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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s information disclosure statement filed 10/10/2023 has been considered and is included in the file.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the ring-shaped spacer of claim 7 and the intermediary flap hingedly secured between the rear end of the platform and the rear flap of claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 16 incorrectly shows the first crease line “56” and the second crease line “146” in the wrong locations. The first crease line forming the rear flap and the second crease line forming the intermediary flap.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: “214”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0064] recites the “platform 10” which is mislabeled.
Paragraph [0070] recites an “intermediary flap 46” which is mislabeled.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 7, 8, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 27-32, the use of “a ---” when it was already presented above in the claim, should be changed to “the ---“. An example being “a third storage accessory being a first container” should be changed to --the third storage accessory being the first container--.
In claim 1, line 34, “the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth” should be changed to --the first, the second, the third, the fourth, the fifth, or the sixth--.
In claim 7, line 2, “internal cavity” should be changed to --interior cavity--.
In claim 8, lines 1-2, “the second storage accessory configured to store a bucket comprising” should be changed to --wherein the second storage accessory configured to store a bucket comprises--.
In claim 11, lines 10-11, “each series of the plurality configured to attach a particular storage accessory; a plurality of storage accessories” should be changed to --a plurality of storage accessories; each series of slots of the plurality of series of slots are configured to attach a particular storage accessory of the plurality of storage accessories--.
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.
Claims 6-9, 11-20 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 6 recites the limitation “attachment pieces” in line 8. It is unclear if these are the same as the attachment piece recited in claim 1. For the purposes of examination, the attachment pieces will be read as multiple portions of the attachment piece recited in claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “a ring-shaped spacer configured to be inserted into the internal cavity” in lines 1-2. It is unclear how the ring-shaped spacer would be inserted and be maintained within the “interior cavity” since the four corner pieces do not connect.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “attachment pieces” in line 6. It is unclear if these are the same as the attachment piece recited in claim 1. For the purposes of examination, the attachment pieces will be read as multiple portions of the attachment piece recited in claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the four corner pieces” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, the limitation is misrepresentative of the disclosed invention, since the four corner pieces appears to be the Fig. 5 embodiment, and the stepped interior cavity is the embodiment of Fig. 5A.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the intermediary flap hingedly secured between the rear end of the platform and the rear flap” in line 3, which is misrepresentative of the disclosed invention in which the intermediary flap is not between the rear end and the rear flap, see paragraph [0070] of original disclosure.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “a platform” and “a generally rectangular platform”. It is unclear if the second reference is referring to the same platform or if there are multiple platforms. For the purposes of examination, the phrases will be read as one platform that is generally rectangular in shape.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the series of slots in the storage accessories" in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “attachment pieces” in line 19. It is unclear if these are the same as the attachment piece recited earlier in claim 18. For the purposes of examination, the attachment pieces will be read as multiple portions of the attachment piece recited in claim 18.
Claims 12-15, 17, and 19-20 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026) and Douglass et al. (US 6648569).
Regarding claim 1, Derbes et al. discloses a slidable bed liner (Fig. 1) for a cargo storage area of a vehicle (Fig. 2), comprising: a generally rectangular platform (Fig. 1, abstract), including: a top side (12); a bottom side (opposite of (12)); a front end (top of Fig. 1); a rear end (bottom of Fig. 1); the bottom side of the platform having a low coefficient of friction designed to slide along a top surface of a floor of the cargo storage area of the vehicle (col. 5, lines 8-14, claim 1); a rear flap hingedly secured to the rear end (col. 7, line 65 – col. 8, line 3, Fig. 3E); at least one handhold (21) positioned on the rear flap (Fig. 2); a series of slots traversing through the platform configured to removably attach a storage accessory for storing a bucket (35); a series of slots traversing through the platform configured to removably attach a storage accessory being a first container (35); a series of slots traversing through the platform configured to removably attach a storage accessory being a second container (35); a series of slots traversing through the platform configured to removably attach a storage accessory being a retaining barrier (15); the series of slots positioned towards the front end of the platform (Fig. 1); a series of slots traversing through the platform configured to removably attach a bicycle storage accessory (Fig. 6); a plurality of storage accessories, including a storage accessory configured to store a bucket (35); a storage accessory being a first container (35); a storage accessory being a second container (35); a storage accessory being a retaining barrier (15); a storage accessory being a bicycle storage accessory (Fig. 6); wherein the slidable bed liner is designed to slide in and out of an open cargo storage area of the vehicle to facilitate the loading and unloading of cargo (claim 1).
Derbes et al. does not explicitly disclose a series of slots traversing through the platform configured to removably attach a storage accessory for storing long handled tools; wherein each series of slots are unique to removably attach a particular storage accessory; a storage accessory configured to store long handled tools; and an attachment piece configured to removably attach storage accessories to the platform through the series of slots traversing through the platform.
Liddle et al., like Derbes et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches a storage accessory (10) for storing long handled tools (17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. to include a storage accessory configured to store long handled tools as taught by Liddle et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a storage space for a commonly transported set of tools to provide a more complete storage solution for the user.
Harrison, like Derbes et al. and Liddle et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches wherein each series of slots are unique to removably attach a particular storage accessory (col. 3, lines 42-52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. modified by Liddle et al. to provide specific series of slots for particular storage accessories as taught by Harrison, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to tailor the slots to specific storage accessories for a better fit within the cargo storage area.
Douglass et al., like Derbes et al., Liddle et al., and Harrision, teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches an attachment piece (310) configured to removably attach storage accessories to the platform through the series of slots traversing through the platform (Figs. 1 and 8, col. 4, lines 58-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. modified by Liddle et al. and Harrison with an attachment piece as taught by Douglass et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a secure connection between the platform and the storage accessories.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026) and Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lance et al. (US 2002/0014505).
Regarding claim 2, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 1, and teaches (references to Douglass et al.) a series of slots traversing through a bottom surface of each storage accessory (Fig. 1, col. 4, lines 58-61).
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach the bed liner further comprising: the series of slots in the bottom surface of the first storage accessory corresponding to the first series of slots traversing through the platform; the series of slots in the bottom surface of the second storage accessory corresponding to the second series of slots traversing through the platform; the series of slots in the bottom surface of the third storage accessory corresponding to the third series of slots traversing through the platform; the series of slots in the bottom surface of the fourth storage accessory corresponding to the fourth series of slots traversing through the platform; the series of slots in the bottom surface of the fifth storage accessory corresponding to the fifth series of slots traversing through the platform; and the series of slots in the bottom surface of the bicycle storage accessory corresponding to the sixth series of slots traversing through the platform.
Lance et al., like Derbes et al., Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches a series of slots (154) traversing through a bottom surface of each storage accessory (150a); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the first storage accessory corresponding to the first series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the second storage accessory corresponding to the second series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the third storage accessory corresponding to the third series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the fourth storage accessory corresponding to the fourth series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the fifth storage accessory corresponding to the fifth series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12); and the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the bicycle storage accessory corresponding to the sixth series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. to provide slots in each storage accessory corresponding to the slots in the platform as taught by Lance et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a securing location for each storage accessory for a fixed, non-movable storage unit while in transport.
Regarding claim 3, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 2, and teaches (references to Lance et al.) wherein attachment pieces (174) traverse through both the series of slots in the platform and the series of slots in the storage accessories to removably attach the storage accessory to the platform (paragraph [0052], Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 4, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 3, and teaches (references to Douglass et al.) wherein each attachment piece (310) comprises: a base having a circular, convex shape designed to prevent the attachment piece from catching on the top surface of the floor of the cargo storage area of the vehicle as the slidable bed liner slides in and out of the open cargo storage area of the vehicle (Fig. 9, (312), (315)); the base being larger in diameter than the series of slots in the platform to prevent the attachment piece from being pulled through a slot during use (Fig. 9); a vertical rail extending upwards from a top surface of the base (Fig. 9); the vertical rail configured to traverse through both the series of slots in the platform and the series of slots in the storage accessories to removably attach the storage accessory to the platform (Fig. 1).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026), Douglass et al. (US 6648569), and Lance et al. (US 2002/0014505) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Ferreira (US 9550444).
Regarding claim 5, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 4. However, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the vertical rail of the attachment piece includes a locking mechanism configured to removably secure the attachment piece to the storage accessory.
Ferreira, like Derbes et al., teaches liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches wherein a vertical rail of an attachment piece includes a locking mechanism configured to removably secure the attachment piece to a storage accessory (col. 4, lines 45-49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. to include a locking mechanism as taught by Ferreira, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to secure the storage accessory in place with the ability to remove the storage accessory when necessary.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026) and Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lance et al. (US 2002/0014505) and Taylor (US 2008/0284181).
Regarding claim 6, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 1, and teaches (references to Douglass et al.) a series of slots traversing through a bottom surface of each storage accessory (Fig. 1, col. 4, lines 58-61).
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the second storage accessory configured to store a bucket comprises: four corner pieces; each corner piece including a curved interior wall, a top surface, and a flat bottom surface; a series of slots traversing through the bottom surface of each corner piece; the series of slots of each corner piece corresponding with the second series of slots in the platform; and attachment pieces traversing through both the series of slots in the corner pieces and the second series of slots in the platform to removably attach the second storage accessory to the platform; wherein the curved interior walls of the four corner pieces when attached to the platform form an interior cavity for securing a bucket snugly therein.
Lance et al., like Derbes et al., Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches a series of slots (154) traversing through a bottom surface of each storage accessory (150a); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the storage accessory corresponding to the series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. to provide slots in each storage accessory corresponding to the slots in the platform as taught by Lance et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a securing location for each storage accessory for a fixed, non-movable storage unit while in transport.
Taylor, like Derbes et al., teaches a storage accessory configured to store a bucket, and further teaches the storage accessory (100) comprising: four corner pieces (300); each corner piece including a curved interior wall (curved through (400)), a top surface (Fig. 1), and a flat bottom surface (Fig. 1); a series of slots traversing through the bottom surface of each corner piece (350); wherein the curved interior walls of the four corner pieces when attached to the platform form an interior cavity for securing a bucket snugly therein (Fig. 3, paragraph [0054] securing the receptacle, i.e. bucket).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. to have the storage accessory configured to store a bucket include four corner pieces as taught by Taylor, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to better secure the bucket, particularly if used in place (Taylor: paragraph [0054]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026) and Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lance et al. (US 2002/0014505) and Desjardins (US 4998696).
Regarding claim 8, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 1, and teaches (references to Douglass et al.) a series of slots traversing through a bottom surface (Fig. 1, col. 4, lines 58-61).
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the second storage accessory configured to store a bucket comprises: a curved interior wall, four exterior walls, a top surface, and a flat bottom surface; the series of slots corresponding with the second series of slots in the platform; and attachment pieces traversing through both the series of slots in the second storage accessory and the second series of slots in the platform to removably attach the second storage accessory to the platform; the curved interior walls of the four corner pieces when attached to the platform form an interior cavity for securing a bucket snugly therein; the interior cavity comprising a series of circular steps; wherein each step of the series form a unique diameter sized to fit a particular size of bucket to be stored by the second storage accessory.
Lance et al., like Derbes et al., Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches a series of slots (154) traversing through a bottom surface of each storage accessory (150a); the series of slots (154) in the bottom surface of the storage accessory corresponding to the series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. to provide slots in each storage accessory corresponding to the slots in the platform as taught by Lance et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a securing location for each storage accessory for a fixed, non-movable storage unit while in transport.
Desjardins, like Derbes et al., teaches a storage accessory (Figs. 2-3) for storing a bucket, and further teaches a curved interior wall (32), four exterior walls (28), a top surface (Figs. 2-3), and a flat bottom surface (26); the curved interior walls of the four corner pieces when attached to the platform form an interior cavity for securing a bucket snugly therein (Figs. 2-3); the interior cavity comprising a series of circular steps ((34), (36), 39)); wherein each step of the series form a unique diameter sized to fit a particular size of bucket to be stored by the second storage accessory (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, Douglass et al., and Lance et al. to include a curved interior wall, to secure a bucket snugly with a series of circular steps as taught by Desjardins, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a secure space for buckets with smaller diameters, and can be selected from three or more of the most common sized buckets for a tighter, more secure hold.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026) and Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Marshall (US 2016/0214522).
Regarding claim 9, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 1.
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach the bed liner further comprising an intermediary flap positioned proximal to the rear flap of the platform; the intermediary flap hingedly secured between the rear end of the platform and the rear flap; and the intermediary flap and the rear flap configured to be folded up and compressed against a closed cargo storage area of the vehicle such that the slidable bed liner becomes compatible with a vehicle having a smaller cargo storage area.
Marshall, like Derbes et al., teaches a slidable bed liner (100), and further teaches the bed liner comprising an intermediary flap (120) positioned proximal to the rear flap (130) of the platform; the intermediary flap hingedly secured between the rear end of the platform and the rear flap (as best understood with respect to the 112b rejection, the intermediary flap here is hingedly secured to the rear flap (Fig. 2A); and the intermediary flap and the rear flap configured to be folded up and compressed against a closed cargo storage area of the vehicle such that the slidable bed liner becomes compatible with a vehicle having a smaller cargo storage area (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. to include an intermediary flap as taught by Marshall, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to fit within a smaller cargo area when necessary (Marshall: abstract).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Liddle et al. (US 2013/0134195), Harrison (US 7731026) and Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wooden, Jr. (US 2017/0043697).
Regarding claim 10, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 1.
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the platform is comprised of cardboard materials.
Wooden, Jr., like Derbes et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches the platform is comprised of cardboard materials (paragraph [0003] teaches cardboard as a material to use for ease of sliding).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Liddle et al., Harrison, and Douglass et al. to be comprised of cardboard materials as is taught by Wooden, Jr., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve the slidability of the bed liner along the cargo storage area of a vehicle (Wooden, Jr.: paragraph [0003]).
Claims 11-13, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Douglass et al. (US 6648569).
Regarding claim 11, Derbes et al. discloses a slidable bed liner (Fig. 1) for a cargo storage area of a vehicle (Fig. 2), comprising: a platform (Fig. 1, abstract), including: a generally rectangular platform (Fig. 1, abstract), including a top side (12), a bottom side (opposite of (12)), a front end (top of Fig. 1), and a rear end (bottom of Fig. 1); the bottom side of the platform having a low coefficient of friction designed to slide along a top surface of a floor of the cargo storage area of the vehicle (col. 5, lines 8-14, claim 1); a rear flap hingedly secured to the rear end (col. 7, line 65 – col. 8, line 3, Fig. 3E); at least one handhold (21) positioned on the rear flap (Fig. 2); a plurality of series of slots ((21), (32)) traversing through the platform (10); each series of slots of the plurality configured to attach a particular storage accessory ((35), (15), Fig. 6); a plurality of storage accessories ((35), (15), Fig. 6); wherein the slidable bed liner is designed to slide in and out of an open cargo storage area of the vehicle to facilitate the loading and unloading of cargo (claim 1).
Derbes et al. does not explicitly disclose an attachment piece configured to removably attach storage accessories to the platform through the series of slots traversing through the platform.
Douglass et al., like Derbes et al., teaches a slidable bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches an attachment piece (310) configured to removably attach storage accessories to the platform through the series of slots traversing through the platform (Figs. 1 and 8, col. 4, lines 58-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. with an attachment piece as taught by Douglass et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a secure connection between the platform and the storage accessories.
Regarding claim 12, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 11, and teaches (references to Derbes et al.) wherein the plurality of slots traversing through the platform comprise at least two of the following: a first series of slots configured to removably attach a first storage accessory for storing long handled tools; a second series of slots configured to removably attach a second storage accessory for storing a bucket; a third series of slots (Fig. 3D) configured to removably attach a third storage accessory being a first container (35); a fourth series of slots (Fig. 3E) configured to removably attach a fourth storage accessory being a second container (35); a fifth series of slots (under (15)) configured to removably attach a fifth storage accessory being a retaining barrier (15); and a sixth series of slots configured to removably attach a bicycle storage accessory (Fig. 6). Please note at least two listed have been provided for the full rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 13, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 11, and teaches (references to Derbes et al.) wherein the plurality of storage accessories comprise at least two of the following: a first storage accessory configured to store long handled tools; a second storage accessory configured to store a bucket; a third storage accessory being a first container (35); a fourth storage accessory being a second container (35); a fifth storage accessory being a retaining barrier (15); and a sixth storage accessory being a bicycle storage accessory (Fig. 6). Please note at least two listed have been provided for the full rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 16, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 11, and teaches, and teaches (references to Douglass et al.) wherein each attachment piece (310) comprises: a base having a circular, convex shape (Fig. 9, (312), (315)); a vertical rail extending upwards from a top surface of the base (Fig. 9); the vertical rail configured to traverse through both the series of slots in the platform and the series of slots in the storage accessories to removably attach the storage accessory to the platform (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Derbes et al. discloses a method of using a slidable bed liner (Fig. 1) to transport cargo in a vehicle, comprising: providing a vehicle having a cargo storage area (Fig. 2); providing cargo in need of transport (35); providing a slidable bed liner (Fig. 1), comprising: a generally rectangular platform (Fig. 1, abstract) including a top side (12), a bottom side (opposite of (12)), a front end (top of Fig. 1), and a rear end (bottom of Fig. 1); the bottom side of the platform having a low coefficient of friction designed to slide along a top surface of a floor of the cargo storage area of the vehicle (col. 5, lines 8-14, claim 1); a rear flap hingedly secured to the rear end (col. 7, line 65 – col. 8, line 3, Fig. 3E); at least one handhold (21) positioned on the rear flap (Fig. 2); a plurality of series of slots ((21), (32)) traversing through the platform (10); each series of slots of the plurality configured to attach a particular storage accessory ((35), (15), Fig. 6); a plurality of storage accessories ((35), (15), Fig. 6); wherein the slidable bed liner is designed to slide in and out of an open cargo storage area of the vehicle to facilitate the loading and unloading of cargo (claim 1); selecting a particular storage accessory depending on the cargo to be transported ((35), (15)); setting the slidable bed liner in the cargo storage area of the vehicle (Fig. 2); loading cargo onto the slidable bed liner using the storage accessory to ensure reliable securement of the cargo therein (col. 5, lines 35-38); and transporting the cargo to a destination using the vehicle (implied use based on vehicle and securing of the cargo).
Derbes et al. does not explicitly disclose an attachment piece configured to removably attach storage accessories to the platform through the series of slots traversing through the platform; removably attaching the storage accessory to the platform using attachment pieces.
Douglass et al., like Derbes et al., teaches a slidable bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches an attachment piece (310) configured to removably attach storage accessories to the platform through the series of slots traversing through the platform (Figs. 1 and 8, col. 4, lines 58-61); and removably attaching the storage accessory to the platform using attachment pieces (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Derbes et al. with an attachment piece as taught by Douglass et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a secure connection between the platform and the storage accessories while in transport.
Claims 14-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 11 and claim 18 above respectively, and further in view of Lance et al. (US 2002/0014505).
Regarding claim 14, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 11.
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach the bed liner further comprising: each storage accessory having a series of slots traversing through a bottom surface; wherein the series of slots traversing through the bottom surface of each storage accessory correspond to a particular series of slots traversing through the platform.
Lance et al., like Derbes et al. and Douglass et al., teaches a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches each storage accessory (150a) having a series of slots (154) traversing through a bottom surface; wherein the series of slots (154) traversing through the bottom surface of each storage accessory correspond to a particular series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. to provide slots in each storage accessory corresponding to the slots in the platform as taught by Lance et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a securing location for each storage accessory for a fixed, non-movable storage unit while in transport.
Regarding claim 15, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. and Lance et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 14, and teaches (references to Lance et al.) wherein attachment pieces (174) traverse through both the series of slots in the platform and the series of slots in the storage accessories to removably attach the storage accessory to the platform (paragraph [0052], Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 19, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. teaches the method of claim 18.
However, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach the method further comprising: each storage accessory having a series of slots traversing through a bottom surface; wherein the series of slots traversing through the bottom surface of each storage accessory correspond to a particular series of slots traversing through the platform.
Lance et al., like Derbes et al. and Douglass et al., teaches a method of use a bed liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches each storage accessory (150a) having a series of slots (154) traversing through a bottom surface; wherein the series of slots (154) traversing through the bottom surface of each storage accessory correspond to a particular series of slots (172) traversing through the platform (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. to provide slots in each storage accessory corresponding to the slots in the platform as taught by Lance et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a securing location for each storage accessory for a fixed, non-movable storage unit while in transport.
Regarding claim 20, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. and Lance et al. teaches the method of claim 19, and teaches (references to Lance et al.) wherein attachment pieces (174) traverse through both the series of slots in the platform and the series of slots in the storage accessories to removably attach the storage accessory to the platform (paragraph [0052], Fig. 6).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derbes et al. (US 8840166) in view of Douglass et al. (US 6648569) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Ferreira (US 9550444).
Regarding claim 17, Derbes et al. as modified Douglass et al. teaches the bed liner of claim 16. However, Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the vertical rail of the attachment piece includes a locking mechanism configured to removably secure the attachment piece to the storage accessory.
Ferreira, like Derbes et al., teaches a liner for a cargo storage area of a vehicle, and further teaches wherein a vertical rail of an attachment piece includes a locking mechanism configured to removably secure the attachment piece to a storage accessory (col. 4, lines 45-49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed liner of Derbes et al. as modified by Douglass et al. to include a locking mechanism as taught by Ferreira, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to secure the storage accessory in place with the ability to remove the storage accessory when necessary.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 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:
Regarding claim 7, fails to teach the specifics of a ring-shaped spacer configured to be inserted into the interior cavity to secure a different sized bucket as compared to the second storage accessory acting alone. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the interior cavity formed by four corner pieces of the storage accessory in this manner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Kearney, Jr. (US 5887926) and Kearney, Jr. (US 6007129) teach storage accessories for long handled tools. Lance et al. (US 6460744) teaches a slidable bed liner. Smith et al. (US 7290820), Crandall (US 7794003), Gelli (US 3006487), Bartkus (US 4772165), Erickson et al. (US 5154478), Phirippidis (US 5469999), Kane (US 11584305), Levine et al. (US 12221071), Gibson (US 2004/0084491), Franks (US 2012/0325877), and Ryan (US 6682118) teach unique areas for storage accessories. Westfall (US 11104261), Phillips (US 12337746), and Rutman et al. (US 12344197) teach attachment pieces. Morris (US 2015/0093177), Scott (US 2008/0017648), and Min (WO 2018/155780) teach bucket storage accessories and the like.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate Friday.
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, Peter M Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643