DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office Action is in response to the amended claims filed on 1/14/2026.
Claims 1-5, 8-11, 14-19 and 21-25 are currently pending.
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)(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, 2, 4, 5, 8, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lavoie et al. (US 2020/0148018).
As to claims 1 and 15 Lavoie discloses an apparatus and method comprising:
interface circuitry (figure 2);
machine readable instructions (figure 15); and
programmable circuitry to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to:
cause a suspension system to lower a rear of a vehicle to a lowered position (figure 15 #226),
determine whether a trailer hitch of the vehicle is aligned with a coupler external to the vehicle (paragraph 0063);
when the trailer hitch is aligned with the coupler, cause the suspension system to raise the rear of the vehicle (paragraph 0063 and figure 15 #232); and determine whether the trailer hitch is coupled to the coupler based on a position of a trailer jack connected to the trailer hitch (shown in figure 10, and paragraph 0053, when the power reaches a threshold that means the truck is carrying the jack weight, which is when it is determined based on the trailer jack position that the trailer is coupled, and sends a signal to stow the jack).
As to claims 8 and 25 Lavoie discloses the apparatus and method of claim 1 and 15, wherein the programmable circuitry is to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to:
cause the suspension system to level the vehicle in response to determining that the trailer hitch is coupled to the coupler (figure 15 #232); and
cause the suspension system to lower the rear of the vehicle in response to determining that the trailer hitch is not coupled to the coupler (figure 15 #226).
As to claim 21 Lavoie discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the programmable circuitry is to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to cause the suspension system to raise a front of the vehicle to a raised position. (figure 5 shows the front of the vehicle being raised and lowered)
As to claims 5 and 18 Lavoie discloses the apparatus and method of claim 21 and 15, wherein the raised position corresponds with approximately a maximum height associated with the suspension system, and wherein the lowered position corresponds with approximately a minimum height associated with the suspension system. (the suspension is raised to ride height which is a maximum height associated with the suspension as it is the maximum ride height and lowered to the lowest height possible to clear the trailer hitch).
As to claims 22 and 24 Lavoie discloses the apparatus and method of claim 21 and 15, wherein the programmable circuitry is to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to prevent the vehicle from having a driving speed or acceleration that satisfies a threshold when the rear is in the lowered position and the front is in the raised position. (paragraph 0038)
For example, the hitch assist system 10, in some embodiments, may regulate speed of the vehicle 12 during alignment of the vehicle 12 with the coupler 14 of trailer 16, which can reduce the potential for a collision with trailer 16, and can bring vehicle 12 to a complete stop at a determined endpoint 35 of path 32. It is disclosed herein that the hitch assist system 10 can additionally or alternatively issue an alert signal corresponding to a notification of an actual, impending, and/or anticipated collision with a portion of trailer 16. The powertrain control system 72, as shown in the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 2, may also interact with the hitch assist system 10 for regulating speed and acceleration of the vehicle 12 during partial or autonomous alignment with trailer 16. As mentioned above, regulation of the speed of the vehicle 12 may be advantageous to prevent collision with trailer 16.
As to claim 2 and 16 Lavoie discloses the apparatus and method of claim 22 and 15, wherein the threshold is a driving speed of 0 miles per hour. (When the vehicle reaches the endpoint, it is stopped giving a threshold of 0 miles per hour. See paragraph 0038)
For example, the hitch assist system 10, in some embodiments, may regulate speed of the vehicle 12 during alignment of the vehicle 12 with the coupler 14 of trailer 16, which can reduce the potential for a collision with trailer 16, and can bring vehicle 12 to a complete stop at a determined endpoint 35 of path 32. It is disclosed herein that the hitch assist system 10 can additionally or alternatively issue an alert signal corresponding to a notification of an actual, impending, and/or anticipated collision with a portion of trailer 16. The powertrain control system 72, as shown in the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 2, may also interact with the hitch assist system 10 for regulating speed and acceleration of the vehicle 12 during partial or autonomous alignment with trailer 16. As mentioned above, regulation of the speed of the vehicle 12 may be advantageous to prevent collision with trailer 16.
As to claims 4 and 19 Lavoie discloses the system and method of claims 22 and 24, further including causing the suspension system to level the vehicle in response to the vehicle driving at the speed or that satisfies the threshold. (in claim 24 it is disclosed that the vehicle is prevented from that speed therefore the limitation would not happen)
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.
Claim(s) 9-11, 14, 17 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lavoie et al. (US 2020/0148018) in further view of Guest et al (US 2020/0164712) and MacPherson et al (US 2021/0155264).
As to claim 9 Lavoie discloses a vehicle comprising:
a suspension system (71)
interface circuitry (figure 2);
machine readable instructions (figure 15); and
programmable circuitry to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to:
cause the suspension system to decrease a height of the rear portion of the vehicle to a lowered height (figure 15 #226),
determine whether a trailer hitch of the vehicle is aligned with a portion of a towable body to which the trailer hitch is couplable (paragraph 0063);
after the trailer hitch is aligned with the portion of the towable body, cause the suspension system to raise the rear portion of the vehicle (paragraph 0063 and figure 15 #232); and
determine that the trailer hitch is coupled to the portion of the towable body when a trailer jack connected to the towable body is raised off a surface (shown in figure 10, and paragraph 0053, when the power reaches a threshold that means the truck is carrying the jack weight, which is when it is determined based on the trailer jack position that the trailer is coupled, and sends a signal to stow the jack).
However Lavoie is silent to the suspension being an air suspension, including a front air compartment and a rear air compartment, the front air compartment coupled to a front portion of a body of the vehicle, and the rear air compartment coupled to a rear portion of the body of the vehicle;
Guest discloses that it was known well known in the art at the time of filing to have a vehicle with an air suspension. The air suspension including a front air compartment (figure 1 # 50 and 52) and a rear air compartment (figure 1 #54 and 56), the front air compartment coupled to a front portion of a body of the vehicle (figure 1 #68), and the rear air compartment coupled to a rear portion of the body of the vehicle (figure 1 #70).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the air suspension system of Guest with the programing of Lavoie, as Lavoie discloses that it is designed for an active suspension and Guest discloses that this their suspension is an active suspension for hitching a trailer (paragraphs 0053 and 0054)
As to claim 23 Lavoie discloses the vehicle of claim 9, wherein the programmable circuitry is to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to prevent the vehicle from driving at a speed that satisfies a threshold when the rear portion of the vehicle has the lowered height. (paragraph 0038)
As to claim 10 Lavoie discloses the vehicle of claim 23, wherein the threshold is 0 miles per hour. (When the vehicle reaches the endpoint, it is stopped giving a threshold of 0 miles per hour. See paragraph 0038).
As to claim 14 Lavoie discloses the vehicle of claim 9, wherein the programmable circuitry is to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine-readable instructions to:
cause the suspension system to level the vehicle in response to determining that the trailer hitch is coupled to the portion of the towable body; and
cause the suspension system to remove air from the rear air compartment to lower the rear portion of the vehicle in response to determining that the trailer hitch is not coupled to the portion of the towable body.
As to claims 3 ,11 and 17 Lavoie discloses the apparatus of claim 22 including setting a threshold speed for maneuvering, however is silent to the threshold is a driving speed of 10 miles per hour.
MacPherson discloses it was known in the art at the time of filing to set the speed limit of maneuvering of a kneeling vehicle to 10 miles per hour (paragraphs 0167to 0169) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to set the speed at 10mph to set a safety limit for hitching or kneeling.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 8-11, 14-19 and 21-25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 SHERMAN D MANLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5539. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7-5:30 est.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/SHERMAN D MANLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LOGAN M KRAFT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights