DETAILED ACTION
This action is a first action on the merits. The claims filed on November 27, 2023 have been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending and addressed below.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: The recitation of “a vehicle” in line 4 should likely be --the vehicle--. Appropriate correction is required.
Additionally, the recitation of “operable to along” in line 5 should likely be --operable to slide along--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haigler, US 4,951,991 (hereinafter Haigler) in view of Calkin et al., US 2008/0110002 (hereinafter Calkin).
Claim 1: Haigler discloses a removable extender (bed extension 24) for a vehicle (see Fig 1), comprising:
a first slat (tube 32 with extension rod 50) having a first mounting bracket (tube 28 connected to truck frame member 20 by metal straps 26) disposed at a distal end (tube 32 is telescopically disposed in tube 28 at distal end as shown in Fig 1, col 2, ln 5-17);
a second slat (tube 34 with extension rod 52) having a second mounting bracket (tube 30 connected to truck frame member 22 by metal straps 26) disposed at a distal end (tube 34 is telescopically disposed in tube 30 at distal end as shown in Fig 1, col 2, ln 5-17), the second slat (34) spaced apart and substantially parallel to the first slat (32), in an assembled configuration (as shown in Fig 1, 4, col 2, ln 5-17);
a third slat (L-bracket 62), in the assembled configuration (Fig 1, 4), positioned perpendicularly to the first slat (32/50)and the second slat (34/52), wherein the third slat (62) is assembled to the first slat and the second slat using a first mating feature (plate 58) and a second mating feature (plate 60) (col 2, ln 15-23); and
an overhanging article on a vehicle (extendable support for a load substantially longer than the truck, col 1, 5-15, col 2, ln 58-61) supported by a first end region (at leg 81/posts 84) and a second end region (at leg 81/post 84) of the third slat (62) (as shown in Fig 1).
Haigler fails to disclose at least one strap for wrapping around the overhanging article on a vehicle, the at least one strap operably coupling a first end region and a second end region of the third slat; and a tensioning device located along the at least one strap between the first end region and the second end region for adjusting an overall length of the at least one strap.
Calkin discloses at least one strap (liter-tie down apparatus 10) for wrapping around a load (liter L, L’) on a vehicle (abstract, par [0001]). The at least one strap (10) is operably coupling a first end region (at securement fixture M) and a second end region (as shown in Fig 1, par [0023]); and
a tensioning device (ratchet assembly 16) located along the at least one strap (10) between the first end region and the second end region (as shown in Fig 1, par [0024]) for adjusting an overall length of the at least one strap (Fig 1-2, par [0023]-[0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the removable extender of Haigler to include at least one strap with tensioning device as disclosed by Calkin operably coupled to the first end region and the second end region of the third slat and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the use of at least one strap and tensioning device operably coupled to the first end region and the second end region of the third slat would have yielded the predictable results of quickly and easily securing the overhanging load safely within the removable extender of the vehicle (Calkin, abstract).
Claim 2: Calkin further discloses further comprising:
a distal strap (Calkin, a second liter-tie down apparatus 10 shown in Fig 1); and
a second tensioning device (Calkin, second ratchet assembly 16 shown in Fig 1) located along the distal strap (tie-downs 10 shown at each end of liter L in Fig 1), wherein the distal strap (10) tensions the distal end of the load in the assembled configuration (Calkin, ratchet assembly 16 is provided to shorten at least one of the securement strap members and thereby tension the apparatus and litter against movement in the vehicle, abstract, par [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the removable extender of Haigler to include a second strap and tensioning device as disclosed by Calkin, such that the distal strap tensions the distal end of the first slat and the distal end of the second slat in the assembled configuration as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the use of a second strap and tensioning device as disclosed by Calkin would have yielded the predictable results of quickly and easily securing the overhanging load safely within the removable extender of the vehicle (Calkin, abstract).
Claim 3: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, further discloses wherein the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket are operable to secure the first slat and the second slat to the vehicle (Haigler, tubes 28, 30 are connected to truck frame member 20 by metal straps 26, tubes 32, 34 are telescopically carried in tubes 28, 30 as shown in Fig 1, col 2, ln 5-11).
Claim 8: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, are silent as to wherein the removable extender extends beyond a distal end of the vehicle less than or equal to 96 inches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the removable extender to extend beyond a distal end of the vehicle less than or equal to 96 inches, since it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984),
Claim 9: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses wherein a distal end of the overhanging article (load substantially longer than the truck bed) extends beyond the third slat (L-bracket 62) in the assembled configuration (load substantially longer than the truck bed is support via vertical support member 78 supported by L-bracket 62, abstract, see Fig 1, col 1, ln 8-14, col 2, 5-30).
Haigler, as modified by Calkin, are silent as to the distal end of the overhanging article extends beyond the third slat in the assembled configuration less than or equal to 10 inches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the removable extender of Haigler and Calkin, such that a distal end of the overhanging article extends beyond the third slat in the assembled configuration less than or equal to 10 inches, since it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984),
Claim 10: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses wherein a length of the third slat (L-bracket 62) is less than or equal to a width of the vehicle (L-bracket 62 is less than the width of truck 10 as shown Fig 1).
Claim 11: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses wherein the at least one strap (Calkin, strap member 10, include strap 18) is removably coupled to the first end region and the second end region using one or more carabiners (Calkin, strap member 18, par of strap member 10, includes a loop 22 at the terminal end mounting the fastener member 20 in order to receive an alternate fastener member, such as a carabiner (not shown) for alternative connection of the strap end portion to a securement fixture on a vehicle, par [0023]-[0024]).
Claim 12: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses wherein the first slat (tube 32 with extension rod 50) is slidable within the first mounting bracket (tube 28 connected to truck frame member 20 by metal straps 26) (tube 32 is telescopically disposed in tube 28) and the first mating feature (plate 58) (bracket 58 slides along slot 58, col 2, ln 62-68), and the second slat (tube 34 with extension rod 52) is slidable within the second mounting bracket (plate 60) (tube 34 is telescopically disposed in tube 30) and the second mating feature (bracket 60 slides along slot 60, col 2, ln 62-68).
Claim 13: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses the first slat (32) is integrally formed to the first mounting bracket (28) (tube 32 is telescopically disposed in tube 28 at distal end as shown in Fig 1, col 2, ln 5-17, tubes 32 and 28 together constitute part of the removable extender) and the second slat (tube 34) is integrally formed with the second mounting bracket (30) (tube 34 is telescopically disposed in tube 30 at distal end as shown in Fig 1, col 2, ln 5-17, tubes 34 and 30 together constitute part of the removable extender).
Claim 14: Haigler discloses a removable extender for a vehicle (see Fig 1), comprising:
an extension component (bed extension 24) comprising:
a first mounting bracket (tube 28 connected to truck frame member 20 by metal straps 26) operable to slide along and engage a first track (tube 32 with extension rod 50) of a vehicle;
a second mounting bracket (tube 30 connected to truck frame member 22 by metal straps 26) operable to along and engage a second track (tube 34 with extension rod 52) of the vehicle, and;
a bumper portion (L-bracket 62) comprising a first end region (at leg 81/posts 84) and a second end region (at opposite leg 81/posts 84) (as shown in Fig 1); and
an overhanging article on a vehicle (extendable support for a load substantially longer than the truck, col 1, 5-15, col 2, ln 58-61) supported by a first end region (at leg 81/posts 84) and a second end region (at leg 81/post 84) of the third slat (62) (as shown in Fig 1).
Haigler fails to disclose at least one strap for wrapping around an overhanging article on the vehicle, the at least one strap operably coupling the first end region and the second end region of the bumper portion.
Calkin discloses at least one strap (liter-tie down apparatus 10) for wrapping around a load (liter L, L’) on a vehicle (abstract, par [0001]). The at least one strap (10) is operably coupling a first end region (at securement fixture M) and a second end region (as shown in Fig 1, par [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the removable extender of Haigler to include at least one strap as disclosed by Calkin operably coupled to the first end region and the second end region of the bumper portion as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the use of at least one strap operably coupled to the first end region and the second end region of the bumper portion would have yielded the predictable results of quickly and easily securing the overhanging load safely within the removable extender of the vehicle (Calkin, abstract).
Claim 15: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses wherein the first mounting bracket (tube 28 connected to truck frame member 20 by metal straps 26) includes a first linear rail (tube 28 forms a linear rail) corresponding to the first track (tube 32 with extension rod 50) and the second mounting bracket (tube 30 connected to truck frame member 20 by metal straps 26) includes a second linear rail (tube 30 forms a linear rail) corresponding to the second track (tube 33 with extension rod 52).
Claim 16: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses the extension component (as shown in Fig 1) is an integrally formed frame (bed extension 24 is made of multiple parts that together constitute the whole bed extension 24 as shown in Fig 1).
Claim 17: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses wherein the extension component (24) is an assembled structure of removably couplable slats (tubes 28, 32, extension rods 50, 52, L-bracket 62 and rods 40, 42 are slats removably coupled together, see Fig 1, 4, col 2, ln 5-23).
Claim 20: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, discloses a tensioning device (ratchet assembly 16) located along the at least one strap (10) between the first end region and the second end region (as shown in Fig 1, par [0024]) for adjusting an overall length of the at least one strap (Calkin, Fig 1-2, par [0023]-[0024]).
Claim(s) 4, 6-7, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haigler in view of Calkin as applied to claims 1 and 14, and further in view of Scribner et al., US 2009/0072566 (hereinafter Scribner).
Claim 4: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, fails to disclose further comprising: one or more taillights at least partially disposed within the third slat; and wiring for providing power to the one or more taillights.
Scribner discloses a vehicle bed extender (11) including one or more taillights (lights 52 that function as taillights) at least partially disposed within the third slat (lower surface 50); and wiring (wires) for providing power to the one or more taillights (52) (wires extend down from the crosspiece assembly, these are connected to the vehicle's lighting system, Fig 9, par [0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the removable extender of Haigler and Calkin to include taillights and wiring for the taillights as disclosed by Scribner on the third bumper slat, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of taillights and appropriate wiring would have yielded predictable results of allowing lights on the bumper portion to serve as taillights as the lowered tailgate and vehicle extender may effectively block the tail lights of the vehicle (Scribner, par [0048]).
Claim 6: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, fails to disclose the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket are pin lock brackets.
Scribner discloses a mounting bracket (receiver hitch 12) that is a pin lock bracket (extension tube 37, when in use, is inserted into the receiver hitch 12 and has a hole 44 to allow a pin to secure the extension tube 37) to the receiver hitch 12, par [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket of Haigler to be pin lock brackets as disclosed by Scribner, as this modification would have yielded the predictable results of securing the first and second slats within the first and second mounting brackets resulting in an improved mounting bracket connection (Scribner, par [0038]).
Claim 7: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, fails to disclose further comprising: one or more reflectors disposed on the third slat.
Scribner discloses a vehicle bed extender (11) including one or more reflectors (side reflectors 56) disposed on the third slat (arm assembly 35 is provided with side reflectors 56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the removable extender of Haigler and Calkin to include reflectors as disclosed by Scribner, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of reflectors would have yielded predictable results of allowing reflectors on the third slat as the lowered tailgate and vehicle extender may effectively block the tail lights of the vehicle (Scribner, par [0048]).
Claim 18: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, fails to disclose the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket are pin lock brackets.
Scribner discloses a mounting bracket (receiver hitch 12) that is a pin lock bracket (extension tube 37, when in use, is inserted into the receiver hitch 12 and has a hole 44 to allow a pin to secure the extension tube 37) to the receiver hitch 12, par [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the first mounting bracket and the second mounting bracket of Haigler to be pin lock brackets as disclosed by Scribner, as this modification would have yielded the predictable results of securing the first and second slats within the first and second mounting brackets resulting in an improved mounting bracket connection (Scribner, par [0038]).
Claim 19: Haigler, as modified by Calkin, fails to disclose further comprising: one or more taillights at least partially disposed within the bumper portion; and wiring for providing power to the one or more taillights.
Scribner discloses a vehicle bed extender (11) including one or more taillights (lights 52 that function as taillights) at least partially disposed within the bumper portion (lower surface 50); and wiring (wires) for providing power to the one or more taillights (52) (wires extend down from the crosspiece assembly, these are connected to the vehicle's lighting system, Fig 9, par [0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the removable extender of Haigler and Calkin to include taillights and wiring for the taillights as disclosed by Scribner, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of taillights and appropriate wiring would have yielded predictable results of allowing lights on the bumper portion to serve as taillights as the lowered tailgate and vehicle extender may effectively block the tail lights of the vehicle (Scribner, par [0048]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haigler, Calkin and Scribner as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Steiler, Canadian Patent No. CA 2246868 C (hereinafter Steiler).
Claim 5: Scribner further discloses a vehicle bed extender (11) that includes wiring connected to the vehicle's lighting system (Fig 9, par [0048]).
Haigler, Calkin and Scribner fail to disclose the wiring includes a four-pin electrical connector.
Steiler discloses a trailer connector mount that includes connector sockets and plugs that complete the electrical path to the trailer. The configurations of four to seven pins in various sizes are commonly used (Fig 1, pg 4, 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the wiring of Scribner to further include a four-pin electrical connector as disclosed by Steiler, as this modification would have yielded the predictable results of providing a manner for connecting the wring of the removable extender of Haigler, Calkin, and Scribner with the vehicle’s lighting system thereby powering the lights on the vehicle bed extender.
Conclusion
Claims 1-20 are rejected. No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAROLINE N BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1623. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 pm EST.
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, Tara E Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/CAROLINE N BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676