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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-20 in the reply filed on 6/30/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 16 is 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.
Claims 16 recites the limitation "the one or more rails" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested the dependency of the claim be changed from “10” to “15” in order to provide antecedent basis for the limitation.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 3, 10, 11, 14, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dumlao et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2003/0046779).
Re claim 1, Dumlao et al. discloses a floor assembly for a cargo vehicle (see paragraph 0061 which discloses that the structure can be used in an over-the-road trailer), comprising a composite decking (32, figure 6, see also paragraph 0065 which discloses materials of the decking) having an upper surface configured to support cargo and a lower surface opposite to the upper surface (see the annotated figure below), the lower surface being substantially flat; and a corrugated structure (50, figure 1) coupled to the lower surface of the composite decking, the corrugated structure comprising one or more corrugated sections that each form respective channels (25, figure 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
412
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 2, the composite decking and the corrugated structure are adjoined continuously with respect to each other (as shown by figures 1 and 2, they are continuous with each other).
Re claim 3, the corrugated structure comprises at least one of a metal (see paragraph 0065 in which it is disclosed the corrugated structure can include metal) or a composite laminate comprising at least a resin matrix and fiber reinforcements.
Re claim 10, Dumlao et al. discloses a floor assembly for a cargo vehicle (see paragraph 0061 which discloses that the structure can be used in an over-the-road trailer), comprising a composite decking (32, figure 6, see also paragraph 0065 which discloses materials of the decking) having an upper surface configured to support cargo and a lower surface opposite to the upper surface (see the annotated figure above); and a corrugated structure (50, 50, and 50”, figure 2) that is coupled to the lower surface of the composite decking, the corrugated structure comprising a plurality of corrugated sections (50, 50, and 50”, figure 2), the plurality of corrugated section comprising a first corrugated section (50, 50, and 50”, figure 2) and a second corrugated section (22, figure 2), wherein at least a portion of the first corrugated section is nested with at least a portion of the second corrugated section.
Re claim 11, the first corrugated section and the second corrugation section are coupled together via one or more of welding, adhesive bonding, or crimping (paragraphs 0124-0125 disclose using adhesives in addition to the bolts 80 shown in figure 5 which are used to secure the device in an assembled state).
Re claim 14, the corrugated structure comprises at least one of a metal (see paragraph 0065 in which it is disclosed the corrugated structure can include metal) or a composite laminate comprising a plurality of resin matrixes and fiber reinforcements .
Re claim 17, Dumlao et al. discloses a method of assembling a floor assembly for a cargo vehicle (see paragraph 0061 which discloses that the structure can be used in an over-the-road trailer), the method comprising providing a corrugated structure (50, figure 1), providing a composite decking (32, figure 6, see also paragraph 0065 which discloses materials of the decking) having an upper surface configured to support cargo and a lower surface opposite to the upper surface (see the annotated figure below), the lower surface being substantially flat, and coupling the composite decking to the corrugated structure (see paragraph 00125).
PNG
media_image1.png
412
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 18, the corrugated structure comprises a plurality of corrugated sections (22 is one section and 50, 50, and 50” is the other section) wherein each of the plurality of corrugated sections form respective channels, and wherein the method further comprises coupling the plurality of corrugated sections together to form one or more nested corrugated sections, the composite decking being coupled to the one or more nested corrugated section (as shown by figure 2).
Re claim 20, the method includes coupling side walls (82, figure 2) to the corrugated structure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4, 5, 12, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dumlao et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2003/0046779) in view of McCormack et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2016/0107706).
Dumlao et al. discloses all the limitations of the claims, as applied above, except for the channels being filled with filler material, and wherein the filler material comprises one or more of a foam or a low-density polymer, the filler material couples together the corrugated structure and the composite decking, or pouring a foam material into each of the channels of the plurality of corrugated sections, wherein the coupling the composite decking to the corrugated structure includes coupling the nested corrugated sections to the composite decking via the foam material.
McCormack et al. teaches channels (the area between an inner and outer skin, see paragraph 0033) being filled with filler material, and wherein the filler material comprise foam (thermal insulating foam, see paragraph 0033), the filler material couples together structures of a trailer (see paragraph 0033, “the inner liner panel may be attached to the wall structure at the wall’s periphery but is also held to the wall by the foam insulation, which may attach to a scrim layer, adhesive or other mechanical fastening structure at the inner surface of the inner liner panel”), and pouring a foam material (see paragraph 0033, “thermal insulating foam is blown or poured”) into each of the channels, wherein the coupling of the trailer structures includes coupling the trailer structures via the foam material (see paragraph 0033, “the inner liner panel may be attached to the wall structure at the wall’s periphery but is also held to the wall by the foam insulation, which may attach to a scrim layer, adhesive or other mechanical fastening structure at the inner surface of the inner liner panel”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a floor assembly of a vehicle, such as that disclosed by Dumlao et al., to have the channels be filled with filler material, and wherein the filler material comprises foam, the filler material couples together the corrugated structure and the composite decking, and pouring the foam material into each of the channels of the plurality of corrugated sections, wherein the coupling the composite decking to the corrugated structure includes coupling the nested corrugated sections to the composite decking via the foam material, as taught by McCormack et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, sin order to fill the voids of the device with an insulative material to protect goods being carried by the vehicle.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dumlao et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2003/0046779) in view of Schutt et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0385072).
Dumlao et al. discloses all the limitations of the claims, as applied above, except for one or more rails for a slider suspension, the one or more rails being coupled to the corrugated structure.
Schutt et al. teaches one or more rails (46, figure 2) for a slider suspension, the one or more rails being coupled (either directly or indirectly) to a floor assembly (the floor of the trailer shown in figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a floor assembly, such as that disclosed by Dumlao et al. to have a one or more rails for a slider suspension, the one or more rails being coupled (either directly or indirectly) to the corrugated structure which is part of the floor assembly, as taught by Dumlao et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a wheel and suspension assembly for the cargo vehicle which can accommodate changing weight distribution of the vehicle due to the various loads being carried (see Schutt et al., paragraph 0002).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 16 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 primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in claim is the inclusion in the claims of the limitations directed to each of the one or more rails being coupled to the corrugated structure via the plurality of gussets. Such limitations, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claims, are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record. While the use of gussets is old and well known in the art, there is no suggestion or teaching to use them to couple the rails to the corrugated structure. Schutt et al., the closest prior art of record, teaches the use of gussets in relation to a slider suspension, but the gussets are not used for attaching rails to a corrugated structure and there is no suggestion or teaching in the prior art of record to use them as such.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references all disclose vehicle floor constructions.
US Patent Application Publication 2019/0176905 discloses using foam in vehicle cavities including in corrugated sections.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason S Morrow whose telephone number is (571)272-6663. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m..
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at (571) 272-5109. 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.
/JASON S MORROW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
July 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights