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 .
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following claimed features must be shown, without entering any new matter: an elastic band integrated into a lower hem of the cover body, the all the securing mechanism in claim 6, one or more back sensor openings in claim 11.
Claims 1, 6, and 8-11 are objected to: the “roof portion” and “side-covering portions” has no antecedent basis in the specification.
Claims 1, 6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter.
“in in” is grammatically incorrect.
It is unclear what comprises the “roof portion” and the “body portion” as introduced by the amended claim. The original disclosure shows portion 104 and two portions 106 covering the two sides. It is noted that a) the terms “roof portion” and the “body portion” as introduced by the amended claims seems to reference to the two different elevational related portions of the cover, i.e., the roof being higher elevation as compared to the body portion. However, the apertures at 104 and 106 seems to all in the same elevation from the bottom of the ground in fig. 1, and b) there is no definition of what delineate between the “roof portion” and the “body portion” in the specification.
Claims 1, 6, 8, and 10-11 Joannis (DE 102018125753) in view of Butterworth(6099067), and further in view of Burkey (5431474).
PNG
media_image1.png
690
1057
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
729
992
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
859
1118
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As in 2nd schematically illustrated, the mobile garage 10th a preferably flexible cover 20th , which is designed, for example, as a sewing dress and comprises an opaque or opaque material such as an opaque or opaque plastic material or an opaque or opaque textile material, in order to at least keep the elements or structures of the vehicle to be kept secret from the public 50 to cover.
In the minor section 23 which is set up the front of the vehicle 50 to cover are sections 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 provided, which are not formed from an opaque material, but from a transparent material to cause corresponding parts of the vehicle 50 in a state where the mobile garage 10th the vehicle 50 covers, are visible.
By providing the transparent sections 29 and 30th , and / or the fastening devices 64 and 65 , enables a driver to sit on a driver's seat of the vehicle located on the left 50 sits, by means of the mobile garage 10th covered condition of the vehicle 50 , has sufficient visibility around the vehicle 50 For example, to drive at least a few meters on a closed area.
sections 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 provided, which are not formed from an opaque material, but from a transparent material
In the minor section 25th which is set up to the rear of the vehicle 50 to cover, are transparent sections 31 and 32 provided, which are not formed from an opaque material, but from a transparent material
In the event that the connection device 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 is designed as a Velcro fastener, a connecting section can be selected from the first connecting section 60A , 61A , 62A , 63A and the second connection section 60B , 61B , 62B , 63B be provided with hooks, and the other connecting section selected from the first connecting section 60A , 61A , 62A , 63A and the second connection section 60B , 61B , 62B , 63B can be provided with eyelets, with two adjacent secondary sections in the directly connected state 22 , 23 , 24th , 25th engage the respective hooks in the respective eyelets.
Regarding claim 1, Joannis teaches a vehicle cover apparatus, comprising: a flexible cover body having a concave inner surface that forms a cavity, wherein the cavity is shaped to receive a vehicle, the vehicle being characterized as having a sensor array that includes at least one top sensor and at least two side sensors located on opposing sides of the vehicle, the flexible cover body. With respect to the roof-covering portion and side-covering portions, note that a) there is no defined “roof portion” and the “body portion” in the specification, the roof portion comprise the aperture on section 23 and the body comprises the apertures 30/33 on section 24/22 of the cover in fig. 2, at least one top aperture (29) formed in in the roof-covering portion of the cover body, b) alternatively, the roof-covering portion comprises the upper portion (the cab portion of the cover including the roof of the vehicle) and the and side-covering portions below this roof-covering portion and this side-covering portions comprises the claimed transparent portions at 31/32/26/27 as cited above. Regarding the at least top and the two side apertures being configured to provide a field of view to at least one of the at least two corresponding side sensors of the vehicle sensor array, note that the “sensor array” is intended use and do not impart any structure over the cover with transparent portions in Joannis.
Joannis meets all claimed limitations except for the a) reinforced edges on the apertures in each of the two side apertures, and b) an elastic band (110) integrated into a lower hem of the cover body, the elastic band being configured to encircle a base portion of the vehicle to secure the cover body around the vehicle; and a plurality of adjustable straps (112) attached to the cover body, each strap having a fastening mechanism for securing to the vehicle.
PNG
media_image4.png
346
297
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The results of this technique are shown in the cross-sectional view of FIG. 4, where a fold of window banding 54 is disposed between window sheet 49 and covering portion 34.
Butterworth, at 54, teaches that it is known in the art to provide a reinforcement at the edge of the opening between a transparent portion 49 and a cover body 34. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a reinforcement edge as taught by Butterworth to added durability and to prevent ripping.
PNG
media_image5.png
280
597
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(11) The cable 17 as shown is formed of any suitable material including natural and synthetic fabric, wire, webbing, or strapping, or of an elastomeric material and while it is housed within the seam 16, it is capable of moving longitudinally within the longitudinal length of the seam 16.
Regarding the elastic band the elastic straps, Burkey teaches an elastic band integrated into a lower hem of the cover body, the elastic band being configured to encircle a base portion of the vehicle to secure the cover body around the vehicle; and a plurality of adjustable straps (21) attached to the cover body, each strap having a fastening mechanism for securing to the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide an elastic band integrated into a lower hem of the cover body, and a plurality of adjustable straps attached to the cover body, each strap having a fastening mechanism for securing to the vehicle as taught by Burkey to provide added security, e.g. prevent wind blowing.
Note that the “encircle a base station” does not require the entire base is completely circle. Also notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide a plurality of straps at the four sections of the cover in Joannis (front, back, left, and right sides) to keep the entire cover secured. Also note that Burkey also teaches a loop (when rings 17 omitted) also meet the claim.
Regarding claim 6, note securing mechanism can be hook and loop fastener in addition to the hooks and eyelets.
Regarding claim 8, note the transparent portions cited above, i.e., the transparent portions sewn into the apertures similar to that of applicant using the method modified by Butterworth, as set forth supra.
Regarding claim 10, note the material is plastic and weather-resistant material.
Regarding claim 11, note 31/32 cited above.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Joannis rejection, as set forth above, and further in view of Kufferath (DE19904140).
PNG
media_image6.png
554
828
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Instead of a transparent film, a transparent gauze or a transparent, wide-mesh fabric or knitted fabric or a ribbon structure can also be provided.
Kufferath teaches that it is known in the art to provide mesh as an equivalent to transparent material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide mesh material as taught by Kufferath to provide an alternative material for one to see through.
Claims 1, 6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joannis as set forth above in paragraph 5, and further in view in view of Michael (BR 102013024895) or Plaster (8131429), and further in view of Maniff et al. (20230165419). In the alternative, Michael or Plaster, each teaches that it is known in the art to provide car with sensor at numerous places around the car. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the car of either Michael or Plaster in the cover of the Joannis to provide the desired protection for the car.
PNG
media_image7.png
683
516
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
794
601
media_image8.png
Greyscale
[0046] The base cover 202 can also have a sensor access port 208. The sensor access port 208 can be a simple aperture in the base cover 202 designed to allow a sensor of the robotic cleaning device to extend through the sensor access port 208. The sensor access port 202 can provide the robotic cleaning device with the ability to operate properly without the sensing devices being obstructed. The sensor access port 208 can be any shape to allow the sensor of the robotic cleaning device to function properly. For example and not limitation, the sensor access port 208 can be round, triangular, square, or otherwise polygonal, to ensure the sensor of the robotic cleaning device is able to function without obstruction. As another example, the sensor access port 208 can be a transparent or translucent material or a mesh material that allows the sensor of the robotic cleaning device to operate without obstruction. As yet another example, the portion of the base cover 202 nearest the sensor access port 208 can be tapered, or otherwise made thinner, to further allow the sensor of the robotic cleaning device to operate without obstruction. To ensure cover 100 is not moved to obstruct the view of the sensing device, cover 100 can have non-slip material placed near the sensors of the robotic cleaning device. Furthermore, although not shown, the sidewall 210 can have similar sensor access ports 208 to allow sensors on the side of the robotic cleaning device to similarly operate without obstruction.
Maniff teaches that it is known in the art to provide openings at the sensor locations to enable the operation of the sensors. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the car of either Michael or Plaster in the cover of the Joannis to provide the desired protection for the car. Since the car of Michael or Plaster having proximity sensor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide transparent/mesh portion in the cover of Joannis at the locations of the sensors in the car of either Michael or Plaster to enable the sensor to work properly using the teachings from Maniff.
SET II:
Claims 1, 8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (7458333) in view of Joannis, and Butterworth and further in view of Burkey.
PNG
media_image9.png
752
1037
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
409
603
media_image10.png
Greyscale
(3) The present invention is related to a covering and securing structure for a covering body, and more particularly to a covering body applicable for use in covering a yacht, car and freight, which renders a simpler and more convenient handling of the covering body, operation, and better enables achieving covering and securing protective effectiveness.
the tether 30 is threaded through the hem 14 of the circumferential edge of the covering 10,
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches a cover for a car which inherently has a roof and body portions. Yang teaches a band (30) integrated into a lower hem of the cover body, the band being configured to encircle a base portion of the vehicle to secure the cover body around the vehicle; and a plurality of adjustable straps (43) attached to the cover body, each strap having a fastening mechanism for securing to the vehicle. Yang does not teach a) the at least one top aperture formed in the roof-covering portion of the cover body, b) at least two side apertures in the side-covering portions on opposing sides of the flexible cover body, and c) the reinforce edges in the apertures. As set forth above, Joannis teaches the roof portion comprise the aperture on section 23 and the body comprises the apertures 30/33 on section 24/22 of the cover in fig. 2, at least one top aperture (29) formed in in the roof-covering portion of the cover body, b) alternatively, the roof-covering portion comprises the upper portion (the cab portion of the cover including the roof of the vehicle) and the and side-covering portions below this roof-covering portion and this side-covering portions comprises the claimed transparent portions at 31/32/26/27 in Joannis as cited above. Regarding the at least top and the two side apertures being configured to provide a field of view to at least one of the at least two corresponding side sensors of the vehicle sensor array, note that the “sensor array” is intended use and do not impart any structure over the cover with transparent portions in Joannis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the at least one top aperture formed in the roof-covering portion of the cover body, and the at least two side apertures in the side-covering portions on opposing sides of the flexible cover body to provide observable portions in the cover while hiding the general appearance of the vehicle.
Butterworth, at 54, teaches that it is known in the art to provide a reinforcement at the edge of the opening between a transparent portion 49 and a cover body 34. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a reinforcement edge as taught by Butterworth to added durability and to prevent ripping.
Burkey teaches that it is known in the art to provide the perimeter cable “formed of any suitable material including natural and synthetic fabric, wire, webbing, or strapping, or of an elastomeric material and while it is housed within the seam”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the strap of Yang of elastic material as taught by Burkey to provide the desired fastening structure for the vehicle.
Regarding claim 8, note the transparent portions in Joannis cited above, i.e., the transparent portions sewn into the apertures similar to that of applicant using the method modified by Butterworth, as set forth supra.
Regarding claim 10, note the teaching of the cover being used in rain, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the material of water proof to provide the desired protection.
Regarding claim 11, note 31/32 in Joannis cited above.
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang rejection as set forth above in paragraph 8, and further in view of Whiteside (6070629). Whiteside teaches that it is known in the art to provide magnets at 39. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide magnets as taught by Whiteside to provide added security.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang rejection as set forth above in paragraph 8, and further in view of Kufferath (DE19904140). Kufferath teaches that it is known in the art to provide mesh as an equilvalent to transparent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide mesh cover, for openings as taught by Kufferath to provide an alternative transparent material.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Note the drawing objections stand in view that some claimed structures or features are not being drawn as required by 37CFR1.83.
Regarding the new limitation of a top aperture in the roof-covering portion of the cover body, as set forth above, it is unclear what comprises the “roof portion” and the “body portion” as introduced by the amended claim. The original disclosure shows portion 104 and two portions 106 covering the two sides. It is noted that a) the terms “roof portion” and the “body portion” as introduced by the amended claims seems to reference to the two different elevational related portions of the cover, i..e., the roof being higher elevation as compared to the body portion. However, the apertures at 104 and 106 seems to all in the same elevation from the bottom of the ground in fig. 1, and b) there is no definition of what delineate between the “roof portion” and the “body portion” in the specification. Joannis teaches a roof portion comprise the aperture on section 23 and the body comprises the apertures 30/33 on section 24/22 of the cover in fig. 2, at least one top aperture (29) formed in in the roof-covering portion of the cover body, the at least one top aperture being positioned to provide a field of view to the at least one top sensor of the vehicle sensor array when the cover is deployed over the vehicle, the at least one top aperture having, b) alternatively, the roof-covering portion comprises the upper portion (the cab portion of the cover including the roof of the vehicle) and the and side-covering portions below this roof-covering portion and this side-covering portions comprises the claimed transparent portions at 31/32/26/27 as cited above.
Regarding the limitation of the at least top and the two side apertures being configured to provide a field of view to at least one of the at least two corresponding side sensors of the vehicle sensor array, note that the “sensor array” is intended use and do not impart any structure over the cover with transparent portions in Joannis.
Regarding the reinforced edges to maintain the integrity of the aperture, note that the aperture comprises the aperture where the transparent or translucent (cl. 8) or mesh (cl. 9) are attached, this is the same attachment that the transparent of Joannis being attached to the opaque cover to form the same transparent window as applicant, and the Butterworth teaches the attachment in the same analogous art for forming a transparent window in the cover. These type of attachment using reinforced edges between two flexible material can be used in any other areas like bags, clothing, etc.
With respect to the combination with Joannis in view of Michael or Plaster and further in view of Maniff, as set forth it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the car of either Michael or Plaster in the cover of the Joannis to provide the desired protection for the car. Since the car of Michael or Plaster having proximity sensor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide transparent/mesh portion in the cover of Joannis at the locations of the sensors in the car of either Michael or Plaster to enable the sensor to work properly using the teachings from Maniff over the same type of proximity sensors.
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 TRI M MAI whose telephone number is (571)272-4541. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm (Mon-Friday).
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at (571) 270-5055. 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.
TRI M. MAI
Examiner
Art Unit 3733
/TRI M MAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733