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.
Claims 20, 22-29, 31-36 and 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flewelling (US 2011/0089179 A1) in view of Taylor (US 5,447,251 A).
Regarding claims 20, 24, 29 & 36, Flewelling discloses a refuse cart retention corral (housing 10), comprising: a base plate (base 45) having a first end and a second end (Figs. 1 & 3); a first side fixture (sidewall 12) a second side (sidewall 13) arranged on opposing sides of the base plate (Figs. 1 & 3); a first hinged member (see hinged members shown in Figs. 1 & 3) coupled to one of the first side fixture and the second side fixture proximate the second end, the first hinged member configured to be movable from an open position allowing a refuse cart (containers 20) to be installed in or removed from the refuse cart retention corral (housing 10), and a closed position configured to retain a refuse cart within the refuse cart retention corral (Para. 0016); and a divider (see sidewall 33a with sidewall 33b) positioned between the first side fixture and the second side fixture (Figs. 1 & 3).
Flewelling differs form the invention as claimed because Flewelling does not disclose wherein at least one of the first side fixture, the second side fixture, and the divider defines a protrusion configured to interface with a refuse cart when received within the refuse cart retention corral.
Su, however, teaches a refuse cart wherein the structure includes a protrusion (portion 22 with walls 21) configured to interface with a refuse container (container 3) received within the refuse cart corral (Figs. 2 & 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have included wherein the cart structure includes a protrusion configured to interface with a refuse container on the refuse cart for purpose of locking the container into place and preventing it from falling out of the refuse corral. Regarding claim 24, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention of have located the protrusion structure of Su on the first side fixture, the second side fixture, and the divider each define a protrusion so that it is configured to interface with a cutout defined in a refuse cart for the purpose of providing a retaining means and thereby preventing the refuse container from falling out of the refuse corral. Regarding claim 27, making the modification in order for a length of the protrusion is equal to a length of at least one of the first side fixture, the second side fixture, and the divider would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was effectively filed. Such a modification, would amount to allowing for adaptions to various configurations and sizes to accommodate multiple applications, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Regarding claim 28, making the modification so that the protrusion has a substantially rectangular geometry with a cutout corresponding to an outer surface of a refuse cart would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed. Since changing the shape would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the cutout and protrusion of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. The purpose for making the modification would be to fit packaging constraints.
Regarding claims 22 & 38, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 20. Flewelling further discloses wherein the divider comprises a middle fixture arranged approximately equidistant between the first side fixture and the second side fixture (Figs. 1 & 3).
Regarding claims 23 & 34, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 20. Flewelling further discloses wherein the protrusion is configured to interface with a cutout defined in a refuse cart (Figs. 1 & 3).
Regarding claims 25 & 31, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 20. Flewelling further discloses wherein the first hinged member comprises a swinging door coupled to the first side fixture at the second end (Figs. 1 & 3).
Regarding claim 26, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 20. Flewelling further discloses comprising a second hinged member coupled to the other of the first side fixture and the second side fixture proximate the second end, the second hinged member configured to be movable from an open position allowing a refuse cart to be installed in or removed from the refuse cart retention corral, and a closed position configured to retain a refuse cart within the refuse cart retention corral (Figs. 1 & 3).
Regarding claim 32, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 29, further comprising a second hinged member coupled to the other of the first side fixture and the second side fixture proximate the second end, the second hinged member configured to be movable from an open position allowing a refuse cart to be installed in or removed from the refuse cart retention corral, and a closed position configured to retain a refuse cart within the refuse cart retention corral (Figs. 1 & 3).
Regarding claim 39, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 36. Flewelling further discloses wherein the one or more dividers extend across a top surface of the base plate in a direction parallel with the first side fixture and the second side fixture, and wherein the one or more dividers have a cuboid geometry (Figs. 1 & 3).
Claims 21, 30 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flewelling in view of Su and in further view of Taylor (US 5,447,251 A).
Regarding claims 21, 30 & 37, Flewelling as modified by Su discloses the refuse cart retention corral of claim 20. Flewelling does not disclose a lifting mechanism coupled to at least one of the first side fixture and the second side fixture, the lifting mechanism configured to enable the refuse cart retention corral to be lifted by a refuse vehicle.
Taylor, however, teaches a lifting mechanism coupled to at least one of the first side fixture and the second side fixture, the lifting mechanism configured to enable the refuse cart retention corral to be lifted by a refuse vehicle (handle 66; Col. 3, Lns. 42-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have included a lifting mechanism coupled to at least one of the first side fixture and the second side fixture, the lifting mechanism configured to enable the refuse cart retention corral to be lifted by a refuse vehicle as taught by Taylor on the invention of Flewelling for the purpose of allowing a garbage truck to pick up a heavy load thereby preventing a human operator from getting hurt trying to lift a heavy load.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 33 is 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. It would require hindsight reasoning to reconstruct the prior art to meet the limitations of applicant’s claim. Specifically, wherein the second hinged member defines a protrusion configured to interface with a refuse cart when received within the refuse cart retention corral.
Claim 35 is 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. It would require hindsight reasoning to reconstruct the prior art to meet the limitations of applicant’s claim. Specifically, comprising a divider positioned between the first side fixture and the second side fixture, the divider configured to separate the refuse cart retention corral into a first row and a second row, the first row defined between the first side fixture and the divider, the second row defined between the second side fixture and the divider.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HILARY LYNN JOHNS whose telephone number is (313)446-4852. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30.
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, J. Allen Shriver can be reached at 3032974337 or 5712726698. 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.
/HILARY L JOHNS/Examiner, Art Unit 3613
/JAMES A SHRIVER II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights