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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The “third diameter” does not appear to be explicitly identified by a reference number. Therefore, the “third diameter” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
It is not clear where the “third diameter“ is. It appears that perhaps side surface 88 is where the “third diameter” is measured. It should be noted that if the examiner’s understanding is correct, claim 8 likely recites allowable subject matter (as this would overcome the examiner’s broad interpretation/rejection of claim 8 by Whaley).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is a single run-on sentence (i.e. not in narrative form) that is substantially similar to the independent claim.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-2, 6-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schutt et al. (US 20200385072) in view of Whaley et al. (US 4266820).
Regarding claim 1: Schutt discloses a locking pin 82, 84 for a trailer (Figs. 2-4; abstr.; [0003], [0019]). Schutt discloses a trailer frame assembly 28 and a slide box 32 configured to be supported by a suspension arrangement 30 and slidably displaceable along the trailer frame assembly (abstr.; [0003], [0016]., [0021]). Schutt discloses a pin body 82 having a first end configured to couple to an actuator 78 and a second end (Figs. 2-4; [0019]). Schutt discloses a pin end extending from the second end of the pin body and that the pin end includes a first portion having a substantially circular cross-section and configured to be received within a corresponding aperture in the slide box of the trailer and a second portion having a substantially circular cross-section configured to be selectively received within a corresponding aperture in the trailer frame assembly to prevent the slide box from sliding with reference to the trailer frame assembly (Figs. 2-4; [0021] – drawings illustrate the shapes and position as claimed).
Schutt does not explicitly disclose that the second portion is linearly offset from the first portion. Whaley discloses that a locking pin 42 can have a second portion that is linearly offset from the first portion (Figs. 3, 4; col. 3, lines 31-40). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and the benefit of the cited art to have configured Schutt so that the locking pin is configured so that the second portion is linearly offset from the first portion as taught by Whaley. As Schutt and Whaley are both directed to locking pins for trailers, as locking pins are well known in the arts and can be configured as needed/desired, and as Whaley explicitly teaches the use of an eccentric locking pin, it would have been within routine skill to have selected a locking pin configuration from a finite selection of locking pin configurations (i.e. eccentric, straight, or stepped). Such a simple substitution/addition and configuration would have been predictable with a reasonable expectation for success and with no unexpected results.
Regarding claim 2: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the second portion is vertically offset from the first portion when the pin end is received within the aperture of the trailer frame assembly (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4; col. 3, lines 31-40).
Regarding claim 6: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the substantially circular cross-section of the first portion has a first diameter and the substantially circular cross-section of the second portion has a second diameter (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 7: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the first diameter is larger than the second diameter (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 8: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the second end of the pin body has a substantially circular cross-section having a third diameter 44 and wherein the third diameter is smaller than the first diameter (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 9: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that a portion of a perimeter of the substantially circular cross-section of the first portion and a portion of a perimeter of the substantially circular cross-section of the second portion align to define a flush surface extending between the first portion and the second portion of the pin end (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 10: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the pin body and the first portion of the pin end extend along a first axis and the second portion of the pin end extends along a second axis (Whaley - Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the first end of the pin body defines an aperture (aperture for locking finger 48) extending between the first flat surface and the second flat surface, the aperture configured to couple to the actuator (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 12: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses a locking pin (Schutt – 82, 84) for a slide box (Schutt – 32) of a towed vehicle (Schutt – 14), the slide box configured to be supported by a suspension assembly (Schutt – 30) and configured to be slidably displaced along a length of a vehicle frame assembly (Schutt – Fig. 1; abstr.; [0003], [0016]., [0021]). Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses a pin body (Schutt – 82) having a first end configured to couple to an actuator (Schutt – 78) and a second end (Schutt – Figs. 2-4; [0019]). Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses a first center axis extending along a length of the locking pin (Schutt – Figs. 2-4). Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses a pin end extending from the second end of the pin body and that the pin end includes a substantially cylindrical first portion having a first diameter and a substantially cylindrical second portion having a second diameter (see above; Schutt – Figs. 2-4; Whaley - Figs. 3, 4; col. 3, lines 31-40). Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the first portion extends along the first center axis and the second portion extends along a second center axis laterally offset from the first center axis (see above; Schutt – Figs. 2-4; Whaley - Figs. 3, 4). Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the second diameter is smaller than the first diameter (see above; Whaley - Figs. 3, 4). Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the second portion is configured to engage the vehicle frame assembly thereby preventing the sliding displacement of the slide box along the length of the vehicle frame assembly (see above; Schutt - Figs. 2-4; [0021]; Whaley - illustrate the shapes and position as claimed).
Regarding claim 13: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the second portion is vertically offset from the first portion when the second portion engages the vehicle frame assembly (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4; col. 3, lines 31-40).
Regarding claim 14: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses that the substantially cylindrical first portion has a first perimeter and the substantially cylindrical second portion has a second perimeter, wherein a portion of the first perimeter aligns with a portion of the second perimeter defining a flush surface extending between the substantially cylindrical first portion and the substantially cylindrical second portion (Whaley - Figs. 3, 4).
Regarding claim 17: Schutt, as modified by Whaley, discloses a slide box (Schutt – 32) configured to be supported by a vehicle suspension arrangement (Schutt – 30) and slidably displaceable along a vehicle trailer assembly, the slide box including the locking pin of claim 12 (Schutt – Fig. 1-4; abstr.; [0003], [0016]., [0021]; Whaley - Figs. 3, 4; col. 3, lines 31-40).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-22 are allowed.
Claims 3-5 and 15-16 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.
Trucks and trailers, including slider boxes supported by suspension assemblies and their structures, including locking pins used to lock/adjust trailer loads, are very well known in the art. Representative art which appears close to the claimed invention includes Schutt et al. (US 20200385072), Whaley et al. (US 4266820), Long et al. (US 20130202345), Wessels (US 11117629), Stanley et al. (US 5716071), Andreason et al. (US 20180334004), Bromley et al. (US 20070262554), Cervi (US 20230265673), and Pennig (US 5443465). In general, this art, alone or in combination, discloses various recited features, including but not limited to, a truck, a trailer, a locking pin for a trailer, an eccentric locking pin for a trailer, a trailer frame assembly, a slide box configured to be supported by a suspension arrangement and slidably displaceable along the trailer frame assembly, a pin body having a first end configured to couple to an actuator and a second end, and a pin end extending from the second end of the pin body, that the pin end includes a first portion having a substantially circular cross-section and configured to be received within a corresponding aperture in the slide box of the trailer and a second portion having a substantially circular cross-section configured to be selectively received within a corresponding aperture in the trailer frame assembly to prevent the slide box from sliding with reference to the trailer frame assembly, and that the second portion is linearly offset from the first portion. 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 combined structure as being claimed in the instant application. Specifically, the explicitly identified/designed structure of the locking pin and the detailed combination of the pin configuration and the locking operation when combined with the independent claims are not taught. 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 but such is not easily conceived from this art. The instant invention clearly and specifically recites structural 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
9/29/2026
