DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because
Line 5, “second” should be replaced with --first-.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0020], pg. 5, last line, “base 12” should be replaced with –base 22--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Third line from the bottom, “second” should be replaced with –first--; and,
Second to last line, “second” should be replaced with –first--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Last line, “parallel” should be replaced with –perpendicular--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (US5634529).
1: A foldable rail assembly (Figs. 1-5), comprising: a lower rail assembly (36a-c) extending upwardly away from a platform; an upper rail assembly (24a, 26a-b, 28a-c), extending above the lower rail assembly; a rotatable member (34a-c) coupling the upper rail assembly to the lower rail assembly such that the upper rail assembly is movable between a first position (Fig. 3A) and a second position (Fig. 3B), wherein in the first position, the foldable rail assembly extends upwardly from the platform to a first height and wherein in the second position, the foldable rail assembly extends upwardly from the platform to a second height, the first height being larger than the second height (col. 4, lines 40-42: “In FIG. 3A, the railing assembly 20 is shown in the elevated or raised position. In FIG. 3B, the railing assembly 20 is shown in its lowered position”); and a first latch (51a) and a second latch (51b) configured to limit movement of the upper rail assembly away from the second (see objection above, it appears applicant intended “first” here) position when engaged, wherein the first latch is configured to be engaged in response to the upper rail assembly entering the second (see objection above, it appears applicant intended “first” here) position (51a, Figs. 1, 3A, and 3B, and see col. 5, lines 15-20: “ When the railing assembly 20 has been lifted into the position shown in FIG. 3A, the bias exerted by spring 64 urges the latch to have transverse or foot portion 57b of the L-shaped slot capture the guide and locking pin 62, so that the railing assembly is latched and rigidly secured in its elevated position”).
In the above referenced embodiment, Nguyen fails to disclose wherein the second latch is configured to be manually engaged by an operator. However, in an alternative embodiment, Nguyen teaches a latch configured to be manually engaged by an operator, see e.g., Figs. 4A and 4B and col. 5, lines 63-64: “A handle 78 is attached to the latch 72 for ease of movement of the latch”. It 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 to have included a second latch configured to be manually engaged by an operator in the above referenced embodiment of Nguyen according to the further teachings of Nguyen in order to provide a foldable rail assembly having “an additional latch assembly”, see e.g., col. 5, line 30, with a different type of operation to promote awareness of the status of each latch, e.g., main latch and safety factor latch.
2: The foldable rail assembly of claim 1, wherein the rotatable member (34a-c) has a first end portion pivotally coupled (see Figs. 3A and 3B) to the lower rail assembly (36a-c) and a second end portion pivotally coupled to the upper rail assembly (at 26a).
7: The foldable rail assembly of claim 1, wherein the second latch (Figs. 4A and 4B) is a draw latch (75) including a hook (see col. 6, lines 2, “L-shaped slot”) and a lever (72) configured to apply a force (via spring 76 or handle 78) onto the hook to engage the second latch.
8: The foldable rail assembly of claim 7, wherein the hook and the lever (72) are coupled to the lower rail assembly (note that lower rail assembly 36a-c is coupled to lever 72 via platform 18).
10: The foldable rail assembly of claim 1, wherein the upper rail assembly (20, Fig. 1) includes a first longitudinal rail (24a), a second longitudinal rail (24b), and a lateral rail (32a) that extends between the first longitudinal rail and the second longitudinal rail.
11: The foldable rail assembly of claim 10, wherein the lower rail assembly (17) includes a vertical rail (36a-c) fixedly coupled to the platform, wherein in the first position (Fig. 3A), the vertical rail extends approximately perpendicular to the first longitudinal rail (26a), and wherein in the second position (Fig. 3B), the vertical rail extends approximately parallel (as best understood, applicant appears to have intended this term to be perpendicular) to the first longitudinal rail.
12: The foldable rail assembly of claim 11, wherein in the first position (Fig. 3A), the vertical rail (36a-c) and the rotatable member (34a-c) extend coaxially.
13: The foldable rail assembly of claim 1, wherein the upper rail assembly (20) is substantially horizontal in both the first position (Fig. 3A) and the second position (Fig. 3B).
14: A platform assembly for a lift device (Figs. 1-5), comprising: a platform (18); and a foldable rail assembly (20) coupled to the platform and extending upwardly from the platform to define a passenger compartment (col. 3, lines 5-6: “the platform for protecting occupants and/or cargo”), the foldable rail assembly including: a support structure (Figs. 3A and 3B) extending away from the platform (18); a railing assembly (20) coupled to the support structure, the railing assembly being movable between (a) a first position in which the railing assembly is and positioned at a first distance away from the platform (Fig. 3A) and (b) a second position in which the railing assembly is positioned at a second distance away from the platform that is smaller than the first distance (Fig. 3B); and a draw latch (Fig. 5, note that “drawing” the handle 86 when the railing assembly is in the second position results in movement of the railing assembly into the first position and engagement of the latch, see e.g., col. 6, lines 35-40: “the latch 85 is moved by its handle 86 in a clockwise direction about pivot 90 against bias of spring 84 to the dotted line position shown in FIG. 5. As the latch is rotated in a counterclockwise direction, the locking pin 82 can be moved within the slot of the latch 85 to permit the link to rotate about pivot 90”).
In the above referenced embodiment, Nguyen fails to disclose a slam latch configured to limit movement of the railing assembly from the first position toward the second position. However, in an alternative embodiment, Nguyen teaches a slam latch (51a, note that “slamming” the railing assembly into the first position engages the latch, see e.g., col. 5, lines 14-20: “When the railing assembly 20 has been lifted into the position shown in FIG. 3A, the bias exerted by spring 64 urges the latch to have transverse or foot portion 57b of the L-shaped slot capture the guide and locking pin 62, so that the railing assembly is latched and rigidly secured in its elevated position”) configured to limit movement of the railing assembly from the first position toward the second position. It 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 to have included a slam latch configured to limit movement of the railing assembly from the first position toward the second position in the above referenced embodiment of Nguyen according to the further teachings of Nguyen in order to provide a foldable rail assembly having “an additional latch assembly”, see e.g., col. 5, line 30, with a different type of operation to promote awareness of the status of each latch, e.g., main latch and safety factor latch.
15: The platform assembly of claim 14, wherein the support structure includes a vertical rail (36a-c) fixedly coupled to the platform (18).
16: The platform assembly of claim 15, wherein the slam latch (51a) includes a rotatable body (56, Fig. 3A) pivotally coupled (at 60) to the vertical rail (36b) and a trigger mechanism (58) releasably coupled (the lever is releasably coupled in the sense that the lever is coupled to the rotatable body and the claimed term releasably indicates that operation of the lever releases the railing assembly from the first position) to the rotatable body.
17: The platform assembly of claim 16, wherein the trigger mechanism (58) is coupled (at 60) to the railing assembly (20).
18: The platform assembly of claim 16, wherein the rotatable body (56) is pivotally coupled to the railing assembly (20, note the rotation of 56 around pivot 60 between the first and second positions).
19: The platform assembly of claim 14, wherein the railing assembly (20) is substantially horizontal in both the first position and the second position (see Figs. 3A and 3B).
20: A scissor lift (Figs. 1-5) comprising: a base (12, Fig. 1); a platform assembly (Figs. 3A-3B) including: a platform base (18); a lower rail assembly (36a-c) extending upwardly away from the platform base (18); an upper rail assembly (20) extending above the lower rail assembly; a rotatable member (34a-c) coupling the upper rail assembly to the lower rail assembly such that the upper rail assembly is movable between a first position (Fig. 3A) and a second position (Fig. 3B), wherein in the first position, the upper rail assembly extends upwardly from the platform base to a first height (Fig. 3A) and wherein in the second position, the upper rail assembly extends upwardly from the platform base to a second height (Fig. 3B), the first height being larger than the second height; and a first latch (51a, Figs. 3A and 3B) and a second latch (an additional latch assembly”, see e.g., col. 5, line 30) configured to limit movement of the upper rail assembly (20) away from the second position when engaged, wherein the first latch (51a) is configured to be engaged in response to the upper rail assembly entering the second position (51a, Figs. 1, 3A, and 3B, and see col. 5, lines 15-20: “ When the railing assembly 20 has been lifted into the position shown in FIG. 3A, the bias exerted by spring 64 urges the latch to have transverse or foot portion 57b of the L-shaped slot capture the guide and locking pin 62, so that the railing assembly is latched and rigidly secured in its elevated position”).
In the above referenced embodiment, Nguyen fails to disclose wherein the second latch is configured to be manually engaged by an operator. However, in an alternative embodiment, Nguyen teaches a latch configured to be manually engaged by an operator, see e.g., Figs. 4A and 4B and col. 5, lines 63-64: “A handle 78 is attached to the latch 72 for ease of movement of the latch”. It 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 to have included wherein the second latch is configured to be manually engaged by an operator in the above referenced embodiment of Nguyen according to the further teachings of Nguyen in order to provide a foldable rail assembly having “an additional latch assembly”, see e.g., col. 5, line 30, with a different type of operation to promote awareness of the status of each latch, e.g., main latch and safety factor latch.
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (US5634529) in view of Claypool (US10173875).
Nguyen fails to disclose the foldable rail assembly of claim 2, wherein the first latch includes a first latch portion coupled to the upper rail assembly and a second latch portion coupled to the rotatable member. Claypool teaches, in the context of foldable rail assemblies, wherein the first latch (1006, Fig. 10A) includes a first latch portion (1010) coupled to the upper rail assembly (800) and a second latch portion (1004) coupled to the rotatable member (806). It 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 to have included wherein the first latch includes a first latch portion coupled to the upper rail assembly and a second latch portion coupled to the rotatable member in the foldable rail assembly of Nguyen according to the teachings of Claypool in order to provide a more readily accessible latch, i.e. elevated from the platform – it is noted however that the prior art of record fails to disclose the first latch portion being coupled to the uppermost longitudinal rail and the second latch portion being coupled to the rotatable member).
4. Nguyen in view of Claypool disclose the foldable rail assembly of claim 3, wherein the first latch portion includes a trigger (78, Fig. 4A of Nguyen) configured to be engaged by the operator to control engagement of the first latch.
5. The foldable rail assembly of claim 4, wherein the trigger (78) is configured to disengage the first latch when pressed by the operator (see Nguyen at col. 5, lines 63-64: “A handle 78 is attached to the latch 72 for ease of movement of the latch – note that pressing the trigger 78 upwardly in Fig. 4A of Nguyen disengages the latch).
6. The foldable rail assembly of claim 3, wherein the second latch portion includes a protrusion (80, Fig. 4A of Nguyen) that is received within the first latch portion (at 77b) when the first latch is engaged.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (US5634529) in view of Bisbing (GB2212205).
Nguyen fails to disclose the foldable rail assembly of claim 8, wherein the lever is pivotally coupled to the lower rail assembly, and wherein the hook is pivotally coupled to the lever. Bisbing teaches a flexible locking member (40) that includes lever portion (43) and a hook portion (48), that by virtue of the flexible material are pivotally coupled. It 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 to have included wherein the lever is pivotally coupled to the lower rail assembly, and wherein the hook is pivotally coupled to the lever in the second latch in order to accommodate slight misalignment in the elements of the foldable rail assembly.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,037,230. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the present application are encompassed by the scope of the claims of the patent. Specifically, both sets of claims recite a platform with a foldable rail assembly with first and second rotary latches in the form of a draw latch and a slam latch, respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ben Pezzlo whose telephone number is (571)272-9656. The examiner can normally be reached M to Th 7 to 5.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/BAP/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights