Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to
www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp.
3. Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No US 9,205,881. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they recite substantially similar limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of
35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McDonald (US 4,772,038).
[CLAIM 1] Regarding claim 1, McDonald discloses a trailer, comprising: a trailer frame (McDonald Figs. 2-3: frame 3) having a hitch (McDonald Fig. 1: shown below reference number 13); a stationary support base (McDonald Fig. 2: traction bar 7, rear transverse member 9, and front transverse member 11) joined to the trailer frame; two support plates (McDonald Fig. 2: movable rectangular frames 17 and 19) slidably guided on the support base toward and away from each other; a pair of wheel assemblies (McDonald Fig. 1: wheel assembly 5) wherein a wheel assembly is mounted to an end of each of the support plates remote from the other support plate such that a distance between the wheel assemblies varies with movement of the support plates on the support base (McDonald, FIG 2); and a drive mechanism (McDonald Fig. 2: pinions 37 and 39) having a movable member operably configured to selectively move the support plates simultaneously toward each other when the movable member is moved in a first direction (McDonald enables in/out directional movement via tool 77 in FIG 3) or simultaneously away from each other when the movable member is moved in a second direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
756
559
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 2] Regarding claim 2, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim 1 wherein the drive mechanism comprises a rack and pinion mechanism with a drive shaft (Fig. 2: rack 41 and pinions 37,39 and shafts 29), the rack and pinion mechanism including a pair of racks rack secured to each of the pinion gears operably coupled to each of the racks/frames wherein selective rotation of the drive shaft in the first direction causes simultaneous movement of the racks toward each other and wherein selective rotation of the drive shaft in the second direction causes simultaneous movement of the racks away from each other (McDonald FIGS 2-3).
[CLAIM 7] Regarding claim 7, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim 1 and further comprising a locking device (McDonald Col. 3, lines 57- 62: describes a free end 45 of the rods 29, designed to receive a key) to selectively lock each support plate to the support base in a first position where the wheel assemblies are furthest from each other and a second position where the wheel assemblies are closer to each other (McDonald the frames can move in/or out for folding and be selectively locked if desired by the user).
[CLAIM 8] Regarding claim 8, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim 7 wherein each locking device comprises a member (McDonald Fig. 3: square key head portion of 77) selectively engageable with a recess in each of the first and second positions (the key is engageable with the recess of free end 45 in the first position, second position and all positions there-between
[CLAIM 15] Regarding claim 15, McDonald discloses a trailer, comprising: a trailer frame (McDonald Figs. 2-3: frame 3) having a hitch (McDonald Fig. 1: shown below reference number 13); a stationary support base (McDonald Fig. 2: traction bar 7, rear transverse member 9, and front transverse member 11) joined to the trailer frame (All parts of the trailer are joined at final assembly); two support plates (McDonald Fig. 2: movable rectangular frames 17 and 19) slidably guided on the support base toward and away from each other (McDonald is designed to move in/out); a pair of wheel assemblies, wherein a wheel assembly (McDonald Fig. 1: wheel assembly 5) is mounted to an end of each of the support plates remote from the other support plate such that a distance between the wheel assemblies varies with movement of the support plates on the support base (McDonald, FIG 2); a user operated drive (McDonald Fig. 2: pinions 37 and 39) coupled to the support plates and a floor (McDonald FIG 1) secured to the frame (All trailer components are secured at final assembly).
[CLAIM 17] Regarding claim 17, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim +claim 15 and further comprising: a lock device (McDonald Col. 3, lines 57- 62: describes a free end 45 of the rods 29, designed to receive a key) to selectively lock each support plate to the support base in a first position with respect to the support base and a second position with respect to the support base (McDonald the frames can move in/or out for folding as desired by the user).
[CLAIM 18] Regarding claim 18, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim 17, wherein the support plates are configured to simultaneously move toward each other in a first direction (McDonald the frames can move in/out for folding if desired by the user) or simultaneously away from each other in a second direction.
[CLAIM 19] Regarding claim 19, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim 15, wherein the drive includes a movable member (McDonald, the trailer assembly when disassembled, enables movement of all components), and wherein the support plates are configured to simultaneously move toward each other when the movable member is moved in a first direction (McDonald the frames can move in/or out for folding along with the support plates if desired to do so by the user) or simultaneously away from each other when the movable member is moved in a second direction.
[CLAIM 20] Regarding claim 20, McDonald discloses the trailer of claim 15, wherein the support plates are configured to simultaneously move toward each other in a first direction (McDonald, the frames can move in/out for folding along with the support plates if desired to do so by the user) or simultaneously away from each other in a second direction.
EXAMINER REPLY
Amendment to claims 1, 10 and 15 are acknowledged and eliminates the statutory double patenting rejection made in the office action dated 8/11/26. However, a non-statutory double patenting rejection of claims 1-16 over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent US 9,205,881 is appropriate because of applicant’s claim amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES J TRIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-3411. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM PST.
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, Marc Jimenez can be reached on (571)272-.4530. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES J TRIGGS/Examiner AU 3615
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights