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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s information disclosure statement filed 12/2/2024 has been considered and is included in the file.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 11, “the side assemblies” should be changed to --the pair of side assemblies--.
In claim 1, line 12, remove the period at the end of the line and replace with a comma.
In claim 1, lines 13-14, “the front and rear haul body assemblies, the side assemblies coupled together” should be changed to --the first haul body assembly, the rear haul body assembly, and the pair of side assemblies are coupled together--.
In claim 1, lines 16-17, “the side assemblies, and the front and rear haul body assemblies” should be changed to --the pair of side assemblies, the front haul body assembly and the rear haul body assembly--.
In claim 1, line 19, “the bottom opening” should be changed to --the at least one bottom opening—in both instances.
In claim 2, line 2, “the side assembly” should be changed to --the pair of side assemblies--.
In claim 3, line 2, “the side assembly” should be changed to --the pair of side assemblies--.
In claim 5, line 3, “the side assembly” should be changed to --the pair of side assemblies--.
In claim 6, line 3, “the side assembly” should be changed to --the pair of side assemblies--.
In claim 7, line 3, “gusset 188” should be changed to --gusset--.
In claim 8, line 3, “plate 184” should be changed to --plate--.
In claim 9, line 3, “and said at least one” should be changed to --and between said at least one--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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.
The term “substantially vertical side walls” in claims 1, 4, and 6 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examining purposes, the term substantially will be removed.
The term “substantially an entire length” in claims 2-3 and 5-6 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examining purposes, the term substantially will be removed.
Claims 7-13 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7, 9, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Alexander (US 2230988, cited on IDS dated 12/2/2024).
Regarding claim 1, Alexander discloses a coal hauler (Fig. 1 including (A) and trailer couped to (D), p. 1, col. 1, lines 10-15) comprising: a plurality of ground engaging members (wheels of truck (A), and (27)); a motivator (implied engine of truck (A)) configured to provide a driving force to at least one of the ground engaging members (wheels of truck (A), and (27)); a haul body (Fig. 1, 4, body of trailer), the haul body being supported on the ground engaging members ((27) and rear truck wheels, (B)), the haul body (body of trailer) including a pair of side assemblies (a left and a right side pair of (10) and (11)), which include substantially vertical side walls (10), a front haul body assembly ((12),(12’)), a rear haul body assembly ((13),(13’)), the front and rear haul body assemblies ((12),(12’), (13),(13’)) being secured to the side assemblies (a left and a right side pair of (10) and (11)) to form a coal hauling chamber (internal space within the pair of side assemblies, the front haul body assembly and the rear haul body assembly), the front and rear haul body assemblies ((12),(12’), (13),(13’)), the side assemblies (a left and a right side pair of (10) and (11)) coupled together in a central portion by a center bulkhead structure (14), at least one bottom opening (opening closed by the pair of drop gates (21)) formed by the side assemblies (p. 1, col. 2, lines 37-48), and the front and rear haul body assemblies (p. 1, col. 2, lines 37-48), at least one selectively movable door (21) selectively blocking the bottom opening to at least partially uncover the bottom opening to facilitate a bottom dump of material from within the haul body (p. 1, col. 2, lines 37-48), a plurality of support structures including at least one front support structure ((15),(16)) secured between each side assembly and the front haul body assembly along the coal hauling chamber (Figs. 2 and 7), at least one rear support structure ((15),(16)) secured between each side assembly and the rear haul body assembly along the coal hauling chamber (Figs. 2 and 7), wherein said front and rear support structures reinforce intersections of the front and rear haul body assemblies with the side assemblies along the coal hauling chamber (Figs. 2 and 7, p. 1, col. 1, lines 43-46).
Regarding claim 2, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses wherein substantially an entire length of an intersection between the side assembly and the front haul body assembly is reinforced by said at least one front support structure (Fig. 7, ((15),(16))).
Regarding claim 3, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses wherein substantially an entire length of an intersection between the side assembly and the rear haul body assembly is reinforced by said at least one rear support structure (Fig. 7, ((15),(16))).
Regarding claim 4, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses wherein the side assemblies include substantially vertical side walls (10) and bottom sloped walls (11).
Regarding claim 5, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 4, and discloses wherein substantially an entire length of an intersection between the substantially vertical side walls and the bottom sloped walls of the side assembly and the front haul body assembly is reinforced by said at least one front support structure (Fig. 7, ((15),(16))).
Regarding claim 6, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 4, and discloses wherein substantially an entire length of an intersection between the substantially vertical side walls and the bottom sloped walls of the side assembly and the rear haul body assembly is reinforced by said at least one rear support structure (Fig. 7, ((15),(16))).
Regarding claim 7, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses wherein the at least one front support structure ((15),(16)) includes at least two of an elongated side gusset (15), a generally triangular sheet (16), and a front corner gusset (includes (15) and (16), i.e. at least two).
Regarding claim 9, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses including at least one weld between said at least one front support structure and each side assembly and the front haul body assembly, and said at least one rear support structure and each side assembly and the rear haul body assembly along the coal hauling chamber (p. 1, col. 1, line 53 – p. 1, col. 2, line 8, (15) welded to ((10),(11) and ((12),(12’), (13),(13’))).
Regarding claim 12, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 9, and discloses the welds each extend along at least a portion of the length of adjacent components (p. 1, col. 1, line 53 – p. 1, col. 2, line 8, (15) welded along the edges of ((10),(11) and ((12),(12’), (13),(13’))).
Regarding claim 13, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses wherein the haul body does not include a separate support frame on which the haul body is disposed or coupled (Fig. 1 shows there is no support frame wherein the haul body is disposed upon).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexander (US 2230988) in view of Landis (US 2268290).
Regarding claim 8, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses wherein the at least one rear support structure includes an elongated side gusset (15). However, Alexander does not explicitly disclose a conical plate.
Landis, like Alexander, teaches a hauler of materials, and further teaches a rear support structure including a conical plate (23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coal hauler of Alexander with a conical plate as taught by Landis, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide reinforcement at locations that may require different shapes for a more secure connection to the components they are reinforcing.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexander (US 2230988) in view of Weich et al. (WO2009152808, machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 10, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 1, and discloses a weld between at least one of said at least one front support structure and each side assembly and the front haul body assembly, and said at least one rear support structure and each side assembly and the rear haul body assembly along the coal hauling chamber (p. 1, col. 1, line 53 – p. 1, col. 2, line 8, (15) welded to ((10),(11) and ((12),(12’), (13),(13’))). However, Alexander does not explicitly disclose including high frequency mechanical impact weld.
Weich et al. teaches a welding method that includes a high frequency mechanical impact weld (paragraph [0009] of the machine translation, HiFIT increases fatigue strength).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coal hauler of Alexander to include a high frequency mechanical impact type of weld as taught by Weich et al., with a reasonable expectation of success. Using a known technique of providing a High Frequency Impact Treatment at the weld seam would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, since they would have recognized that applying the known technique of Weich et al. would yield predictable results for increasing a fatigue strength of a weld.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexander (US 2230988) in view of Wark (US 2006/0022075).
Regarding claim 11, Alexander discloses the coal hauler of claim 9. However, Alexander does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of said welds includes a backer plate.
Wark, like Alexander, teaches a component that is in contact with coal, and further teaches wherein at least one of said welds includes a backer plate ((42), paragraph [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coal hauler of Alexander to include a backer plate as taught by Wark, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide further support in the area of the weld and to allow for a deep weld from one side.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate 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, Peter M Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights