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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 6 of page 2, reference to a specific claim should be deleted and replaced with desired content, as the content and numbering of claims changes throughout prosecution. On line 9 of page 6, “thee” should be replaced with “the” to correct a typographical error. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 5 and 10 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. On line 2 of claim 5, “the roller track” lacks antecedent basis. It is suggested changing “roller” to “rolling” would correct this issue. On line 3 of claim 10, “or the like” is indefinite, as this is a limitless expression and it is unclear what is or is not encompassed by the term “like”. 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. Claim(s) 1, 3- 4 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Eriksson (WO 2020239220 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Eriksson discloses a r ailway wagon for transportation of at least one vehicle, comprising: a first wagon end 4 , a second wagon end 3 , and a carrying section 2 therebetween, the carrying section having a front portion releasably connected to the first wagon end (Figure 1) , the carrying section being movable between a closed position in which the front portion is connected to the first wagon end and forms a complete rail car , and an open position in which the front portion is turned out from the first wagon end for loading and unloading of said at least one vehicle (Figures 3 & 4) . A beam assembly 6 is configured to support the front portion while the front portion is being turned, the beam assembly having a first end and a second end, and a top face 32 extending between the first beam end and the second beam end (Figure 5) ; wherein the front portion comprises a first connection mechanism and a second connection mechanism, at least the first connection mechanism comprising a first rolling member 44 and a first guiding member 46 (Figures 7-8) , the first rolling member 44 being configured to roll on a rolling track 43 arranged at the top face, and the first guiding member 46 being configured to interact with a guiding rail 45 arranged along the rolling track so that, while the front portion is being moved between the closed position and the open position or vice versa, the first rolling member 44 is in contact with the rolling track 43 . A sliding arrangement 23/39 (see page 8, lines 3- 29) is arranged along the beam assembly including at the second end of the beam assembly. Regarding claim 3, not e there are two rolling assemblies 44/43 and two guide members/guide rails 46/45 spaced apart on either side of the top face (see F igure 7). Regarding claim 4, an indentation or recess 33/38 is arranged in the top face at the second end of the beam assembly (see figure 7). Regarding claim 14, the first rolling member 44 and first guiding member 46 are arranged such that the first rolling member rolls along the rolling track 43 (see Figures 7-8). Regarding claim 15 the first rolling member 44 is arranged in substantially the same horizontal plane with the vertical leg of the L-shaped guiding member 46 (see Figure 8). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 6-9 and 11-13 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. Claims 5 and 10 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as various types of swinging end types of railway cars for accommodating loading/unloading of a transported vehicle. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Samuel Joseph Morano whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6684 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday before 3:30 pm Eastern . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT TC Director Joseph Thomas can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-8004 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT S. JOSEPH MORANO Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit 3615 /S. Joseph Morano/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615