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
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, 8, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 3979138 A (George).
Regarding claim 1: George teaches a hitch ball assembly for a trailer hitch, comprising: a body having a plurality of hinged segments operable between an open position and a closed position (arm(s) 8, elbow hinge 9; Fig. 4); and each of the plurality of hinged segments having an outer surface that collectively form a first hitch ball configured to engage a trailer tongue when the hinged segments are operated to the closed position (ball 21, ball receptacle 37; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 2: George teaches the hitch ball assembly of claim 1 (see above), wherein the plurality of hinged segments pivot relative to one another (the arm(s) 8 pivot relative to one another when the hinge is opened and closed).
Regarding claim 3: George teaches the hitch ball assembly of claim 2 (see above), wherein the plurality of hinged segments comprises at least two hinged segments (arm(s) 8 consists of at least two portions, one on either side of the elbow hinge 9; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8: George teaches the hitch ball assembly of claim 1 (see above), further comprising a biasing member for biasing the plurality of hinged segments in the closed position (spring 27).
Regarding claims 10 and 11: George teaches the hitch ball assembly of claim 1, but does not directly teach that each of the plurality of hinged segments is hollowed out or wherein each of the plurality of hinged segments is not hollowed out.
However, George does disclose a hollow frame mounted on the vehicle (Claim 6) and that the hinged portions (arm 8) are at least partially hollow, in order to accommodate the elbow hinge 9.
Applicant has not disclosed that the hinged portions being hollow or not hollow provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem other than the well-known and unsurprising function of optimizing structural integrity.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the hinged portions of George by being hollowed out or kept solid. This is because one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected hollowing out and keeping solid to be two of several straightforward ways of optimizing the structural integrity of the hitch because hollowing it out makes the piece(s) lighter while keeping portions solid makes them less prone to bending or otherwise being damaged.
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.
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) 4 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 3979138 A (George) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 7232145 B1 (Reece).
Regarding claim 4: George teaches the hitch ball assembly of claim 1 (see above), wherein the plurality of hinged segments comprises a first lip and a second lip configured to engage a cam groove formed in a ball post.
However, Reece teaches connectors 14 and 34, with threads 17 and 36, respectively.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the hinged segments of George with the connectors of Reece. This is because they are both mechanisms of a trailer hitch assembly. This is important in order to ensure a proper and secure connection between the hitch and the trailer.
Regarding claim 9: George teaches the hitch ball assembly of claim 1 (see above), but does not directly teach a magnet for holding the plurality of hinged segments in the closed position.
However, Reece teaches magnets 10 and 32 to ensure that the trailer tongue on the trailer is properly and securely mounted on the metal ball on the trailer hitch on the vehicle.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the closed position of George with the magnets of Reece. This is because they are both mechanisms of a trailer hitch assembly. This is important in order to ensure that the trailer tongue is properly mounted on the ball hitch.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 and 12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Neither George nor Reece teach that each of the plurality of hinged segments define a concave inner surface configured to engage a ball-shaped ball end of a ball post (as in instant claim 5), that the plurality of hinged segments define a concave inner surface configured to engage a second hitch ball, wherein the first hitch ball has a diameter greater that a diameter of the second hitch ball (as in instant claims 6-7), nor that the body is a clam-shell type body (as in instant claim 12). These claims, though independent from each other, all claim a hitch ball that is really two hitch balls in one, with one nested inside the other (or at least the space for one nested inside the other, as in claim 12).
This idea is not found in any other relevant prior art. Therefore, the subject matter is novel. Additionally, there exists no combination of references that would lead one of ordinary skill in the art to this idea. Therefore, the subject matter is also non-obvious.
Therefore, the subject matter, if rewritten as described above, would be allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20140015226 A1 teaches a ball clamp 30 has a semi-spherical surface that is urged by coil compression spring 34 into engagement with the spherical surface of a hitch ball.
US 8419039 B1 teaches a trailer tongue assembly includes a trailer tongue having trader tongue front and rear portions, the trailer tongue front portion being configured for releasable attachment to a trader hitch, and an attachment frame connected to the trailer tongue rear portion and configured for attachment to a trailer.
US 8240694 B1 teaches a trailer hitch alignment device that aligns a trailer hitch onto a hitch ball from beneath both the trailer hitch and the hitch ball.
US 7926829 B2 teaches a trailer hitch that includes multiple hitch connectors for connecting the trailer to a towing vehicle in different ways.
US 7744110 B1 teaches an apparatus that guides a trailer tongue onto a trailer hitching ball with minimal assistance.
US 20090102155 A1 teaches a motorcycle hitch assembly including a pivotal trailer ball allowing the trailer ball to remain generally vertical as the motorcycle and base lean while turning.
US 20070138761 A1 teaches a trailer hitch for resisting inadvertent separation of a trailer tongue coupler from a vehicle's hitch ball.
US 7090238 B1 teaches a hitch assembly is provided to prevent trailer towing by unauthorized persons.
US 6209902 B1 teaches a trailer hitch and tongue alignment system for the purpose of helping a user line up the hitch ball of a vehicle to a hitch ball receiver of a trailer.
US 6193258 B1 teaches a device for aligning the trailer hitch ball on the towing vehicle, and for lifting the trailer hitch on and off the ball.
US 5882029 A teaches a vertical post on the towing vehicle in front of and in close proximity to the ball that has a pivotal arm which can rotate from a vertical position to a rearwardly inclined position.
US 5658004 A teaches a ball type trailer hitch cover assembly has an elastic tubular ball cover section comprising a tight fitting bottom section which expands over the ball and leads it to an enlarged circumferential section loosely holding the ball therein by contracting back the bottom section.
US 4772039 A teaches a ball hitch for towing trailers and the like may be assembled in either of two possible configurations so that the resultant assembled ball structure has a selected diameter complemental to the socket of the trailer tongue.
US 3794355 A teaches an expansion trailer hitch for use in towing a vehicle at either an extended position or a normal position.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA FITZPATRICK whose telephone number is (703)756-5783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-4pm.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571)272-2160. 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.
/JULIA FITZPATRICK/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/LAURA MARTIN SWEENEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights