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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Applicant claims a rollback wrecker with a movable truck bed that can slide rearward and tilt downward, where a hydraulic motor and threaded rod assembly are coupled to said movable truck bed for sliding said bed. It is unclear and not described in the specification how the truck bed is moved by the threaded rod.
In paragraph 0032 applicant said “The hydraulic motor 104 can be in the form of a worm device similar to a Ramsey winch and can be positioned at one end 107 of the truck frame (FIG. 1). The hydraulic motor 104 provides the power for movement of the truck bed 102, and the threaded rod assembly 106 translates this power into the precise movement of the bed 102.” But there is no feature the connects the truck bed to the threaded rod. Applicant teaches C-channels, but the threaded rod seems to just be laying within the C-channels, and the turning of the rod would not translate to movement of the bed through the C-channels.
In contrast, the applicant, in paragraph 0033 the applicant said “FIG. 3 illustrates a perspective view of a wheel lift device of the present invention in accordance with the disclosed structure. The wheel lift device 108 is designed to run along the threaded rod assembly 106 for towing a vehicle easily and without damage. More specifically, the wheel lift device 108 includes a central bearing 116 that is configured to run along the threaded rod assembly 106. The central bearing 116 is compatible with the threaded rod assembly 106 and helps the wheel lift device 108 move up and down along the truck bed 102.” Therefore, it is clear that the threaded rod moves the wheel lift through the central bearing, which is threaded onto the rod and moves as the rod is turned by the hydraulic motor, and therefore the movement of the wheel assembly is clearly defined.
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.
Claim(s) 1=8, 10=14, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piercey, III (US 2013/0243563) in view of Meyers (US 2013/0315695).
Regarding claim 1, Piercey, III teaches a rollback wrecker vehicle for loading a vehicle onto a wrecker deck, the rollback wrecker vehicle comprising:
a movable truck bed 10 and 1;
a hydraulic motor, 6 and 7, see paragraphs 0019 and 0043;
and a wheel lift, 13, which is for a motorcycle;
wherein said hydraulic motor for sliding said movable truck bed rearward and tilting downward for access to a vehicle, see figure 1 and paragraph 0019;
wherein said movable truck bed slidable and tiltable from a first horizontal position to a second inclined position for attaching the vehicle, see figure 1;
wherein said movable truck bed slidable and tiltable from said second inclined position to said first horizontal position for loading the vehicle, see figure 2; and
further wherein said movable truck bed having a first terminal end in contact with the ground when in said second inclined position, see figure 1.
Piercey, III teaches that the motor can be a worm drive, but does not teach the specifics of the worm drive, such as the threaded rod. Meyers teaches a trailer for loading a vehicle, comprising:
a motor, 24;
a threaded rod assembly, 20; and
a wheel lift, 16’
wherein said threaded rod assembly extending along a length of said movable truck bed, see figure 1;
wherein said wheel lift movable along a length of said threaded rod assembly;
wherein said wheel lift having a lift member including a first wheel yoke, 38, for attaching to a first wheel of the vehicle and a second wheel yoke, 38, for attaching to a second wheel of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to replace the winch of Piercey, III with the threaded rod assembly and wheel lift of Meyers, in order to precisely control the movement of the vehicle while it is being loaded, see paragraph 0006 of Meyers.
Regarding claim 2, Piercey, III teaches said movable truck bed having a plurality of C-channels centrally mounted and extending along the length of said movable truck bed, see figure 3.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Piercey et al. and Meyers teaches said plurality of C-channels supporting said threaded rod assembly extending therethrough, as figure 3 shows multiple C-channels extending the width of the bed, and the threaded rod would be located in the middle, in the combination taught.
Regarding claim 4, Piercey, III does not specifically teach that each one of said plurality of C-channels having a length from 2 inches to 4 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the length of the C-channels to between 2 to 4 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 5, Piercey, III does not specifically teach that said movable truck bed having a length from 15 feet to 24 feet. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the length of the movable bed to 15 to 24 feet, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 6, Piercey, lll and Meyers teach that said wheel lift movable from a first position proximal to said first terminal end to a second position proximal to a second terminal end of said movable truck bed, see figures 1 and 2 or Piercey, III and paragraph 0034 of Meyers.
Regarding claim 7, Meyers teaches said wheel lift having a central bearing, 36, configured to run along said threaded rod assembly.
Regarding claim 8, Piercey, III teaches said wheel lift having a first bearing C-cover and a second bearing C-cover, wherein said first bearing C-cover having a first bearing and a second bearing to move along said plurality of C-channels on a first side of said threaded rod assembly, and further wherein said second bearing C-cover having a first bearing and a second bearing to move along said plurality of C-channels on a second opposing side, see figure 4 and paragraphs 0030.
Regarding claim 10, Piercey et al. teaches a rollback wrecker vehicle for loading a vehicle onto a wrecker deck, the rollback wrecker vehicle comprising:
a movable truck bed, 10 and 1;
a hydraulic motor,;
a hydraulic motor, 6 and 7, see paragraphs 0019 and 0043;
and a wheel lift, 13, which is for a motorcycle;
wherein said hydraulic motor for sliding said movable truck bed rearward and tilting downward for access to a vehicle, see figure 1 and paragraph 0019;
wherein said movable truck bed slidable and tiltable from a first horizontal position to a second inclined position for attaching the vehicle, see figure 1;
wherein said movable truck bed having a plurality of C-channels centrally mounted and extending along the length of said movable truck bed, see figure 3;
wherein said movable truck bed slidable and tiltable from said second inclined position to said first horizontal position for loading the vehicle, see figure 2;
wherein said movable truck bed having a first terminal end in contact with the ground when in said second inclined position, see figure 1;
wherein said wheel lift having a first bearing C-cover and a second bearing C-cover; wherein said first bearing C-cover having a first bearing and a second bearing to move along said plurality of C-channels on a first side of said threaded rod assembly; and further wherein said second bearing C-cover having a first bearing and a second bearing to move along said plurality of C-channels on a second opposing side, see figure 4 and paragraphs 0030.
Piercey, III teaches that the motor can be a worm drive, but does not teach the specifics of the worm drive, such as the threaded rod. Meyers teaches a trailer for loading a vehicle, comprising:
a motor, 24;
a threaded rod assembly, 20; and
a wheel lift, 16;
wherein said threaded rod assembly extending along a length of said movable truck bed, see figure 1;
wherein said wheel lift movable along a length of said threaded rod assembly;
wherein said wheel lift having a lift member including a first wheel yoke, 38, for attaching to a first wheel of the vehicle and a second wheel yoke, 38, for attaching to a second wheel of the vehicle;
wherein said wheel lift having a central bearing, 36, configured to run along said threaded rod assembly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to replace the winch of Piercey, III with the threaded rod assembly and wheel lift of Meyers, in order to precisely control the movement of the vehicle while it is being loaded, see paragraph 0006 of Meyers.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Piercey et al. and Meyers teaches said plurality of C-channels supporting said threaded rod assembly extending therethrough, as figure 3 shows multiple C-channels extending the width of the bed, and the threaded rod would be located in the middle, in the combination taught.
Regarding claim 12, Piercey, III does not specifically teach that each one of said plurality of C-channels having a length from 2 inches to 4 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the length of the C-channels to between 2 to 4 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 13, Piercey, III does not specifically teach that said movable truck bed having a length from 15 feet to 24 feet. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the length of the movable bed to 15 to 24 feet, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 14, Piercey, lll and Meyers teach that said wheel lift movable from a first position proximal to said first terminal end to a second position proximal to a second terminal end of said movable truck bed, see figures 1 and 2 or Piercey, III and paragraph 0034 of Meyers.
16. A rollback wrecker vehicle for loading a vehicle onto a wrecker deck, the rollback wrecker vehicle comprising:
a movable truck bed, 10 and 1;
a hydraulic motor,;
a hydraulic motor, 6 and 7, see paragraphs 0019 and 0043;
and a wheel lift, 13, which is for a motorcycle;
wherein said hydraulic motor coupled to said movable truck bed for sliding said movable truck bed rearward and tilting downward for access to a vehicle, see figure 1 and paragraph 0019;
wherein said movable truck bed having a plurality of C-channels centrally mounted and extending along the length of said movable truck bed, see figure 3;
wherein said movable truck bed slidable and tiltable from said second inclined position to said first horizontal position for loading the vehicle, see figure 1;
wherein said movable truck bed slidable and tiltable from a first horizontal position to a second inclined position for attaching the vehicle, see figure 2;
wherein said movable truck bed having a first terminal end in contact with the ground when in said second inclined position, see figure 1;
and further wherein said wheel lift movable from a first position proximal to said first terminal end to a second position proximal to a second terminal end of said movable truck bed.
Piercey, III teaches that the motor can be a worm drive, but does not teach the specifics of the worm drive, such as the threaded rod. Meyers teaches a trailer for loading a vehicle, comprising:
a motor, 24;
a threaded rod assembly, 20; and
a wheel lift, 16;
wherein said threaded rod assembly extending along a length of said movable truck bed, see figure 1;
wherein said wheel lift movable along a length of said threaded rod assembly;
wherein said wheel lift having a lift member including a first wheel yoke for attaching to a first wheel of the vehicle and a second wheel yoke for attaching to a second wheel of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to replace the winch of Piercey, III with the threaded rod assembly and wheel lift of Meyers, in order to precisely control the movement of the vehicle while it is being loaded, see paragraph 0006 of Meyers.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Piercey et al. and Meyers teaches said plurality of C-channels supporting said threaded rod assembly extending therethrough, as figure 3 shows multiple C-channels extending the width of the bed, and the threaded rod would be located in the middle, in the combination taught.
Regarding claim 18, Piercey, III does not specifically teach that each one of said plurality of C-channels having a length from 2 inches to 4 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the length of the C-channels to between 2 to 4 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 19, Piercey, III does not specifically teach that said movable truck bed having a length from 15 feet to 24 feet. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the length of the movable bed to 15 to 24 feet, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 20, Piercey, III teaches said wheel lift having a first bearing C-cover and a second bearing C-cover, wherein said first bearing C-cover having a first bearing and a second bearing to move along said plurality of C-channels on a first side of said threaded rod assembly, and further wherein said second bearing C-cover having a first bearing and a second bearing to move along said plurality of C-channels on a second opposing side, see figure 4 and paragraphs 0030.
Claim(s) 9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piercey, III in view of Meyers as applied to claims 8 and 13 above, and further in view of Alm (WO 96/08389) .
Regarding claim 9 and 15, neither Piercey, III nor Meyers teaches said wheel lift having a hydraulic cylinder for lifting said first wheel yoke and said second wheel yoke and lifting the first wheel and the second wheel off the ground.
Alm teaches a wheel lift for a loading a vehicle onto a truck bed, see figure 2, including a hydraulic cylinder, 70, for lifting said wheel yoke off the ground, see page 9, lines 5+. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the hydraulic cylinder of Alm with the apparatus taught by the combination of Piercey, III and Meyers in order to lift the wheel lift off the ground so it does not scrape along the ground during loading of the vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art cited on the PTO-892 and not relied upon are included to show additional example of movable beds for loading vehicle thereon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITLIN S JOERGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5 (CST).
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. 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.
/KAITLIN S JOERGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
2 February 2026