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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Williams (US 7434825 B2). [Note that prior art citations are italicized and enclosed in brackets.]
Regarding Claim 1, Williams teaches a vehicle [Williams Fig. 3, Reference Character 10; Williams Paragraph 13: “Motor vehicle 10 may take many forms such as a sport utility vehicle (as shown in FIG. 1), a van, or a truck.”], comprising: a bumper of a vehicle [Williams Fig. 3, Reference Character 22]; and a deployable step assembly that is pivotable back-and-forth between a stowed position and a deployed position relative to the bumper, when in the stowed position, a step pad of the deployable step assembly is received within a bumper pocket of the bumper, when in the deployed position, the step pad is rearward and vertically lower than the bumper [Williams Fig. 3, Reference Character 34; Williams Paragraph 17: “the step, when fully deployed, is an intermediate distance from the ground as compared to bumper 22 and known step devices (best shown in FIG. 3).”].
Regarding Claim 2, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a hitch tube that extends in cross-width direction of the vehicle and is a component of a vehicle body of the vehicle, the deployable step assembly pivoting about a pivot axis that is directly vertically beneath the hitch tube [Williams Figs. 2 and 2A, Reference Characters 20 and 28].
Regarding Claim 3, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 2, further comprising a collar bracket disposed about the hitch tube, the deployable step assembly pivotably coupled to the collar bracket [Williams Figs. 2A and 5, Reference Character 32].
Regarding Claim 4, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 3, further comprising at least one mechanical fastener that secures the collar bracket to the hitch tube, the deployable step assembly spanning over the at least one mechanical fastener when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position [Williams Figs. 2A and 5, Reference Character 36].
Regarding Claim 5, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the deployable step assembly transitions from the stowed position to the deployed position exclusively by pivoting [Williams Figs. 3, 4, 6, and 7; Williams Abstract: “A step is pivotally coupled to the brackets, and therefore to the structural member and motor vehicle.”].
Regarding Claim 14, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the deployable step assembly is outboard of a bumper step of the bumper [Williams Fig. 3, Reference Characters 34 and 22].
Regarding Claim 15, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the vehicle is a pickup truck that includes a cargo bed [Williams Paragraph 13: “Motor vehicle 10 may take many forms such as a sport utility vehicle (as shown in FIG. 1), a van, or a truck.”].
Regarding Claim 16, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the step pad includes a stepping pad and a cover, the step pad concealed by the cover when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position, the step pad establishing a step surface when the deployable step assembly is in the deployed position [Williams Figs. 4 and 8, Reference Characters 58 and 34 respectively].
Regarding Claim 17, Williams teaches the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a biasing device that damps pivoting of the deployable step assembly from the stowed position to the deployed position and that assists pivoting of the deployable step assembly from the deployed position to the stowed position [Williams Figs. 5-7, Reference Character 76; Williams Paragraph 21: “To deploy step 34, and therefore transition from first position 66 to second position 68, handle 75 can be pulled in a direction along axis 64 and away from step 34, thereby compressing spring 76, and effectively unlocking step 34 (best shown in FIG. 7).”; Williams Paragraph 22: “To return step 34 to its locked, stowed position, step 34 is raised and the rotating motion of second sleeves 60, 62 in relation to first sleeves 40, 42 results in the decompression of spring 76 (best shown in FIG. 6), thereby causing spring loaded lockout key 70 to return to its locked state.”].
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Williams (US 7434825 B2). [Note that prior art citations are italicized and enclosed in brackets.]
Regarding Claim 18, Williams teaches a method, comprising: pivoting a deployable step assembly of a vehicle to transition the deployable step assembly from a stowed position and a deployed position [Williams Paragraph 21: “To deploy step 34, and therefore transition from first position 66 to second position 68, handle 75 can be pulled in a direction along axis 64 and away from step 34, thereby compressing spring 76, and effectively unlocking step 34 (best shown in FIG. 7). Once unlocked, step 34 can be pulled at an angle that is both away from motor vehicle 10 and down towards the ground, which will allow for step 34 to travel for approximately 90 degrees of rotation into a fully deployed second position 68.”], wherein, in the stowed position, a step pad of the deployable step assembly establishes a portion of a bumper of the vehicle [Williams Fig. 3], wherein, in the deployed position, the step pad is rearward and vertically lower than the bumper [Williams Fig. 3].
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.
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 7434825 B2) in view of Demick (US 7377563 B1). [Note that prior art citations are italicized and enclosed in brackets.]
Regarding Claim 6, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach a bumper pocket. Demick teaches the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the deployable step assembly is at least partially received within a bumper pocket when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position [Demick Figs. 2-5]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly of Williams to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, a bumper pocket in view of Demick. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Demick because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing a “finished and/or contoured” appearance. As recognized by Demick, the step “may be stowed within bumper 22 to form the finished and/or contoured external appearance surface thereof according to the invention” [Demick Paragraph 15].
Regarding Claim 7, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach a bumper pocket. Demick teaches the vehicle of claim 6, wherein a top surface of the bumper spans over the bumper pocket and spans over the deployable step assembly when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position [Demick Figs. 2-5]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly of Williams to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, a bumper that spans over the bumper pocket in view of Demick. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Demick because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing a “finished and/or contoured” appearance. As recognized by Demick, the step “may be stowed within bumper 22 to form the finished and/or contoured external appearance surface thereof according to the invention” [Demick Paragraph 15].
Regarding Claim 8, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach a light within a bumper pocket. Demick teaches the vehicle of claim 6, further comprising a light within the bumper pocket, the light configured to illuminate at least the step pad of the deployable step assembly when the deployable step assembly is in the deployed position [Demick Fig. 6, Reference Character 36; Demick Paragraph 24: “One or more lights, reflectors, and/or other illuminating devices 36 positioned on anterior wall 45”]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly of Williams to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, a light in view of Demick. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Demick because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing illumination of the step for users. As recognized by Demick, a light is included “so as to emit or reflect sufficient light for marking the depth of main step surface 125 in low-light conditions” [Demick Paragraph 24].
Regarding Claim 9, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach a light within a bumper pocket. Demick teaches the vehicle of claim 8, wherein the deployable step assembly spans over the light when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position [Demick Fig. 6, Reference Character 36; Demick Paragraph 24: “One or more lights, reflectors, and/or other illuminating devices 36 positioned on anterior wall 45”]. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Demick because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing a “finished and/or contoured” appearance. As recognized by Demick, the step “may be stowed within bumper 22 to form the finished and/or contoured external appearance surface thereof according to the invention” [Demick Paragraph 15].
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 7434825 B2) in view of Demick (US 7377563 B1) and further in view of Ross et al. (US 7621546 B2) (hereinafter “Ross”). [Note that prior art citations are italicized and enclosed in brackets.]
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Williams and Demick teaches a deployable step assembly comprising a light but does not teach illumination of the ground beneath the deployable step. Ross teaches the vehicle of claim 9, wherein the light is configured to emit light to illuminate ground beneath the deployable step assembly when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position [Ross Figs. 1, 2, and 7, Reference Character 58; Ross Abstract: “A light source is fixedly mounted to the link for illuminating the stepping surface to allow users to locate the step.”]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, a light configured to illuminate the ground in view of Ross. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams, Demick, and Ross because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing better clarity for users. As such, “users are able to clearly locate the stepping surface 16 of the step 14 while entering and exiting the vehicle at night or in low lighting conditions.” [Ross Paragraph 17].
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 7434825 B2) in view of Demick (US 7377563 B1) and further in view of Nania (US 9434317 B2). [Note that prior art citations are italicized and enclosed in brackets.]
Regarding Claim 11, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach a catch assembly. Nania teaches the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a catch assembly that can engage to hold the deployable step assembly in the stowed position, and can disengage to permit pivoting of the deployable step assembly from the stowed position to the deployed position [Nania Figs. 7A and 7B, Reference Character 72]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, a catch assembly in view of Nania. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Nania because this would have achieved the desirable result of preventing movement of the step. As recognized by Nania, “a latch operates to prevent movement” of the step” [Nania Paragraph 8]. It is noted that the step in Nania’s invention is located at the end of the bumper instead of in the widthwise center of the bumper, but it would have been obvious to feature the claimed arrangement, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as a matter of design choice, yielding the same predictable results, since such a modification is a change of location of parts. The rearranging of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 12, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach an activation button. Nania teaches the vehicle of claim 11, wherein the deployable step assembly includes an activation button configured to release the catch assembly from an engaged position to permit the deployable step assembly to pivot from the stowed position to the deployed position [Nania Figs. 7A and 7B, Reference Character 74; Nania Paragraph 23 “the latch/release system 72 includes a button 74 having a pin 76 extending downwardly from the top or upper side 20 of the bumper 18. Pressing the button 74 exerts downward pressure on a lever 78 through the pin 76. Downward pressure on the lever 78 causes the lever to rotate about the pivot point 80 and releases the latch 82”]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, an activation button in view of Nania. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Nania because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing ease of activation, as recognized by Nania. As such, the step can be unlatched from an easily accessed exterior of the bumper [Nania Figs. 7A and 7B]. It should be noted that the use of a known technique to improve similar devices, methods, or products in the same way is likely to be obvious. (See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007); see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Regarding Claim 13, Williams teaches a deployable step assembly but does not teach an activation button. Nania teaches the vehicle of claim 12, wherein the activation button is configured to be activated with a foot of a user [Nania Figs. 7A and 7B, Reference Character 74]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, an activation button in view of Nania. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams and Nania because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing increased ease of activation, as it would obviate the need for a user to bend at the waist. It is noted that the button in Nania’s invention is recessed into the top surface of the bumper, but it would have been obvious to feature a protruding button, thus enabling the button to be pressed by the underside of the user’s foot, yielding the same predictable results, since such a modification is a change of location of parts. As no limitations claimed invention preclude the use of a button that protrudes from the bumper or step, it should be noted that the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design choice. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (see also MPEP § 2144.04).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 7434825 B2) in view of Ross et al. (US 7621546 B2) (hereinafter “Ross”). [Note that prior art citations are italicized and enclosed in brackets.]
Regarding Claim 19, Williams teaches a method comprising pivoting a deployable step assembly but does not teach a light. Ross teaches the method of claim 18, further comprising covering a light with the deployable step assembly when the deployable step assembly is in the stowed position, the light illuminating at least a portion of the deployable step assembly when the deployable step assembly is in the deployed position [Ross Figs. 1, 2, and 7, Reference Character 58; Ross Abstract: “A light source is fixedly mounted to the link for illuminating the stepping surface to allow users to locate the step.”]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deployable step assembly to include, with a reasonable expectation of success, a light configured to illuminate the ground in view of Ross. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Williams, Demick, and Ross because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing better clarity for users. As such, “users are able to clearly locate the stepping surface 16 of the step 14 while entering and exiting the vehicle at night or in low lighting conditions.” [Ross Paragraph 17].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T WALSH whose telephone number is 303-297-4351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 5:30 pm ET.
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, J. Allen Shriver II, can be reached at 303-297-4337. 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.
/MICHAEL T. WALSH/Examiner, Art Unit 3613