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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 6-9 in the reply filed on 7/14/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-9 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 which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites “the rear” and “the silo” which lack proper antecedent basis in the claims.
Claims 7-8 are dependent on indefinite claim 6.
Claim 9 recites “the silo” which lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims.
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 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grandury (US 3,985,254) in view of Gipson (US 7,182,163 B1).
Consider claim 6. Grandury teaches a silo transport trailer, comprising: a tongue (4) for securing to a tractor; a plurality of axles and wheels on a rear end of the trailer (proximate reference character “54” in fig. 3); a pivot shaft (17) arranged on a rear end of the trailer; and a tilting system (3, 83, etc.) for pivoting the silo to an upright position.
Grandury does not explicitly teach a lift mechanism as specifically recited in the claim. Gipson teaches a lift mechanism (21) at or near axles and wheels at a rear end of a trailer, the lift mechanism being configured to allow the rear of the trailer to shift side to side (see figs. 3-5 and column 5, lines 13-35). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Grandury’s loader with a lift mechanism as taught by Gipson in order to easily align the rear of the trailer with a desired location for the silo.
Consider claim 7. Grandury teaches that the tilting system comprises a telescoping cylinder (3) and a non-telescoping cylinder (83).
Consider claim 8. Grandury teaches that the non-telescoping cylinder comprises a pair of non-telescoping cylinders (83, 82).
Consider claim 9. Grandury teaches that the tilting system comprises a lift frame (5) configured for pinning the silo thereto and for interacting with the telescoping cylinder and/or non-telescoping cylinder to pivot the silo into the upright position.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The attached PTO-892 lists references which teach various silo transport trailers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D SNELTING whose telephone number is (571)270-7015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00-4:30 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, 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.
/JONATHAN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights