242.
In Fig. 2F, the lead line for reference number 240 is not directed to one or more openings in the second laterally extending edge 228. See Fig. 2E; ¶ 0073.
In Fig. 2G, the upper occurrence of reference number 210 is improper because reference number 210 is used in the specification to identify the mount (which is labeled by the lower occurrence of reference number 210 in Fig. 2G).
In Fig. 2J, it appears that reference number 256 should be changed to 256ʹ. Note that the construction of the second extension in Fig. 2J resembles that of Fig. 2H but differs from that of Fig. 2G.
Fig. 2L fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(h)(5) because it shows two alternative embodiments in the same figure. See ¶ 0082. Modified forms of construction must be shown in separate views.
Reference number 314 (see ¶ 0083) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 3D, the illustration of the light assembly 62 fails to resemble the light assembly shown in Figs. 3A-3B. Further, when a black box is used to represent structure, the black box should contain descriptive text.
In Fig. 3D, within box 342, “Red Switch” should read “Key Switch”. See ¶ 0087.
In Fig. 3D, reference number 540 should be changed to 370. See ¶ 0095.
In Fig. 4A, the lead line for reference number 66 is not directed to the rack platform. See Figs. 4B-4C; ¶ 0101.
Reference number 419 (see ¶ 0103) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 4D, reference number 446 does not label the grip on the side of the base portion 432 opposite to the pin portion 434. See Fig. 4E; ¶ 0106. Instead, in Fig. 4D, the lead line for reference number 446 is directed to an edge of the base portion 432.
In Fig. 4E, the lead line for reference number 432 is not directed to the base portion of the latch pin 430. See Fig. 4C; ¶ 0103.
In Fig. 4E, the lead line for the right occurrence of reference number 442 is not directed to one of the slots on the flexible fingers 440. See ¶ 0106.
Reference number 516C (see ¶¶ 0111, 0120) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 5A, the lead line for the upper occurrence of reference number 538 on the left side of the figure is not directed to one of the upright members of the storage rack 68. See ¶ 0116. Instead, it labels the fuel tank 48. See Fig. 1A.
In Fig. 5B, reference numbers 38B and 38C do not label accessories. See ¶ 0108. Instead, in Fig. 5B, the lead lines for reference numbers 38B and 38C are directed to the latch pins 430. See Figs. 4C. Note also that reference number 38B is used to label a different structure in Fig. 1B.
In Fig. 5B, reference number 516b should be changed to 516B. See Fig. 5A; ¶ 0111.
In Fig. 5B, the upper occurrence of reference number 530 (at the top of the figure) should be changed to 536. See Fig. 5A; ¶¶ 0115, 0119.
In Fig. 5C, reference number 552 does not label one or more sides of the storage rack 68. See Fig. 5B; ¶ 0120.
In Fig. 5D, reference number 410 should be changed to 430. See Fig. 4C; ¶ 0103.
In Fig. 6A, the lead line for reference number 520 is not directed to a slot in the upper surface 516A of the upper rail 516. See ¶¶ 0111, 0113, 0120-0121.
Reference number 610 (see ¶ 0121) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings. Note that reference numbers 610A, 610B are used to label/identify accessory holders.
Reference number 656A (see ¶¶ 0123-0124) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
Reference number 656B (see ¶¶ 0123-0124) does not appear in the drawings. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
AIA – First to File
The present reissue application contains claims to a claimed invention having an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013. Accordingly, this application is being examined under the AIA first to file provisions.
Listing of Prior Art
The following is a listing of the prior art cited in this Office action together with the shorthand reference for each document (listed alphabetically):
“Ahn”
KR Publication No. 10-1695420 B1 (with translation)
“Boduen”
RU Publication No. 165 313 U1 (with translation)
“Cote, Jr.”
US Patent No. 3,884,498
“Girouard et al.”
US Publication No. 2002/0027028 A1
“Fichet”
GB Publication No. 2 151 569 A
“Haraikawa et al.”
EP Publication No. 0 449 666 A2
“Im”
KR Publication No. 1998-033887 U (with translation)
“Kerner et al.”
US Publication No. 2011/0132679 A1
“Kim et al.”
KR Publication No. 10-2013-0068677 A (with translation)
“Labbe et al.”
US Publication No. 2018/0178869 A1
“Lasser”
US Publication No. 2012/0068448 A1
“Matthew et al.”
US Patent No. 4,264,083
“O’Day”
US Patent No. 6,029,999
“Rutsch”
DE Publication No. 195 13 731 A1 (with translation)
“Sauermann”
EP Publication No. 3 483 043 A1 (with translation)
“Simpson”
WO Publication No. 2011/017769 A1
“Verge”
US Patent No. 4,453,728
“Watzek”
FR Publication No. 2 462 326 A1 (with translation)
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.
GROUND 2: Claims 1, 3-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Girouard et al.
With respect to claim 1, Girouard et al. discloses a snow flap for a snowmobile comprising:
A first portion 238 comprising a first material, i.e., high-density polyethylene (HDPE), with the first portion 238 comprising a first edge (adjacent a channel-shaped recess 285) for mounting to a tunnel region 96 of a snowmobile chassis 11 and a second edge 243 disposed opposite the first edge. See Figs. 15-18 and 20-21; ¶¶ 0044, 0049, 0051. A similar first portion 38 is illustrated in Figs. 2, 4, 6-10 and 13A-13B. See ¶ 0034. The chassis 11 and tunnel region 96 are illustrated in Figs. 11-12 and 22. See ¶ 0041.
A second portion 40 comprising a second material, i.e., hard rubber or Synprene® IT481 (thermoplastic elastomer). See Figs. 15 and 20; ¶ 0051. A similar second portion 40 is illustrated in Figs. 2, 4, 6-10 and 13A-13B. See ¶ 0034.
A joint (including rivets 99) formed between the first portion 238 and the second portion 40. See Figs. 15 and 20; ¶ 0051.
HDPE is a well-known thermoplastic polymer that is known to possess high rigidity (stiffness) and strength. Rubber and thermoplastic elastomers are known to possess elasticity (flexibility), with thermoplastic elastomers combining the elasticity of rubber with the processability of plastic. Synprene® thermoplastic elastomers are known to be flexible.1 Thus, the first material (HDPE) is stiffer than the second material (thermoplastic elastomer).
With respect to claim 3, the first portion 238 extends rearward a predetermined angle from the tunnel region 96 of the chassis 11. See Figs. 20-22. A similar first portion 38 is illustrated in Figs. 2, 4, 6-10 and 13A-13B. See ¶ 0034. With respect to claim 4, the predetermined angle is about 30 degrees as shown in Figs 4, 8-9 and 20.
With respect to claim 5, the second portion 40 extends downward from the second edge 243 in a first position. See Fig. 20; A similar second portion 40 is illustrated in Figs. 2, 4, 6-10 and 13A-13B. See ¶ 0034.
With respect to claim 7, the first portion 238 comprises first and second integrally molded channels 246a, 246b on first and second longitudinal edges, and arms 244a, 244b of a bumper 244 fit snugly in the channels 246a, 246b. See Figs. 17-21; ¶ 0045. As shown in Figs. 17-18 and 21, the channels 246a, 246b are bounded by retainer tabs that snugly engage the bumper arms 244a, 244b. Further, in alternative embodiments, the first portion 138 or 438 comprises a first integrally molded skirt 142 or 442 on a first longitudinal edge and a second integrally molded 142 or 442 on a second longitudinal edge. See Figs. 14B and 24B; ¶¶ 0043, 0054. The skirts 142, 442 constitute retainer tabs, as broadly claimed.
GROUND 3: Claims 1, 2, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cote, Jr.
With respect to claims 1 and 2, Cote, Jr. discloses a snow flap 11 for a snowmobile 10 comprising:
A first portion including bars 16 made of spring steel, a metal plate 26 welded to upper ends of the bars 16, and an angle iron 28 welded to lower ends of the bars 16, with the first portion comprising a first edge (defined by the metal plate 26) for mounting to the snowmobile 10 and a second edge (defined by the angle iron 28) disposed opposite the first edge. See Fig. 4; col. 2, ll. 20-26 and 34-41.
A second portion 17 made of rubber. See Fig. 4; col. 2, ll. 20-24.
A joint formed between the first portion 16, 26, 28 and the second portion 17 by co-molding the first portion with the second portion. See Fig. 4; col. 2, ll. 26-28 and 33-34.
The steel/metal material of the first portion inherently possesses greater stiffness than the rubber material of the second portion.
With respect to claim 5, (a portion of) the second portion 17 extends downward from the second edge (defined by the angle iron 28) in a first position. See Fig. 4.
With respect to claim 6, the second portion 17 may be folded and retained to the metal plate 26 of the first portion and an upper portion of the second portion 17 (via a ring 22 engaging a hook 20) in a second position. See Figs. 2-3; col. 2, ll. 45-51.
GROUND 4: Claims 1, 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haraikawa et al.
With respect to claims 1 and 2, Haraikawa et al. discloses a flap/guard 10 for a vehicle comprising:
A first (upper) portion 30 or 80 including a mounting member 11 and at least a portion of a guard member 12, with the first portion 30 or 80 comprising a first edge (see the arcuate upper edge in Fig. 1) for mounting to the vehicle and a second edge (see the lower edge of the first portion 30 in Figs. 5 and 6, and the lower edge of the first portion 80 in Fig. 9) disposed opposite the first edge. See Figs 1, 5-6 and 9; col. 4, ll. 27-37; col. 5, ll. 14-17 and 25-30; col. 6, ll. 14-17 and 25-32.
A second (lower) portion 40 or 90 including a skirt member 13 and possibly a portion of the guard member 12. See Figs. 1, 5 and 9; col. 4, ll. 27-37; col. 5, ll. 21-30; col. 6, ll. 21-32.
A joint formed between the first portion 30 or 80 and the second portion 40 or 90 by co-molding the first portion with the second portion. See Figs. 2-9; col. 4, l. 38 to col. 6, l. 32; col. 6, l. 48 to col. 7, l. 2.
In order to provide increased mechanical strength, the first portion 30 or 80 is made of a hard resin such as graphite fibre polypropylene (GFPP), graphite fibre polyamide (GFPA), or carbon fibre polyamide (CFPA). See col. 3, ll. 39-43; col. 4, l. 56 to col. 5, l. 4; col. 5, ll. 14-17 and 25-30. In order to provide flexibility, the second portion 40 or 90 is made of a flexible resin having thermoplasticity selected from the group of olefin, styrene, and urethane. See col. 3, ll. 43-47; col. 5, ll. 17-30. Thus, the first portion 30 or 80 is stiffer than the second portion 40 or 90.
With respect to claim 1, the flap/guard 10 of Haraikawa et al. functions as a snow flap when the vehicle to which it is attached is driven through snow. Further, the intended use as a snow flap for a snowmobile cannot stand alone in distinguishing the claim from the prior art.
With respect to claim 5, the second portion 40 or 90 extends downward from the second (lower) edge of the first portion 30 or 80 in a first position. See Figs. 1, 5 and 9.
GROUND 5: Claims 1, 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ahn.
With respect to claim 1, Ahn discloses a flap/guard 320 for a vehicle 300 comprising:
A first portion 322 comprising a first material that is rigid and not flexible, with the first portion 322 comprising a first (upper) edge (see Fig. 11) for mounting to the vehicle 300 and a second (lower) edge (see Fig. 11) disposed opposite the first edge. See Figs. 4 and 11; ¶¶ 0032, 0075-0076.2
A second portion 324 comprising a second material that is flexible, i.e., flexible plastic. See Fig. 11; ¶ 0032, 0078.
A joint (including at least one fastener as shown in Fig. 11) formed between the first portion 322 and the second portion 324. See Fig. 11; ¶¶ 0032, 0078.
The first material is rigid and not flexible while the second material is flexible. Thus, the first material is stiffer than the second material.
With respect to claim 1, the flap/guard 320 of Ahn functions as a snow flap when the vehicle to which it is attached is driven through snow. Further, the intended use as a snow flap for a snowmobile cannot stand alone in distinguishing the claim from the prior art.
With respect to claim 3, the first portion 322 extends rearward a predetermined angle (as shown in Fig. 11) when the flap/guard 320 is attached to the vehicle 300. The vehicle 300 is a trailer, and its frame defines a tunnel as broadly claimed.
With respect to claim 5, the second portion 324 extends downward from the second (lower) edge of the first portion 322 in a first position. See Fig. 11.
GROUND 6: Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watzek.
With respect to claim 1, Watzek discloses a flap/guard for a vehicle comprising:
A first portion 1 comprising a first material that is rigid, i.e., a rigid polyurethane foam, with the first portion 1 comprising a first edge (see Fig. 1) for mounting to the vehicle and a second edge (see Figs. 1-2) disposed opposite the first edge. See Figs. 1-2; ¶¶ 0005, 0007-0008.3
A second portion 3 comprising a second material that is rubber. See Figs. 1-2; ¶ 0005, 0007-0008.
A joint formed between the first portion 1 and the second portion 3, with the joint including (i) a laterally extending C-shaped channel 2 at the second edge of the first portion 1, and (ii) a thickened bead (see Fig. 2) at an upper edge of the second portion 3, wherein the thickened bead slides into and is retained by the C-shaped channel 2. See Fig. 2; ¶¶ 0005-0008.
The first material is rigid (not flexible) while the second material is rubber, which is flexible. Thus, the first material is stiffer than the second material.
With respect to claim 1, the flap/guard of Watzek functions as a snow flap when the vehicle to which it is attached is driven through snow. Further, the intended use as a snow flap for a snowmobile cannot stand alone in distinguishing the claim from the prior art.
With respect to claim 5, the second portion 3 extends downward from the second edge of the first portion 1 in a first position. See Figs. 1-2.
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.
GROUND 7: Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Girouard et al.
See the detailed discussion of Girouard et al. in GROUND 2. If Girouard et al. is considered to fail to fully teach the claimed angle of about 30 degrees, a modification involving a mere change in angle—or the selection of a particular angle given prior art general conditions—is generally recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art when, as here, it only yields a predictable result. Further, the skilled artisan would appreciate that an angle of about 30 degrees would be consistent with the disclosure of Girouard et al. and would enable the first portion to perform its intended function in an advantageous and efficient manner.
GROUND 8: Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cote, Jr. in view of Watzek, Fichet and Im.
See the detailed discussion of Cote, Jr. in GROUND 3. Cote, Jr. fails to teach that the snow flap 11 is mounted to the snowmobile 10 via the claimed flap mount having a C-channel receiving a retaining profile on the first edge.
Watzek teaches a flap 3 that is mounted to a vehicle chassis via a flap mount 1 that is coupled to the chassis, wherein (i) the flap mount 1 includes a laterally extending C-shaped channel 2, (ii) a thickened bead or retaining profile (see Fig. 2) is formed at an upper edge of the flap 3, and (iii) the thickened bead or retaining profile slides laterally into and is retained by the C-shaped channel 2. See Fig. 2; ¶¶ 0005-0008. Watzek explains that this construction eliminates the need to use screws for attaching the flap, thereby reducing the cost of assembly/production. See ¶ 0005.
Fichet teaches a flap 4 that is mounted to a vehicle chassis via a flap mount 1 that is coupled to the chassis, wherein (i) the flap mount 1 includes a laterally extending C-shaped channel 22, (ii) a thickened bead or retaining profile 24 is formed at an upper edge of the flap 4, and (iii) the thickened bead or retaining profile 24 slides laterally into and is retained by the C-shaped channel 22. See Figs. 1-4; p. 1, ll. 95-108; p. 2, ll. 23-39. Fichet explains that this construction eliminates the need for separate fasteners to attach the flap. See p. 2, ll. 35-39.
Im teaches a flap 12 that is mounted to a vehicle chassis via a flap mount 11 that is coupled to the chassis, wherein (i) the flap mount 11 includes a laterally extending C-shaped channel 13, (ii) a thickened bead or retaining profile 18 is formed at an upper edge of the flap 12, and (iii) the thickened bead or retaining profile 18 slides laterally into and is retained by the C-shaped channel 13. See Figs. 2-3; the last 6 paragraphs on the 2nd page; the 1st paragraph on the 3rd page.4 Im explains that this construction makes it easy to attach the flap to the vehicle and easy to remove and replace it. See the 2nd full paragraph on the 2nd page and the 3rd full paragraph on the 3rd page.
From the teachings of Watzek, Fichet and Im, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Cote, Jr. by mounting the snow flap to the snowmobile via the claimed flap mount having a C-channel receiving a retaining profile on the first edge. Watzek, Fichet and Im teach that such a construction is desireable because it eliminates the need for separate (small) fasteners, reduces cost, and facilitates attachment and removal.
With respect to claim 10, Fichet’s C-shaped channel 22 has one portion (one side of the channel) that extends further from the flap mount 1 than another portion thereof (the other side of the channel). See Fig. 4. Likewise, Im’s C-shaped channel 13 has one portion (one side of the channel) that is provided with an extension 17 that extends further from the flap mount 11 than another portion thereof (the other side of the channel). When such a construction is incorporated into Cote, Jr., the longer portion of the channel would extend further rearward since the snow flap 11 of Cote, Jr. is mounted to extend rearward from the snowmobile, as shown in Fig. 1. Further, it would have been obvious to position the longer portion at the bottom (to provide a longer lower portion of the channel) since there are only two options (either the longer portion is the lower portion of the channel or the upper portion of the channel) and selection between such limited options is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 12, Watzek teaches a generally cylindrical (or circular) profile. See Fig. 2. Fichet teaches a generally D-shaped profile. See Fig. 4. Im teaches a rectangular profile. See Fig. 3. A modification involving a mere change in shape—or the selection of a particular shape given prior art general conditions—is generally recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art when, as here, it only yields a predictable result.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is considered pertinent to the claimed invention but is not relied upon to reject any claim.
Boduen teaches a snow flap 1, 3 for a snow mobile having a second (lower) portion that may be folded and retained to a first (upper) portion (via fasteners 5) in a second position.
Kerner et al. teaches a flexible snow flap 180 for a snowmobile comprising a first flap portion 179, a second flap portion 181 and a third flap portion 183.
Kim et al. teaches a vehicle flap/guard including a first portion 10 that is co-molded with a second portion 30.
Labbe et al. teaches a snow flap assembly for a snowmobile comprising a flap mount 106, a first flap portion 104, and a second flap portion 102.
Lasser teaches a vehicle flap/guard including a rigid upper portion 40a and a lower portion 40b that is substantially rigid.
Matthew et al. teaches a vehicle flap/guard including a metal upper panel 50a and a non-metal (e.g., rubber or plastic) lower panel 50b.
O’Day teaches a flap mount 15 including a retainer tab 25 for retaining a vehicle flap 75.
Rutsch teaches a vehicle flap/guard including a metal upper portion 35/36 and plastic lower portions 22, 24.
Sauermann teaches a vehicle flap/guard including an upper portion 1 connected to a lower portion 2.
Simpson teaches a vehicle flap/guard having a retaining profile 16 received within a C-shaped channel 12.
Verge teaches that it was known to construct a vehicle flap/guard of an upper portion made of stainless steel and a lower portion made of a material with some flexibility such as rubber or plastic. See col. 1, ll. 14-22.
Response Period
A shortened statutory period for response is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Filing and Contact Information
All correspondence relating to this application should be directed:
By Patent Center5: Registered users may submit via the Patent Center at: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/
By Mail to: Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent & Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
By FAX to: (571) 273-8300
By hand: Customer Service Window
Knox Building
501 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter English whose telephone number is (571)272-6671. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00 am - 6:00 pm EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s the examiner’s supervisor, Eileen Lillis, can be reached at 571-272-6928.
/PETER C ENGLISH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993
1 See ¶ 0084 of Labbe et al.
2 All citations are to the English translation.
3 All citations are to the English translation.
4 All citations are to the English translation.
5 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).
Prosecution Insights