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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on Oct. 21, 2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US 11,999,579 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Reference character #123 in FIG. 5B appears to indicate the axis of rotation but is not disclosed in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 19 & 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannebauer (US 7,740,440) in view of Huang (CN 204625118) (English translation attached with copy) and Gilmour (US4,813,843).
Interpretative note 1. It is noted that "tilted position" and "upright position" are not defined in the claims. For purposes of examination, Gilmour discloses an upright position in FIG. 2 which is zero(0) degrees of rotation, and a tilted position as one(1) degree of rotation, e.g. any amount of rotation that is not zero degrees.
Hannebauer discloses an unstacking system comprising:
a tilt hoist, wherein a tilt hoist includes-
a base (indicated generally as 24) with a support surface,
a tilt frame 22 supported on a base and movable such that a tilt frame is rotatable, about an axis of rotation, between an upright position and a tilted position, and
a platform assembly 25 coupled to a tilt frame, wherein a platform assembly includes a platform 25 fixedly mounted to a tilt frame and a set of primary knees 25 movably coupled to a platform, and primary knees are configured to support a stack of lumber thereon and to move a stack of lumber upwardly along a first support surface toward a spill edge 22B (or 40B) while a tilt frame is in a tilted position;
a support frame (unlabeled in FIG. 3E showing tilt frame 22 tilted away and FIG. 3G showing tilt frame 22 tilted into abutting engagement) with an inclined receiving surface, wherein a support frame is configured to support a platform against an inclined receiving surface while a tilt frame is in a tilted position; and
a set of secondary knees 30 movably mounted to a support frame 30, wherein secondary knees are movable, relative to a support frame, from a starting position to a transfer position to thereby accept a portion of a stack of lumber from a primary knees and to move a portion upwardly toward a spill edge.
Huang discloses a base with an arcuate support surface 11, and a tilt frame 2 supported on a base and movable along an arcuate support surface such that a tilt frame is rotatable, about an axis of rotation (FIG. 3) located above an arcuate support surface between an upright position and a tilted position. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hannebauer to include a base with an arcuate support surface such that a tilt frame is supported on a base and movable along an arcuate support surface such that a tilt frame is rotatable, about an axis of rotation located above an arcuate support surface, as taught by Huang, such that a tilting frame does not turn too early or too late preventing particularly heavy articles from being damaged.
And, Gilmour discloses the claims as amended in the Oct. 24, 2025 submission. Specifically, Gilmour discloses a tilt frame 14 with an arcuate lower support surface 23 supported on base 18, wherein tilt frame 14 is rotatable relative to base 18 about an axis of rotation 20 located above the arcuate support surface in an upright position disclosed in FIG. 2 and a tilted position disclosed in FIG. 1. Gilmour's length and radius of arcuate member 23 locates the axis of rotation 20 at the longitudinal center of mass 26 of an article to be tilted. And, as per the interpretative note 1, rotating Gilmour's apparatus one degree is defined as tilted position because arcuate member 23 is below the axis of rotation 20. (Assuming arguendo the claims quantify the tilted position in degrees Gilmour's FIG. 1 discloses arcuate member 23 below axis of rotation 20 at a fully tilted position, e.g. approximately 35 degrees of rotation.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hannebauer to include an axis of rotation that is above an arcuate lower support surface in an upright position and in a tilted position, as taught by Gilmour, which locates the axis of rotation with the longitudinal center of mass of a to-be tilted article which provides a less complex means of tilting articles.
Claim(s) 25 & 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannebauer in view of Huang and Gilmour and further in view of Holloway (US 8,388,297) which discloses a tilt drive system that includes a drive shaft 36 rotatably mounted to a base, sprockets 34, 34 disposed along a shaft, two chains 28, 28 connected to opposite ends of a tilt frame and engaged by sprockets, and an electric motor 38 (FIG. 6) operatively coupled with a drive shaft. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Hannebauer to include a chain, motor, shaft and sprocket, as taught by Holloway, which reduces power requirements of tilting frames.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-23 & 27-38 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 19 and relative dependents 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 GREGORY W ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8101. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 8am-5pm.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571)272-7097. 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.
/GREGORY W ADAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652