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 .
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, 6, 8, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Inman, JR. (US 2004/0028512).
With regards to claim 1, Inman JR. discloses a hand truck (10) configured to handle a slab (intended use), the hand truck comprising: a pair of wheels (46) spaced-apart laterally and rotatable about an axle (48); an upright frame (12) coupled to the wheels and positioned forward of the pair of wheels and oriented to extend upwardly; a platform (42) coupled to the wheels and the upright frame and positioned forward of the pair of wheels and proximal the ground; a handle (16 and 52) coupled to an upper end of the upright frame; the upright frame and the platform pivoting about the axle during use and having at least two orientations, comprising: a rest orientation in which the platform abuts the ground and the upright frame extends vertically; and a tilted orientation configured to move the slab in which the platform is tilted upward and elevated above the ground at an incline and the upright frame is tilted rearward at an incline (this describes the conventional operation of a hand truck, also described in Paragraph [0010]); a lower pair of lower arms (38 and 40) coupled to the upright frame and positioned at the platform and oriented to extend forwardly from the upright frame and the pair of wheels; the lower pair of lower arms forming a lower open-ended slot (Figures 2 and 5); an upper pair of upper arms (26 and 28) coupled to the upright frame and positioned closer to the handle and spaced-apart from the lower pair of lower arms, and oriented to extend forwardly from the upright frame and the pair of wheels; the upper pair of upper arms forming an upper open-ended slot (Figures 2 and 5); and the upper and lower pairs of arms being vertically aligned and the upper and lower slots being vertically aligned.
With regards to claim 3, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: the upper pair of upper arms extending farther than the lower pair of lower arms (Figure 2).
With regards to claim 4, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, wherein the upper and lower pairs of arms both extend horizontally forward beyond the platform (Figure 2).
With regards to claim 6, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: the upper pair of upper arms being pivotally coupled to the upright frame (Figures 1 and 2); the upper pair of upper arms pivoting between at least two orientations, including: an extended orientation extending forward in the rest orientation (Figure 2); and a retracted orientation against the upright frame (Figure 1); and a lock locking (31, 54, and 68) and the upper pair of upper arms in a selected orientation (Figure 2).
With regards to claim 8, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: the lower pair of lower arms being pivotally coupled to the upright frame; the lower pair of lower arms pivoting between at least two orientations (Figures 1 and 2), including: an extended orientation extending forward in the rest orientation (Figure 2); and a retracted orientation against the upright frame (Figure 1); and a lock (54 and 22) locking the lower pair of lower arms in a selected orientation (Figure 1).
With regards to claim 20, Inman JR. discloses a hand truck (10) configured to handle a slab (intended use), the hand truck comprising: a pair of wheels (46) spaced-apart laterally and rotatable about an axle (48); an upright frame (12) coupled to the wheels and positioned forward of the pair of wheels and oriented to extend upwardly; a platform (42) coupled to the wheels and the upright frame and positioned forward of the pair of wheels and proximal the ground; a handle (16 and 52) coupled to an upper end of the upright frame; the upright frame and the platform pivoting about the axle during use and having at least two orientations, comprising: a rest orientation in which the platform abuts the ground and the upright frame extends vertically; and a tilted orientation configured to move an item in which the platform is tilted upward and elevated above the ground at an incline and the upright frame is tilted rearward at an incline (this describes the conventional operation of a hand truck, also described in Paragraph [0010]); a lower pair of lower arms (38 and 40) coupled to the upright frame and positioned at the platform and oriented to extend forwardly from the upright frame and the pair of wheels; the lower pair of lower arms forming a lower open-ended slot (Figure 2); an upper pair of upper arms (26 and 28) coupled to the upright frame and positioned closer to the handle and spaced-apart from the lower pair of lower arms, and oriented to extend forwardly from the upright frame and the pair of wheels; the upper pair of upper arms forming an upper open-ended slot (Figure 2); the upper and lower pairs of arms being vertically aligned and the upper and lower slots being vertically aligned (Figures 2 and 5); the upper pair of upper arms being pivotally coupled to the upright frame; and the upper pair of upper arms pivoting between at least two orientations, including: an extended orientation extending forward in the rest orientation (Figure 2); a retracted orientation against the upright frame (Figure 1); and a lock locking the upper pair of upper arms in a selected orientation (31, 68, and 54).
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.
Claim(s) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inman, JR. (US 2004/0028512).
With regards to claim 7, Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: the upper pair of upper arms being removably coupled to the upright frame; and a connector (18) attaching the upper pair of upper arms to the upright frame.
While Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the upper pair of upper arms is removable, it is disclosed as a separate movable piece and it would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the application to have made the upper arms removable in order to replace or repair a broken or bent arm. In re Dulberg
With regards to claim 9, Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: the lower pair of lower arms being removably coupled to the upright frame and/or the platform; and a connector (24) attaching the lower pair of lower arms to the upright frame and/or the platform.
While Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the lower pair of lower arms is removable, it is disclosed as a separate movable piece and it would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the application to have made the lower arms removable in order to replace or repair a broken or bent arm. In re Dulberg
Claim(s) 2, 10-14, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inman, JR. (US 2004/0028512) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Yu et al. (CN 112918929 A).
With regards to claim 2, Inman, JR. fails to disclose, however Yu et al. teaches the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: a third wheel (122) coupled to the upright frame (111); and the third wheel being positioned off of the ground in the rest orientation and positioned on the ground in the tilted orientation (when the teachings of Yu et al. are incorporated in to the invention of Inman, JR. this would be the outcome, as the illustrated frame of Yu et al. is in the tilted configuration when the third wheel is in contact with the ground).
It would have been obvious at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Yu et al. into the invention of Inman, JR. in order to provide increased load carry capacity and stability when tilting the hand truck to transport an item thereon.
With regards to claim 10, Inman, JR. fails to disclose, however Yu et al. teaches the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: a third wheel (122) coupled to the upright frame (111); the third wheel being pivotally coupled to the upright frame (Figure 1); the third wheel pivoting between at least two orientations (Page 7, Paragraph 4 of provided translation), including: an extended orientation extending from the upright frame (Figure 1); and a retracted orientation against the upright frame; and a lock (113) locking the third wheel in a selected orientation.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Yu et al. into the invention of Inman, JR. in order to provide increased load carry capacity and stability when tilting the hand truck to transport an item thereon.
With regards to claim 11, Inman, JR. fails to disclose, however Yu et al. teaches the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: a third wheel (122) coupled to the upright frame (111); the third wheel being removably coupled to the upright frame; and a connector (pivot between 111 and 112) attaching the third wheel to the upright frame.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Yu et al. into the invention of Inman, JR. in order to provide increased load carry capacity and stability when tilting the hand truck to transport an item thereon. Furthermore, with regards to the limitation directed towards the third wheel being removably coupled to the frame, any of the pivots or third wheel axle could be removed to facilitate removal of the third wheel in order repair or replace it. In re Dulberg
With regards to claim 12, Inman JR. discloses a hand truck (10) configured to handle a slab (intended use), the hand truck comprising: a pair of wheels (46) spaced-apart laterally and rotatable about an axle (48); an upright frame (12) coupled to the wheels and positioned forward of the pair of wheels and oriented to extend upwardly; a platform (42) coupled to the wheels and the upright frame and positioned forward of the pair of wheels and proximal the ground; a handle (16 and 52) coupled to an upper end of the upright frame; the upright frame and the platform pivoting about the axle during use and having at least two orientations, comprising: a rest orientation in which the platform abuts the ground and the upright frame extends vertically; and a tilted orientation configured to move an item in which the platform is tilted upward and elevated above the ground at an incline and the upright frame is tilted rearward at an incline (this describes the conventional operation of a hand truck, also described in Paragraph [0010]); a lower pair of lower arms (38 and 40) coupled to the upright frame and positioned at the platform and oriented to extend forwardly from the upright frame and the pair of wheels; the lower pair of lower arms forming a lower open-ended slot (Figure 2); an upper pair of upper arms (26 and 28) coupled to the upright frame and positioned closer to the handle and spaced-apart from the lower pair of lower arms, and oriented to extend forwardly from the upright frame and the pair of wheels; the upper pair of upper arms forming an upper open-ended slot (Figure 2); the upper and lower pairs of arms being vertically aligned and the upper and lower slots being vertically aligned (Figures 2 and 5);
Inman, JR. fails to disclose, however Yu et al. teaches a third wheel (122) coupled to the upright frame (111); the third wheel being pivotally coupled to the upright frame; and the third wheel pivoting between at least two orientations (Page 7, Paragraph 4 of provided translation), including: an extended orientation extending from the upright frame (Figure 1); a retracted orientation against the upright frame; and a lock (113) locking the third wheel in a selected orientation.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Yu et al. into the invention of Inman, JR. in order to provide increased load carry capacity and stability when tilting the hand truck to transport an item thereon.
With regards to claim 13, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, further comprising: the upper pair of upper arms extending farther than the lower pair of lower arms (Figures 2 and 5).
With regards to claim 14, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, wherein the upper and lower pairs of arms both extend beyond the platform (Figure 2).
With regards to claim 16, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, further comprising: the upper pair of upper arms being pivotally coupled to the upright frame; the upper pair of upper arms pivoting between at least two orientations, including: an extended orientation extending forward in the rest orientation (Figure 2); and a retracted orientation against the upright frame (Figure 1); and a lock (31, 54, and 68) locking the upper pair of upper arms in a selected orientation (Figure 2).
With regards to claim 17, Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, further comprising: the upper pair of upper arms being removably coupled to the upright frame; and a connector (18) attaching the upper pair of upper arms to the upright frame.
While Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the upper pair of upper arms is removable, it is disclosed as a separate movable piece and it would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the application to have made the upper arms removable in order to replace or repair a broken or bent arm. In re Dulberg
With regards to claim 18, Inman JR. discloses the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, further comprising: the lower pair of lower arms being pivotally coupled to the upright frame; the lower pair of lower arms pivoting between at least two orientations, including: an extended orientation extending forward in the rest orientation (Figure 2); and a retracted orientation against the upright frame (Figure 1); and a lock (22 and 54) locking the lower pair of lower arms in a selected orientation (Figure 1).
With regards to claim 19, Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, further comprising: the lower pair of lower arms being removably coupled to the upright frame and/or the platform; and a connector (24) attaching the lower pair of lower arms to the upright frame and/or the platform.
While Inman, JR. does not explicitly disclose the lower pair of lower arms is removable, it is disclosed as a separate movable piece and it would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the application to have made the lower arms removable in order to replace or repair a broken or bent arm. In re Dulberg
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inman, JR. (US 2004/0028512) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Holder (US 2011/0214274).
With regards to claim 5, Inman, JR. fails to disclose, but Holder teaches the hand truck in accordance with claim 1, further comprising: the lower pair of lower arms (90) having a flared opening (160) at a distal end; and the upper pair of upper arms (80) having a flared opening at a distal end (160).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Holder in to the invention of Inman, JR. in order to provide a way of assisting the guidance of a large slab/door/etc. in to the dolly.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inman, JR. (US 2004/0028512) in view of Yu et al. (CN 112918929 A) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Holder (US 2011/0214274).
With regards to claim 15, Inman, JR. fails to disclose, but Holder teaches the hand truck in accordance with claim 12, further comprising: the lower pair of lower arms (90) having a flared opening at a distal end (160); and the upper pair of upper arms (80) having a flared opening at a distal end (160).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Holder into the invention of Inman, JR. in order to provide a way of assisting the guidance of a large slab/door/etc. in to the dolly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Supervisory Patent Examiner should be directed to JOHN R. OLSZEWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2706. The Supervisory Patent Examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 5:30am - 4:00pm.
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 Supervisory Patent Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Supervisory Patent Examiner’s supervisor, TC Director Joseph Thomas can be reached at 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.
JOHN R. OLSZEWSKI
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3617
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617