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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coccaro (4,854,803) in view of Hahn (5,112,070).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Coccaro discloses a wheel dolly for vehicles, comprising:
two arms, including a first arm and a second arm (18, 20) that are moveable towards one another (see e.g., Col. 7, lines 48-50), each of the two arms having opposite end regions,
dolly wheels (28-34), one dolly wheel being arranged at each of the opposite end regions of each of the two arms (see Fig. 1); and
a mechanism (26) for moving the two arms towards one another, including
a rod (38) extending between the two arms,
a guide tube (36) through which the rod (38) is guided, and
a lever (102);
wherein the two arms are configured to be positioned under a vehicle wheel (see Fig. 5) on opposite sides of the wheel,
wherein the vehicle wheel can be lifted by moving the two arms towards one another (see Fig. 5 and Col. 7, line 67 to Col. 8, line 5),
wherein the rod (38) is coupled to the first arm (20) at one of the opposite end regions of the first arm (see Fig. 1), and
wherein the guide tube (36) and actuator lever (102) are supported at one of the opposite end regions of the second arm (18, see Fig. 1 showing the offset configuration of the telescoping actuating arm 10 near the ends of the two wheel-engaging arms).
While Coccaro discloses that a manual step-by-step actuator between the arms is used to lift a vehicle wheel, it does not disclose the recited rod-surrounding sliding member and stopping member.
Hahn teaches another wheel dolly for vehicles, comprising:
two arms (12a, 12b) that are moveable towards one another (see e.g., Col. 2, lines 14-16),
dolly wheels (14), one dolly wheel being arranged at each end of each of the two arms (see Fig. 1); and
a mechanism (22/16) for moving the two arms towards one another, including
a cylindrical rod (16),
a guide tube (46) through which the rod is guided (see Fig. 1),
a lever (70),
a sliding member (54) engaging around the rod (see Fig. 5 showing the hollow cross section of the movable rod 16 grabbing member, the sliding member being configured to move the rod step-by-step in response to actuation of the lever (see Col. 2, lines 46-55 describing how the sliding member 54 pulls on the rod to move the arms together), and
a stopping member (52) configured to clamp the rod, wherein the cylindrical shape of the rod and the through-bore arrangement of the engaging elements would necessarily allow the rod to be rotatable relative to the two arms,
wherein the two arms can be positioned laterally under a vehicle wheel (26, see Fig. 1), wherein the vehicle wheel can be lifted by moving the two arms towards one another (see Col. 2, lines 14-21),
wherein the rod (16) can be moved step by step by the sliding member (54, i.e., the arm 12a and rod 16 are pulled together toward the jack-supporting arm 12b), wherein the sliding member (54) engages around the rod (16), and wherein the rod can be clamped by the stopping member (52, see Fig. 5 showing the hollow cross-section of the release stopper 52).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have modified the wheel dolly of Coccaro with the actuating mechanism taught by Hahn to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because doing so constitutes a simple substitution of one known element (a jack mechanism having a clamped cylindrical rod engagement) for another (a jack mechanism having a toothed ratcheting engagement) to obtain predictable results (e.g., a telescoping mechanism that is less prone to binding due to misalignment/uneven mounting).
Regarding claim 3, Coccaro further discloses that each of the two arms (18, 20) comprises rollers (90, 92) that can be displaced along each respective one of the two arms (see Col. 9, lines 64-68 describing how the rollers having an inner diameter that is larger than the bushing diameter that support the rollers, this size difference allowing for relative movement both rotationally and laterally along the arms).
Regarding claims 4-5, the actuator of the above Hahn combination includes that the sliding member (54) is movable against a rod-encircling spiral spring (e.g., the right spring 50 in Fig. 5) bias and that the stopping member (52) is tiltable against another rod-encircling spiral spring (e.g., the left spring 50) bias.
Regarding claim 19, the actuator of the above Hahn combination has only a single rod-engaging sliding member (54), which is therefore the only sliding member of the mechanism configured to move the rod step by step in response to actuation of the lever (70).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13 and 15 are allowed.
Claims 2, 7, and 16-18 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 prior art does not disclose or otherwise fairly suggest a wheel dolly having: the stopping member structural elements of claim 2; the sliding member structural features of claim 7; the guide tube arrangement and wheel clamping arrangement of claim 16; nor does the prior art provide for a pressing and/or spreading mechanism including a circular cylindrical rod engaged step by step by a sliding member having a through hole that receives the rod via an inner circumferential wall of a through hole in the sliding member with opposing clamping surfaces, the through-hole including the recited axial setbacks having an U/arc shape.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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. Particularly, the amendment to claim 1 related to the offset positioning of the rod and actuator along the arms necessitate additional searching/review of the prior art which produced the Coccaro patent which discloses a step-by-step manual wheel dolly having an offset actuator.
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 STEVE CLEMMONS whose telephone number is (313)446-4842. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-4:30 EST Monday-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, J Allen Shriver can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEVE CLEMMONS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights