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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “a pair of front frames” as recited in claim 18.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0026], Applicant uses the reference number in associated with an “arm,” in paragraph [0039] Applicant uses reference number 10 in associated with “the top,” and in paragraph [0044] Applicant uses reference number 10 in associated with “the top assembly.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 20, line 10, “the spring of another pivot” has no antecedent basis in the claims. This objection could be overcome by replacing the noted language with --a spring of another pivot of the plurality of operably biased pivots--
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 1-14 and 18 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.
In claim 1, line 6, the phrase, “at least a closed position, sunroof open position, open stowed position and back” is vague and indefinite. Due to a lack of proper grammar it is not clear how many positions Applicant is attempting to recited.
In claim 2, it is not clear if “a front bow” is an additional bow to the at least two fabric bows recited in claim 1 or is a part of the at least two fabric bows.
In claim 10, Applicant recites a four-bar linkage system substantially forming a parallelogram. In the specification, Applicant supports thig by referring to A plurality of arms 9, 10, 11 along with a frame, indicated at 12 (paragraph [0020] of Applicant’s specification). However, as shown in Fig. 19 of Applicant’s drawings arms 9, 10, 11 and frame 12 do not appear to make a parallelogram or what is commonly known as a four bar linkage as outlined below in the image taken from Fig. 19 of Applicant’s drawings:
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
371
451
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is noted that the left end of frame 12 is not connected to anything and therefore does not make a parallelogram.
In claim 18, Applicant has recited “a pair of front frames.” However, since no such term is used in the specification, it is unclear what structure applicant is referring to. It appears that Applicant may have intended to recite --a pair of front rails-- (as disclosed in paragraph [0036] of Applicant’s specification. For purposes of expediting examination, this is how the claim will be interpreted.
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 (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 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 1-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lewis et al. (US 2018/0215243).
With respect to claim 1, Lewis et al. disclose a soft top assembly adapted for operably connecting to a vehicle, comprising:
at least two fabric management bows 24,32;
a plurality of operably biased pivots (biased by gas struts 52 and 54 and ) as shown below in the image taken from Fig. of Lewis et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (pair of first pivots)]
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (second pivot)][AltContent: textbox (second
pivot)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
504
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
operable to dampen the movement of the soft top assembly and provide a lift assist when selectively moving between at least a closed position, sunroof open position, open stowed position and back (gas strut 54 would dampen while the cover is being moved to the open position and gas strut 52 would provide a lift assist while moving the cover to the open positions, Lewis et al., paragraphs [0026] and [0031]);
wherein said assembly is operably adapted for sealing engagement with the vehicle (“The first and second door rails 80,76 provide a water tight seal with the cover of the top assembly 10 when in the closed position.” Lewis et al., paragraph [0041].
With respect to claim 2, Lewis et al. disclose at least one pair of front rails 36/36 operably connected to a front bow 24 connectable to the vehicle in the closed position (as shown in Fig. 1 of Lewis et al.).
With respect to claim 3, Lewis et al. disclose that the plurality of operable biased pivots include a pair of first pivots connected to the front rails 36/36 (as indicated in the above image–note, these pivots are biased due to the linkages to the gas struts 52/54 as shown in Fig. 3 of Lewis et al.).
With respect to claim 4, Lewis et al. disclose that said plurality of operable biased pivots include a pair of first pivots and a pair of second pivots connected to the pair of front rails (as shown in the above image (note, these pivots are biased due to the linkages to the gas struts 52/54 as shown in Fig. 3 of Lewis et al.).
With respect to claim 5, Lewis et al. disclose one of said fabric management bows 24 is operably connected to said plurality of operable biased pivots (via rails 36/36–as shown in the above image) and manages a fabric cover when folding to the sunroof open position (Lewis et al., paragraph [0027]).
With respect to claim 6, Lewis et al. disclose that the plurality of operable biased pivots includes at least a pair of first pivots connected to a pair of front rails 36/36 movable with a pivotable portion 44 to a said sunroof open position, and a pair of second pivots operably coupled to a pair of rear rails 38/38as shown in the image taken from Fig. 3 of Lewis et al.:
[AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (pair of first pivots)][AltContent: textbox (pair of second pivots)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image3.png
397
450
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 7, Lewis et al. disclose that the plurality of operable biased pivots are operably connected to said at least two fabric management bows 24/32 (as shown in Fig. 3 of Lewis et al.).
With respect to claim 10, Lewis et al. disclose that a four-bar linkage system (bow control link 46/second bow pivot link 44/side rail 36/side rail 38) substantially forming a parallelogram is operable to move said soft top assembly to the open stowed position (as shown in Fig. 3 of Lewis et al.).
Alternative interpretation of Lewis et al. (US 2018/0215243)
Claims 1, 9, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lewis et al. (US 2018/0215243).
With respect to claim 1, Lewis et al. disclose a soft top assembly adapted for operably connecting to a vehicle, comprising:
at least two fabric management bows 28/34;
a plurality of operably biased pivots (biased by gas struts 52 and 54 and ) as shown below in the image taken from Fig. of Lewis et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (pair of first pivots)]
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (second pivot)][AltContent: textbox (second
pivot)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
504
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
operable to dampen the movement of the soft top assembly and provide a lift assist when selectively moving between at least a closed position, sunroof open position, open stowed position and back (gas strut 54 would dampen while the cover is being moved to the open position and gas strut 52 would provide a lift assist while moving the cover to the open positions, Lewis et al., paragraphs [0026] and [0031]);
wherein said assembly is operably adapted for sealing engagement with the vehicle (“The first and second door rails 80,76 provide a water tight seal with the cover of the top assembly 10 when in the closed position.” Lewis et al., paragraph [0041].
With respect to claim 9, Lewis et al. disclose that when said soft top assembly is at rest said plurality of fabric management bows are biased away from each other (as can be seen in Fig. 5 of Lewis et al., when struts 52 and 54 are in the shown position, bows 24 and 34 would be biased away from one another 3.
With respect to claim 14, Lewis et al. disclose a pair of front rails 36/36 operably connected to a fabric-tensioning header 24 (as shown in Fig. 3 of Lewis et al.).
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lewis et al. (US 2022/0019692).
With respect to claim 1, Lewis et al. disclose a soft top assembly adapted for operably connecting to a vehicle, comprising:
at least two fabric management bows 206,226;
a plurality of operably biased pivots (biased by gas cylinders 242 and 248) as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 20 of Lewis et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (pivot)][AltContent: textbox (pivot)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image4.png
346
492
media_image4.png
Greyscale
operable to dampen the movement of the soft top assembly and provide a lift assist when selectively moving between at least a closed position (gas cylinder 248 would dampen when closing and gas cylinder 242 would assist while closing), sunroof open position, open stowed position and back (Lewis et al., paragraph [0099]);
wherein said assembly is operably adapted for sealing engagement with the vehicle (“The assembly 200 is adapted to abut against at least one seal of the roof top, e.g., a hard top seal,” Lewis et al., paragraph [0098].
With respect to claim 15, Lewis et al. disclose a soft top assembly adapted for connecting to a vehicle, comprising:
a cover 200/34;
at least one fabric management bow 226;
a plurality of operably biased pivots (biased by gas cylinders 242 and 248) as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 20 of Lewis et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (pivot)][AltContent: textbox (pivot)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image4.png
346
492
media_image4.png
Greyscale
operable to dampen (gas cylinder 242 would dampen motion while opening) the movement of the soft top assembly and provide a lift assist (gas cylinder 248 would assist lifting while opening) when selectively moving between at least a closed position and sunroof open position and back (gas cylinder 248 would dampen when closing and gas cylinder 242 would assist while closing);
wherein said assembly is operably adapted for sealing engagement with a hardtop roof top (“The assembly 200 is adapted to abut against at least one seal of the roof top, e.g., a hard top seal,” Lewis et al., paragraph [0098]).
With respect to claim 16, Lewis et al. disclose a pair of front rails 212/212 operably connected to a header 206 and said plurality of operably biased pivots (as shown in Fig. 18 of Lewis et al.).
With respect to claim 17, Lewis et al. disclose said plurality of operably biased pivots are operably connected to a pair of front rails 212/212 and also to said at least one fabric management bow 226 (Lewis et al., paragraph [0099]; Fig. 18).
With respect to claim 18, Lewis et al. disclose a pair of front frames (rails) 212 operably connected to the vehicle, wherein said plurality of operably biased pivots are operably connected to said pair of front frames (rails) 212, wherein said at least one fabric management bow 226 manages the cover when folding to the sunroof open position (Lewis et al., paragraph [0110]; Fig. 18).
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lewis et al. (US 2018/0215243), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Neubrand et al. (US 2011/0227364).
With respect to claim 8, Lewis et al. disclose the claimed soft top assembly except for the plurality of operable biased pivots incorporating clock spring biasing. However, Neubrand et al. teaches a similar soft top assembly including an operable biased pivot including clock springs 52 and 54 (Neubrand et al.; paragraph [0016]; Fig. 2). Replacing the gas struts as disclosed by Lewis et al. with clock springs taught by Neubrand et al. is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. That is 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to replace the gas struts disclosed by Lewis et al. with the teaching of Neubrand et al. because replacing the biasing force of a gas strut with a clockspring has the expected result of providing a biasing force in a desired direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12, 13, and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the above mentioned informalities, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 11-12 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the pivotable portion of said soft top assembly when in the open sunroof position is pushed substantially upward and tilts back on the first and third pivots while the second pivot dampens the movement, and also provides an assist when closing; and wherein pushing further moves the top assembly to the stowed position as the fourth pivot biases the top substantially back and downward.
Claim 13 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the at least one pair of straps operably connecting said plurality of fabric management bows.
Claim 20 has been indicated as containing allowable subject matter primarily for the plurality of biased pivots incorporating springs located on opposing sides of the soft top assembly, wherein the springs of two of said pivots on each opposing side of the top are biased away from each other to load the said fabric management bows
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J COLILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-2157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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.
/Daniel J Colilla/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights