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 .
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 15 June 2026, in which claims 1, 9, 18, and 19 were amended, claims 2, 3, and 14-17 were canceled, and claims 21-26 were added.
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) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Astrike (US 9956996 B2). Astrike discloses a vehicle (#10; figures 1-10B) comprising:
a vehicle body (including bed #14, side walls #10a, 10b) comprising a tailgate (#12; column 3);
a tray (cargo bed extension assembly #11) disposed in the tailgate (#12), the tray being configured to protrude upwardly (figures 3C-5B, 7D, 7E, 9A-10B) and to be folded and unfolded (figures 1-10B), wherein the tray comprises a first tray and a second tray (first and second side panels #30, 32, 130, 132, 430, 432, 530, 532), the first tray and the second tray being configured to be unfolded in opposite directions (opposite left and right directions; figures 3C-5B, 7D, 7E, 9A-10B; column 5).
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Astrike (US 9956996 B2) in view of Seksaria et al. (US 6994363 B2). Astrike does not specifically disclose wherein the vehicle body comprises an operation switch configured to manipulate an operation of an actuator to move the tray (cargo bed extension assembly #11). Seksaria et al. teaches a vehicle body comprising a tailgate (#100), and a tray (tailgate extension apparatus #200) disposed in the tailgate, wherein the vehicle body comprises an operation switch (release button) configured to manipulate an operation of an actuator to move the tray (“The U-frame member 205 is then disengaged from the stored position by disengaging the detent 156 (by pressing a release button and/or pulling the U-frame out of the tailgate 100) and extending the U-frame from the tailgate”; column 6, lines 37-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle of Astrike to include an operation switch, as taught by Seksaria et al., for the predictable result of facilitating movement of the tray from a manual process to one that includes a release button, thereby reducing effort involved in deploying the tray.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-13, and 21-26 are allowed.
Claim 20 is 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:
the allowable subject matter of claim 1 is the upper portion of the actuator comprises a hinge member to which the tray is coupled to be rotatable, and wherein the hinge member comprises an elastic member configured to apply a force in a direction in which the tray is unfolded, in combination with other features of claim 1;
the allowable subject matter of claim 20 is an actuator disposed in the tailgate and configured to push the tray to protrude upwardly, and a locking member configured to fix a position of the tray in a state in which the tray protrudes outwardly and is unfolded, wherein the tray comprises a first tray and a second tray being configured to be unfolded in opposite directions, in combination with other features of preceding claim 18;
the allowable subject matter of claim 21 is the upper portion of the actuator comprises a hinge member to which the tray is coupled to be rotatable, and wherein the hinge member comprises an elastic member configured to apply a force in a direction in which the tray is unfolded, in combination with other features of claim 21.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 15 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner’s indication of allowable subject matter in dependent claim 13 indicated that claim 13 was 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. Claim 13 depends from independent claim 1. Incorporating the contents of claim 13 into independent claim 18 does not automatically place independent claim 18 in condition for allowance because claim 18 does not include all limitations of independent claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Newly cited prior art Povinelli et al. (US 10589803 B2) discloses an aerodynamic bed cover system including a deployable tailgate panel, and Vejnar (US 6742822 B2) discloses an auxiliary tailgate structure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA FREEDMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2442. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at 571-270-5985. 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.
/LAURA FREEDMAN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights