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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
As concerns Claim 15, Line 4 recites the phrase “busing” instead of “bushing”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Gutta (US 5,174,622).
As concerns claim 1, Gutta (US 5,174,622) discloses a golf vehicle comprising:
a vehicle frame (‘subframe’);
an adapter assembly (at least 31, 32) coupled to the vehicle frame, the adapter assembly including:
an adapter bracket (one of the two elements 31) defining a first aperture (31a); and
a tube (other of the two elements 31 on opposing side) coupled to the adapter bracket;
a floorboard assembly (42) including a floorboard frame (made up of at least elements 32a) removably coupled (as illustrated in Figure 9a) to the adapter assembly, the floorboard frame including:
a first frame rail (42a) defining a second aperture (42d) positioned to align with the first aperture; and
a second frame rail (42a on the opposing side) selectively received by the tube; and
a pin (42c) selectively insertable through the first aperture and the second aperture such that, when the pin is positioned through the first aperture and the second aperture, the floorboard assembly is secured to the adapter bracket.
PNG
media_image1.png
430
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Houston (US 2007/0176454).
Houston (US 2007/0176454) discloses:
11. A golf vehicle comprising:
a vehicle frame (66);
a bumper (shown but not cited in at least Figures 1, 1a, 2, 2a, 4a and 5) coupled to the vehicle frame;
an adapter assembly (at least 94) coupled to the vehicle frame and positioned below the bumper (See Figure 6); and
a seat assembly (12) positioned above the bumper, the seat assembly including:
a seat frame (22),
a support (18) coupled to the adapter assembly and positioned forward from the bumper, and
a seat body (34) pivotably coupled to the seat frame and configured to rotate relative to the seat frame about an axis of rotation that extends laterally.
PNG
media_image2.png
554
719
media_image2.png
Greyscale
12. The golf vehicle of claim 11, wherein the seat body is configured to rotate relative to the seat frame between:
a first seat body position where the seat body is configured to support a passenger; and
a second seat body position, where the seat body is configured to support cargo. (See Figures 1A to 2)
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 of this title, 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 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutta in view of Garcia 2023/0264529)
As concerns claim 2, Gutta discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 1, however fails to specify wherein:
the adapter assembly includes a bushing positioned within the tube;
the bushing defines a bushing opening; and
the second frame rail extends through the bushing opening.
Garcia (US 2023/0264529), teaches the use of a bushing (52) positioned within a tube (12);
the bushing defining an opening (See Figure 4); and
the bushing is configured to selectively receive a rail (21) within the bushing opening.
PNG
media_image3.png
594
811
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Garcia to include a bushing as claimed for the expected benefit of providing vibration isolation capabilities, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 3, the combination of Gutta and Garcia discloses wherein: the bushing (Garcia – 52) is a linear bushing comprising a first material (Garcia – Paragraph [0022]);
the frame rail (Garcia – 21) comprises a second material (Garcia – Paragraph [0026]) different from the first material; and
the first material impregnates the second material as the frame rail is slid into and out of the bushing (Considered to be anticipated by the fact that the same materials being claimed are shown by the prior art, interacting in the same general way).
Claims 1 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bigelow et al (US 2007/0057526) in view of Godin (US 5,033,662) and further in view of Simon (US 5,033,662)
As concerns claim 1, Bigelow discloses a golf vehicle comprising:
a vehicle frame (170);
an adapter assembly (at least 148 and connection at 64) coupled to the vehicle frame, the adapter assembly including:
an adapter bracket (64) defining a first aperture (66);
a floorboard assembly (36) including a floorboard frame removably coupled to the adapter assembly; and
a pin (192) selectively insertable through the first aperture such that, when the pin is positioned through the first aperture, the floorboard assembly is secured to the adapter bracket.
Bigelow fails to specify wherein the adapter assembly comprises a tube coupled to the adapter bracket;
wherein the floorboard assembly (36) includes a first frame rail defining a second aperture positioned to align with the first aperture; and
a second frame rail selectively received by the tube;
wherein the pin is selectively insertable through the first aperture and second aperture such that, when the pin is positioned through the first aperture and the second aperture, the floorboard assembly is secured to the adapter bracket.
Godin (US 5,033,662) teaches a system for attachment to the rear of a vehicle, the system comprising:
a vehicle frame (10);
an adapter assembly (at least 14) coupled to the vehicle frame, wherein the adapter assembly comprises a tube (14);
a floorboard assembly (‘frame’ including at least rails 34), wherein the frame rail is received by the tube.
PNG
media_image4.png
715
517
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Bigelow as taught by Godin to include tubular receivers as part of the adapter assembly for the expected benefit of securing the platform to the vehicle, obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Simon (US 5,033,662) further teaches a system for attachment to the rear of a vehicle, the system comprising:
a vehicle frame (Paragraph [0038]);
an adapter assembly (Figure 2) coupled to the vehicle frame, the adapter assembly including:
an adapter bracket (2) defining a first aperture (8); and
a floorboard assembly including a floorboard frame (1) removably coupled to the adapter assembly, the floorboard frame including:
a first frame rail (5) defining a second aperture (7) positioned to align with the first aperture; and
a pin (6) selectively insertable through the first aperture and the second aperture such that, when the pin is positioned through the first aperture and the second aperture, the floorboard assembly is secured to the adapter bracket.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Bigelow as taught by Simon to include a central rail with a corresponding second aperture and pin, for the expected benefit of providing a more structurally secure, selectively removable connection to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
PNG
media_image5.png
506
556
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As concerns claim 4, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 1, wherein the floorboard assembly includes:
a bracket (Godin - 52) coupled to a second frame rail (Godin - 36), the bracket defining a third aperture (Godin - 70);
a guard (Godin - 64) defining a fourth aperture (Godin - 72) positioned to align with the third aperture; and
a fastener (Godin - 74) selectively insertable through the third aperture and the fourth aperture such that, when the fastener is positioned through the third aperture and the fourth aperture, the fastener couples the guard to the bracket.
As concerns claim 5, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 1, wherein:
the tube is a first tube;
the adapter assembly includes a second tube (Godin – Figure 3) laterally spaced from the first tube and coupled to the adapter bracket; and
the floorboard assembly includes a third frame rail laterally spaced from the second frame rail and selectively received by the second tube. (Bigelow already anticipates the three separate points of contact between the structure and the vehicle frame; Godin illustrates having both outer elements being tubular receiver type connections.)
As concerns claim 6, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 1, further comprising a bumper (Bigelow – 60), wherein the adapter assembly is coupled to the vehicle frame such that the adapter assembly is positioned below the bumper.
As concerns claim 7, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 6, wherein, when coupled to the adapter assembly, the floorboard assembly is at least partially positioned below the bumper. (Bigelow – at least Figure 2)
As concerns claim 8, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 6, further comprising a seat assembly (Bigelow - 34) positioned above the bumper and at least partially forward of the floorboard assembly. (Bigelow – Figure 2)
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bigelow et al (US 2007/0057526) in view of Godin (US 5,033,662) and Simon (US 5,033,662) and further in view of Houston (US 2007/0176454) and Zhou et al (US D1,012,524).
As concerns claim 9, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 8, wherein the seat assembly includes:
a seat frame (Bigelow – bars such as 220, 228 and 230 shown wrapping under seat in Figures 2 and 16);
a seat body (Bigelow – 224) coupled to the seat frame.
The combination fails to specify wherein the seat body is pivotably coupled to the seat frame; and
a support extending between the adapter assembly and the seat frame to at least partially support the seat frame.
Houston teaches a seat body (34) coupled to a seat frame (22), wherein the seat body is pivotably coupled to the seat frame (Figures 1a – 2);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as taught by Houston to include a folding seat for the expected benefit of supporting the seat at the vehicle-frame attachment point, as well as allowing for a plurality of configurations of the seat itself, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Zhou et al (US D1,012,524) further teaches a support (annotated in red) extending between an adapter assembly (annotated in green) and a seat frame (annotated in blue) to at least partially support the seat frame.
PNG
media_image6.png
527
686
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as taught by Zhou to include a support as claimed, for the expected benefit of providing support to the seat through the same lower connection point that is directly connected to the frame of the vehicle, as shown in Bigelow and others, in order obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 10, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of Claim 9, wherein the support (Zhou – annotated) is coupled to the adapter bracket (Zhou – annotated in placement / Bigelow - 64) at a first side of the adapter bracket, wherein the tube (As taught by Godin 14) is coupled to the adapter bracket at the first side.
Claims 13-14, 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houston in view of Gutta (US 5,174,622).
As concerns claim 13, Houston discloses the golf vehicle of claim 11, wherein:
the adapter assembly (at least 94) includes an adapter bracket (triangular shaped bracket coming off each bar 94, whereby 32 is attached);
the golf vehicle includes a floorboard assembly (32) having a floorboard frame (32) removably coupled to the adapter assembly (94).
Houston fails to specify wherein the adapter bracket (shown annotated in Figure 6 above) defines a first aperture; or wherein the floorboard assembly has a frame rail defining a second aperture positioned to align with the first aperture, wherein those first and second apertures are positively aligned and having a pin selectively inserted therein.
Gutta (US 5,174,622) teaches a rear-facing seat assembly for a vehicle, the rear-facing seat assembly comprising:
an adapter assembly (at least 31 and 32) including an adapter bracket (the end of element 31 on one side which engages 42b) defining a first aperture (31a);
a floorboard assembly (42) including a floorboard frame (42) having a frame rail (42a) defining a second aperture (42d) positioned to align with the first aperture;
a pin (42c) selectively insertable through the first aperture and the second aperture such that, when the pin is positioned through the first aperture and the second aperture, the floorboard assembly is secured to the adapter assembly.
PNG
media_image1.png
430
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Houston as taught by Gutta to include a frame rail received into a tube of the adapter assembly by aligning first and second apertures, for the expected benefit of providing additional structural stability by providing additional points of contact between the floor board assembly and the adapter assembly, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 14, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of claim 13, wherein:
the adapter assembly further comprises a tube defining a tube opening; and
the floorboard frame comprises a frame rail extending through the tube opening, such that a frame rail first portion of the frame rail is positioned within the tube. (Gutta – Figure 9a illustrates such a configuration with 31 being the adapter and 42 being the frame rail of the floorboard frame)
As concerns claim 17, Houston discloses a rear-facing seat assembly for a golf vehicle, the rear-facing seat assembly comprising:
an adapter assembly (at least 94);
a floorboard assembly (32) including a floorboard frame (Figure 6);
a fastener of some sort, holding two plates adjacent to one another;
a seat assembly including:
a seat frame (22) positioned above the adapter assembly;
a seat body (34) coupled to the seat frame; and
a support (18) extending between the adapter assembly and the seat frame to at least partially support the seat frame.
Houston fails to specify wherein the adapter bracket defines a first aperture; or wherein the floorboard assembly has a frame rail defining a second aperture positioned to align with the first aperture, wherein those first and second apertures are positively aligned and having a pin selectively inserted therein.
Gutta teaches a rear-facing seat assembly for a vehicle, the rear-facing seat assembly comprising:
an adapter assembly (at least 31 and 32) including an adapter bracket (the end of element 31 on one side which engages 42b) defining a first aperture (31a);
a floorboard assembly (42) including a floorboard frame (42) having a frame rail (42a) defining a second aperture (42d) positioned to align with the first aperture;
a pin (42c) selectively insertable through the first aperture and the second aperture such that, when the pin is positioned through the first aperture and the second aperture, the floorboard assembly is secured to the adapter assembly;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Houston as taught by Gutta to include a frame rail received into a tube of the adapter assembly by aligning first and second apertures, for the expected benefit of providing additional structural stability by providing additional points of contact between the floor board assembly and the adapter assembly, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 18, the combination discloses the rear-facing seat assembly of Claim 17, wherein:
the adapter assembly (Gutta – at least 31 and 32) includes a tube coupled to the adapter bracket;
the frame rail is a first frame rail (Gutta – 42a); and
the floorboard frame (Gutta – 42) includes a second frame rail (Gutta – 42a on opposing side) selectively received by the tube (Gutta – as shown in Figure 9a).
As concerns claim 20, the combination discloses the rear-facing seat assembly of Claim 17, the rear-facing seat assembly includes:
a backrest frame (Houston - 26) coupled to the seat frame (Houston - 22) and positioned forward of the seat body, the backrest frame configured to enable coupling a backrest (Houston - 98) to the rear-facing seat assembly; and
an armrest (Houston – portion of 18 that exists above receptacle 70) coupled to the seat frame and positioned at a lateral side of the seat body.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houston and Gutta further in view of Garcia (US 2023/0264529).
As concerns claim 15, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of claim 14, however fails to specify wherein:
the golf vehicle includes a bushing positioned within the tube;
the bushing defines a bushing opening; and
the bushing is configured to selectively receive the frame rail within the bushing opening.
Garcia (US 2023/0264529), however teaches the use of a bushing (52) positioned within a tube (12);
the bushing defining an opening (See Figure 4); and
the bushing is configured to selectively receive a rail (21) within the bushing opening.
PNG
media_image3.png
594
811
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Garcia to include a bushing as claimed for the expected benefit of providing vibration isolation capabilities, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 16, the combination discloses the golf vehicle of claim 15, wherein:
the bushing (Garcia – 52) is a linear bushing comprising a first material (Garcia – Paragraph [0022]);
the frame rail (Garcia – 21) comprises a second material (Garcia – Paragraph [0026]) different from the first material; and
the first material impregnates the second material as the frame rail is slid into and out of the bushing (Considered to be anticipated by the fact that the same materials being claimed are shown by the prior art, interacting in the same general way).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houston and Gutta, further in view of Bigelow et al (US 2007/0057526).
As concerns claim 19, the combination discloses the rear-facing seat assembly of Claim 17, wherein:
the support (Houston – 18) is a first support;
the rear-facing seat assembly includes a second support (Houston – 18) laterally spaced from the first support, the second support extending between the adapter assembly (Houston – at least 94) and the seat frame (22) to at least partially support the seat frame.
The combination fails to specify wherein the first aperture (Gutta – 31a) is positioned between the first support and the second support.
Bigelow et al (US 2007/0057526) however teaches a system for attaching a structure to the rear of a golf vehicle comprising two laterally spaced supports (140) and a central adapter assembly (at least 64) with an aperture located centrally between the two outer supports. (See Figure 11).
PNG
media_image7.png
329
462
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination as further taught by Bigelow to include the placement of the first aperture centrally between the two supports, for the expected benefit of providing additional contact points between the structure and the frame of the vehicle, thereby providing more stability, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON L LEMBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3065. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm.
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, 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 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.
/AARON L LEMBO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights