DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 1002. This objection could be overcome by changing “1002” to --102-- in Fig. 11. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
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 first frame portion and the second frame portion must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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:
In paragraph 0022, line 1, “portions” should be changed to --portions of--.
In paragraph 0023, line 1, “portions” should be changed to --portions of--.
In paragraph 0024, line 1, “portions” should be changed to --portions of--.
In paragraph 0025, line 1, “portions” should be changed to --portions of--.
In paragraph 0026, line 1, “portions” should be changed to --portions of--.
In paragraph 0031, line 2 (as filed on 06/12/2026), “aspect” should be changed to --aspects--.
In paragraph 0032, line 3 (as filed on 06/12/2026), “aspect” should be changed to --aspects--.
In paragraph 0045, line 2, “352” should be changed to --353--.
In paragraph 0050, line 6 (as filed on 06/12/2026), “350, 352” should be changed to --351, 353--.
In paragraph 0053, line 4, “Iin” should be changed to --In--.
In paragraph 0053, line 6, “316” should be changed to --308--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 15 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. Similarly, should any of claims 3-7 be found allowable, the similar claim(s) of claim(s) 16-20 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 2-7 and 9-20 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.
The limitation “the suspension bracket, the suspension brace and the shock absorber are configured at least partially within an area between the first side frame and the second side frame” in claims 2 and 15, and the similar limitation in claim 9 do not accurately describe the invention. As shown in Figs. 10 and 11, neither the suspension brace 1012 nor the shock absorber 1010 is even partially within an area between the first side frame (e.g., 502) and the second side frame (e.g., 504), both the suspension brace 1012 and the shock absorber 1010 being entirely above the first side frame (e.g., 502) and the second side frame (e.g., 504) and therefore not even partially within an area between the first side frame (e.g., 502) and the second side frame (e.g., 504).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holroyd et al. (US 2017/0120972 A1). Holroyd discloses a suspension apparatus, configured for a center-positioned rear wheel (e.g., 8) apparatus of a vehicle (e.g., 2) comprising two front wheels (e.g., 6), the suspension apparatus comprising: a suspension bracket (e.g., 54), coupled to the center-positioned rear wheel apparatus and to a first frame portion (e.g., 200) of a frame (e.g., 4) of the vehicle; a suspension brace (e.g., 216), centrally coupled to a second frame portion (e.g., 180) of the frame of the vehicle, the suspension brace comprising a diagonally raised connection end (Figs. 3, 7, 12 and 17; paragraph 0079); and a shock absorber (e.g., 52), comprising a first end coupled to the suspension bracket and a second end coupled (via second frame portion 180) to the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace, wherein the shock absorber extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket toward the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (Figs. 3 and 12). The frame of the vehicle comprises a first side frame (e.g., one lateral side of the frame) and a second side frame (e.g., the opposite lateral side of the frame), and wherein the suspension bracket, the suspension brace and the shock absorber are configured within an area between the first side frame and the second side frame (Fig. 12). Said suspension apparatus is implicitly configured via a method as recited in claims 8 and 9.
Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Codere et al. (US 2007/0251745 A1). Codere discloses a suspension apparatus, configured for a center-positioned rear wheel (e.g., 16) apparatus of a vehicle (e.g., 10) comprising two front wheels (e.g., 14), the suspension apparatus comprising: a suspension bracket (e.g., 56), coupled to the center-positioned rear wheel apparatus and to a first frame portion (e.g., 102) of a frame (e.g., 42) of the vehicle; a suspension brace (e.g., 106), centrally coupled to a second frame portion (e.g., 100) of the frame of the vehicle, the suspension brace comprising a diagonally raised connection end (Figs. 8, 9, 11-13, 15 and 16); and a shock absorber (e.g., 58), comprising a first end coupled to the suspension bracket and a second end coupled to the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (Figs. 8, 9, 11 and 12), wherein the shock absorber extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket toward the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (Figs. 8, 9, 11 and 12). Said suspension apparatus is implicitly configured via a method as recited in claim 8.
Response to Amendment
It seems that applicant unintentionally indicated that original ¶¶0047-49 should be replaced by replacement ¶0047 in the amendments to the specification filed on June 12, 2026. It is suspected that applicant only intended original ¶0047 to be replaced by replacement ¶0047.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on June 12, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments with respect to the drawing objection(s) for the “first frame portion” and the “second frame portion” not being shown, applicant seems to suggest that a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand which portions of illustrated frame portions 502, 504, 506 and 508 correspond to the claimed first and second frame portions. First 506 and second 508 side frames are a part of trailer 120, and therefore a person of ordinary skill in the art would not consider them to correspond to the claimed first and second frame portions, since the claimed first and second frame portions are claimed as being parts of a vehicle (e.g., 110), and trailer 120 is not a part of vehicle 110. The independent claims specify that the suspension brace is centrally coupled to the second frame portion. However, the suspension brace 1012 is not centrally coupled to either frame portion 502 or 504, since neither frame portion 502 or frame portion 504 is centrally positioned, frame portions 502 and 504 being positioned laterally outward from the longitudinal center of the vehicle. Thus, neither frame portion 502 nor 504 matches the claim limitations of the independent claims at least with respect to how the suspension brace is coupled to the second frame portion, since the suspension brace 1012 is not centrally coupled to either frame portion 502 or frame portion 504. Furthermore, claims 2, 9 and 15 recite a “first side frame” and a “second side frame” in addition to the claimed first and second frame portions, said first and second side frames seemingly corresponding to frame portions 502 and 504. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be led to understand that the claimed first side frame and the claimed second side frame are different elements than the claimed first frame portion and the claimed second frame portion at least due to the differing terminology that is used in the claims, and based on such an understanding, said person of ordinary skill in the art would not be led to understand that either frame portion 502 or frame portion 504 corresponds to the claimed first frame portion or the claimed second frame portion. That is, a person of ordinary skill in the art would actually be led by the disclosure to understand that the claimed first frame portion and the claimed second frame portion do not correspond to the frame portions 502 and 504, since the claimed first and second side frames correspond to the frame portions 502 and 504. Applicant’s remarks did not clearly identify which elements in the drawings correspond to the claimed first and second frame portions, and it still seems, even considering applicant’s remarks, that the claimed first and second frame portions are not shown.
Applicant’s remarks with respect to why “316” was not changed to --308-- in paragraph 0053 seem to be based on a misunderstanding of the Office action. The Office action indicated that “316” should be changed to --308-- in line 6 of paragraph 0053, whereas applicant’s remarks seem to explain why “316” was not changed to --308-- in line 3 of paragraph 0053.
Regarding applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection(s), as shown in Figs. 10 and 11, neither the suspension brace 1012 nor the shock absorber 1010 is even partially within an area between the first side frame (e.g., 502) and the second side frame (e.g., 504), both the suspension brace 1012 and the shock absorber 1010 being entirely above the first side frame (e.g., 502) and the second side frame (e.g., 504) and therefore not even partially within an area between the first side frame (e.g., 502) and the second side frame (e.g., 504).
In response to applicant’s arguments that Holroyd does not satisfy the limitation “a second end coupled to the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace”, the second end of the shock absorber (e.g., 52) in Holroyd is coupled (via second frame portion 180) to the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (e.g., 216). The claims do not preclude the second end of the shock absorber from being coupled to the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace via intervening structure(s) (e.g., 180).
In response to applicant’s arguments in the second full paragraph on page 17 of the remarks, the shock absorber (e.g., 52) in Holroyd extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket (e.g., 54) toward (“In the direction of: driving toward home”; “In a position facing: had his back toward me”; “in the area or vicinity of; near.”; “turned to: facing” - https://www.thefreedictionary.com/toward) the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (e.g., 216), as shown in Figs. 3 and 12. That is, the shock absorber (e.g., 52) in Holroyd extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket (e.g., 54) in the direction (i.e., in a frontward direction) of the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (e.g., 216), as shown in Figs. 3 and 12. That is, the shock absorber (e.g., 52) in Holroyd extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket (e.g., 54) in a position facing (i.e., in a frontward-facing position) the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (e.g., 216), as shown in Figs. 3 and 12. That is, the shock absorber (e.g., 52) in Holroyd extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket (e.g., 54) in the area or vicinity of / near the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (e.g., 216), as shown in Figs. 3 and 12. That is, the shock absorber (e.g., 52) in Holroyd extends in a raised diagonal direction from the suspension bracket (e.g., 54) turned to / facing (i.e., in a frontward-facing position) the diagonally raised connection end of the suspension brace (e.g., 216), as shown in Figs. 3 and 12.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH J FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)270-7802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571)270-5985. 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.
/KEITH J FRISBY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights