DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicants’ Preliminary Amendment, filed 8/27/2024, has been entered. Claims 55-74 are pending with claims 1-54 being deleted and claims 55-74 being added.
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 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.
Claims 55-62, 65-66, and 68-69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoh et al. (US 6196604).
Regarding claim 55: Hoh discloses a structure for a substructure, such as a truck, trailer, semi-trailer, railway wagon, dump truck, or container (title; abstr.). Hoh discloses a body 10 and an openable roof 18 (Fig. 1). Hoh discloses that the roof is displaceable at its edges along two longitudinal beams of the body, that in a closed state the roof closes a roof opening between the two longitudinal beams and that in an opened state the roof mostly exposes the roof opening between the two longitudinal beams (Figs. 1, 5; col. 4, lines 44-55). Hoh discloses that each longitudinal beam is supported in a height-adjustable manner relative to the substructure via at least one lifting assembly 14, 15, 16, 17 (Figs. 1, 2; col. 4, lines 15-62). Hoh discloses that the body is adjustable at least in height relative to the substructure depending on a height adjustment of the lifting assembly (Figs. 1-3; col. 4, lines 15-39). Hoh discloses that at least one lifting drive is provided which displaces the body together with the roof in height relative to the substructure (Figs. 1-3; col. 4, lines 15-39). Hoh discloses that the lifting drive applies a force in the substructure for compressing a load protruding beyond the substructure by lowering the body with the closed roof onto the substructure against a tension of the protruding load and that the openable roof absorbs generated forces that arise when the load is compressed (col. 8, lines 23-28 – roof compresses and therefore absorbs the forces).
Regarding claim 56: Hoh discloses that each longitudinal beam is supported in a height-adjustable manner relative to the substructure via at least two stanchions, that the stanchions each comprise a stanchion lower part assigned to the substructure and a stanchion upper part which is displaceable relative to the stanchion lower part and is assigned to the longitudinal beam, and that the lifting drive is configured as a stanchion drive which displaces at least one of the stanchion upper parts in height relative to the corresponding stanchion lower part (Figs. 1-4, 6-9, 11; col. 4, line 15- col. 5, line 38).
Regarding claim 57: Hoh discloses that a stanchion is arranged in each corner region of the substructure, that each of the four stanchions comprises its own stanchion drive, and that each of the stanchion drives can be actuated independently of the other stanchion drives (Figs. 1-4, 6-9, 11; abstr.; col. 3, lines 13-16, col. 4, line 15- col. 5, line 38).
Regarding claim 58: Hoh discloses that the lifting drive is selected from the group comprising pneumatic drives, hydraulic drives, electric drives, spindle drives, rack and pinion drives, cable pull drives, driven scissor kinematics, driven multi-joint 44kinematics and combinations of thereof (Figs col. 5, lines 56-62). 44
Regarding claim 59: Hoh discloses that the lifting drive is selected from the group comprising pneumatic drives, hydraulic drives, electric drives, spindle drives, rack and pinion drives, cable pull drives, driven scissor kinematics, driven multi-joint kinematics and combinations of thereof (Figs. 9-11; col. 5, line 63-col. 7, line 5).
Regarding claim 60: Hoh discloses that the longitudinal beam is connected to the lifting drive via coupling kinematics which allow tolerance compensation (Figs. 14, 16 – illustrates various linkages/braces that would meet the broadly recited kinematics).
Regarding claim 61: Hoh discloses that the coupling kinematics is selected from the group comprising ball joints, joint connectors, slot-pin combinations, bolt-eye combinations, hinges and combinations thereof (Figs. 14, 16 – illustrates various linkages/braces and their connections that would meet the broadly recited kinematics).
Regarding claim 62: Hoh discloses that the openable roof comprises multiple roof elements coupled to one another which can be folded together accordion-like to open the roof and when the roof is closed close the roof opening lying next to one another (Fig. 5; col. 4, lines 44-62).
Regarding claim 65: Hoh discloses that a locking assembly is provided which locks one of said lifting drive and said upper and lower parts displaced relatively by the lifting drive when one of said roof and said body is completely lowered or at least partially raised (Figs. 12-13; col. 6, lines 24-32, col. 7, lines 22-33).
Regarding claim 66: Hoh discloses that the two longitudinal beams are connected to one another in the region of at least one of their ends by a cross member and that the cross member is variable in length (Fig. 3; col. 4, lines 16-39).
Regarding claim 68: Hoh discloses that the body can be lifted by the lifting drive, and wherein the body, under the load of one of its mass and a spring device, compresses the load during a lowering movement of the body in a direction of the substructure (col. 8, lines 23-28 – roof compresses).
Regarding claim 69: Hoh discloses that the body can be lowered by the lifting drive, and wherein the body compresses the load during a lowering movement of the body in a direction of the substructure under an action of the lifting drive (Figs. 1-3; col. 4, lines 15-39, col. 8, lines 23-28).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 72-74 are allowed.
Claims 63-64, 67, and 70-71 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Trailer body structures that can be raised or lowered including frames and suspension structures as well as lifting mechanisms are well known in the arts. Representative art which appears close to the claimed invention includes Hoh et al. (US 6196604), Fahrzeugwerk (DE 20215675 – see IDS), Bergeron (US 6655726), Remmel et al. (US 20210023924), Arens et al. (US 20190118627), Knight et al. (US 10696312), Pettibone (US 20160194010), Remmel (US 20170144518), and Nelson et al. (US 7118165). In general, this art, alone or in combination, discloses various recited features, including but not limited to, a structure for a substructure, such as a truck, trailer, semi-trailer, railway wagon, dump truck, or container, a body, an openable roof, that the roof is displaceable at its edges along two longitudinal beams of the body, that in a closed state the roof closes a roof opening between the two longitudinal beams, that in an opened state the roof mostly exposes the roof opening between the two longitudinal beams, that each longitudinal beam is supported in a height-adjustable manner relative to the substructure via at least one lifting assembly, that the body is adjustable at least in height relative to the substructure depending on a height adjustment of the lifting assembly, that at least one lifting drive is provided which displaces the body together with the roof in height relative to the substructure, that the lifting drive applies a force in the substructure for compressing a load protruding beyond the substructure by lowering the body with the closed roof onto the substructure against a tension of the protruding load, that the openable roof absorbs generated forces that arise when the load is compressed and various sensors. Thus, upon reviewing these cited publications, and their included references, it appears that the claimed subject matter might teach a generally known concept. However, this art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the specifically recited structural components and positional relationship between the components. Specifically, the art does not disclose the various detailed structures and positional relationships of the beams, the lifting devices, the roof (solid, panels, or material), and the overall relationship to the vehicle (trailer) including protection devices when combined with the entire recited limitations of the independent claim. It could be argued that the individual structure is generally known in the art and thus, could just be assembled to disclose the claimed invention. However, the instant invention clearly and specifically recites structural and positional relationships and combinations, which require a greater effort than just cobbling together known structures. Further, the claimed structures are sufficiently detailed to be distinguishable when configured as claimed. The examiner can find no motivation to combine or modify the references which would define a fully functioning apparatus as claimed in the instant application. Thus, it would not have been within routine skill to glean the specifically combined limitations of the instant invention, from the art, without the benefit of hindsight reasoning or extensive experimentation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARAS P BEMKO whose telephone number is (571)270-1830. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 (EDT/EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Coy can be reached on 571-272-5405. 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.
/Taras P Bemko/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
5/13/2026
Prosecution Insights