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 .
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(s) 1-4, 7-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullock (US 7513725 B1) in view of Clive-Smith (WO 2008149157 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Bullock teaches an automobile securing system for securing an automobile inside a container of a truck, the automobile securing system comprising: a front bracing assembly (Shown in Fig. 2) configured to couple to a bottom wall of the container, the front bracing assembly configured to secure a front wheel of the automobile inside the container, the front bracing assembly including: a strap configured to wrap around the front wheel (Fig. 2 element 41); a base block (Fig. 2 forward flat portion of element 116) and a clamping block (Fig. 2 rounded portion of element 16; better shown but not labeled in Fig. 3) configured to be positioned in front of the front wheel and secure a portion of the strap therebetween (Fig. 2 shows strap 41 between base and clamping block); a front wheel brace configured to engage the front wheel and a side wall of the container, the front wheel brace configured to be positioned to prevent forward movement of the automobile (Fig. 2 element 113); and a front wheel side brace configured to be positioned to prevent lateral movement of the automobile (Fig. 2 element 30).
Bullock fails to explicitly teach a rear bracing assembly configured to couple to the bottom wall of the container, the rear bracing assembly configured to secure a rear wheel of the automobile inside the container, the rear bracing assembly including: a rear wheel brace configured to engage the rear wheel and the side wall of the container, the rear wheel brace configured to be positioned to prevent rearward movement of the automobile; a rear wheel side brace configured to be positioned to prevent lateral movement of the automobile; a backup cleat configured to engage a rear side of the rear wheel brace; and a cross brace configured to couple the rear wheel brace, the rear wheel side brace, and the backup cleat together.
However, Clive-Smith teaches a rear bracing assembly configured to couple to the bottom wall of the container, the rear bracing assembly (Fig. 9 element 10) configured to secure a rear wheel of the automobile inside the container, the rear bracing assembly including: a rear wheel brace configured to engage the rear wheel and the side wall of the container, the rear wheel brace configured to be positioned to prevent rearward movement of the automobile (Fig. 9 element 42 on far right side of rightmost wheel in the figure); a rear wheel side brace configured to be positioned to prevent lateral movement of the automobile (Fig. 9 outer lateral brace on right side of the figure); a backup cleat configured to engage a rear side of the rear wheel brace (Fig. 9 rightmost structure of element 10 in the figure); and a cross brace configured to couple the rear wheel brace, the rear wheel side brace, and the backup cleat together (Fig. 9 longitudinal structure of element 10).
Bullock and Clive-Smith are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of securing vehicles for transportation. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automobile securing system of Bullock to have a rear bracing assembly as disclosed by Clive Smith. Doing so would provide increased strength to the connections while reducing the risk of the vehicle moving during transportation.
Regarding Claim 2, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Bullock and Clive Smith further disclose the front wheel is a first front wheel and the front bracing assembly is a first front bracing assembly configured to secure the first front wheel, wherein the rear wheel is a first rear wheel and the rear bracing assembly is a first rear bracing assembly configured to secure the first rear wheel (See above)
Clive-Smith further discloses the automobile securing system includes: a second front bracing assembly configured to secure a second front wheel of the automobile and a second rear bracing assembly configured to secure a second rear wheel of the automobile (Shown in Fig. 9; it is understood that one of ordinary skill in the art would apply the front bracing assembly of Bullock to both vehicle front wheels).
Regarding Claim 3, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 2.
Clive-Smith further discloses the first front bracing assembly is laterally spaced from the second front bracing assembly by a lateral length of the automobile extending between an outside edge of the first front wheel and an outside edge of the second front wheel, and wherein the first rear bracing assembly is laterally spaced from the second rear bracing assembly by a lateral length of the automobile extending between an outside edge of the first rear wheel and an outside edge of the second rear wheel (Shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 4, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Bullock further discloses the base block, the clamping block, and the portion of the strap secured therebetween are configured to be positioned to align with a center of the front wheel (Shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 7, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Bullock further discloses the front wheel brace is configured to be positioned to engage a front side of the front wheel to prevent forward movement of the automobile (Shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 8, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Clive-Smith further discloses the rear wheel brace is configured to be positioned to engage a rear side of the rear wheel to prevent rearward movement of the automobile (Shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 9, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Bullock further discloses the front wheel brace is configured to be positioned to contact a rear end of the base block (Fig. 2 element 113).
Regarding Claim 10, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Bullock further discloses each of the front wheel brace and the rear wheel brace have a beveled surface configured to engage the front wheel or the rear wheel, respectively (Fig. 3 shows beveled contact surfaces).
Regarding Claim 13, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Clive Smith further discloses the front bracing assembly is longitudinally spaced from the rear bracing assembly by a longitudinal length of the automobile between a front edge of the front wheel and a rear edge of the rear wheel (Spacing shown in Fig. 9).
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullock (US 7513725 B1) in view of Clive-Smith (WO 2008149157 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Bullock teaches an automobile securing system for securing an automobile inside a container of a truck, the automobile securing system comprising: a plurality of front bracing assemblies (Shown in Fig. 2) configured to couple to a bottom wall of the container, the plurality of front bracing assemblies configured to secure front wheels of the automobile inside the container, each of the plurality of front bracing assemblies including: a strap (Fig. 2 element 41)configured to wrap around a respective front wheel of the front wheels, the strap including a first portion and a second portion; a base block (Fig. 2 forward flat portion of element 116) and a clamping block (Fig. 2 rounded portion of element 16; better shown but not labeled in Fig. 3) configured to be positioned in front of the respective front wheel and secure the first portion of the strap therebetween, the base block configured to be positioned on top of the second portion of the strap; and a front wheel brace configured to engage the respective front wheel, the front wheel brace configured to be positioned (i) to prevent forward movement of the automobile and (ii) on top of the second portion of the strap (Fig. 2 shows strap 41 between base and clamping block).
Bullock fails to explicitly teach a plurality of rear bracing assemblies configured to couple to the bottom wall of the container, the plurality of rear bracing assemblies configured to secure rear wheels of the automobile inside the container, each of the plurality of rear bracing assemblies including: a rear wheel brace configured to engage a respective rear wheel of the rear wheels, the rear wheel brace configured to be positioned to prevent rearward movement of the automobile; a backup cleat configured to engage a rear side of the respective rear wheel brace; and a cross brace configured to couple the rear wheel brace and the backup cleat together.
However, Clive-Smith teaches a plurality of rear bracing assemblies (Rightmost elements of Fig. 9) configured to couple to the bottom wall of the container, the plurality of rear bracing assemblies configured to secure rear wheels of the automobile inside the container, each of the plurality of rear bracing assemblies including: a rear wheel brace (Fig. 9 element 42 on far right side of rightmost wheel in the figure) configured to engage a respective rear wheel of the rear wheels, the rear wheel brace configured to be positioned to prevent rearward movement of the automobile; a backup cleat configured to engage a rear side of the respective rear wheel brace (Fig. 9 rightmost structure of element 10 in the figure); and a cross brace configured to couple the rear wheel brace and the backup cleat together (Fig. 9 longitudinal structure of element 10).
Bullock and Clive-Smith are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of securing vehicles for transportation. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automobile securing system of Bullock to have a rear bracing assembly as disclosed by Clive Smith. Doing so would provide increased strength to the connections while reducing the risk of the vehicle moving during transportation.
Regarding Claim 20, Bullock and Clive-Smith teach the limitations set forth in Claim 19.
Bullock further discloses at least one of the front wheel brace or the rear wheel brace is configured to engage a sidewall of the container (Shown in Fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 11-12 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.
Regarding Claim 14, there is no prior art nor any reasons to modify any prior art to have the method steps of: providing a set of rear bracing assemblies including rear wheel braces, rear wheel side braces, backup cleats, and cross braces; laying the straps longitudinally along a bottom wall of the container such that the straps are laterally spaced a distance apart based on a wheel track of the finished automobile; placing the base blocks on top of the straps; placing the front wheel braces laterally across the straps, the front wheel braces engaging rear ends of the base blocks and side walls of the container. The limitations stated along with the other limitations of the independent claim give reason for allowance. Claims 15-18 are allowable as being dependent on Claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC ACOSTA whose telephone number is (571)272-4886. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, Timothy Collins can be reached at 571-272-6886. 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.
/E.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3644
/Nicholas McFall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644
Prosecution Insights