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 .
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, 6, 8, 10, 11, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2012/078096.
In reference to claims 1, 11, and 20, WO 2012/078096 discloses a vehicle (1) comprising a chassis, a cab supported by the chassis, and a movable wind deflector (3), as shown in Figures 1-3b and disclosed on line 26 of page 9 and line 7 of page 10. The cab forms an enclosure with a top (S1) and a rear (S2), as shown in Figures 1-3b and disclosed on lines 10-18 of page 10. The wind deflector (3) is configured to move between a top towing or hauling position wherein the wind deflector is located at the top (S1) of the cab and extends above the top (S1) of the cab to redirect airflow over a payload when the is transporting payload, as shown in Figures 1-2b and disclosed on lines 1-11 of page 11, and a rear deadheading or bobtailing position, as shown in Figures 3a and 3b. The wind deflector (3) is located at the rear (S2) of the cab and extends rearwardly therefrom to prevent air from creating a low pressure area next to the rear (S2) of the cab when the vehicle deadheading or bobtailing without a payload connected thereto. This is inherent due to the wind deflector being placed in the claimed position and creating an extension to the top and sides of the cab which prevents the creation of a low pressure area next to the rear of the cab.
In reference to claims 6 and 16, the wind deflector (3) comprises a shell body (3), as shown in Figures 1-3b.
In reference to claims 8 and 18, the wind deflector (3) resides entirely above the rear of the cab in the top towing or hauling position, as shown in Figure 2a, and the wind deflector resides entirely beneath the top of the cab in the rear deadheading or bobtailing position, as shown in Figure 3a.
In reference to claims 10 and 19, a locking mechanism is configured to rigidly secure the wind deflector (3) onto the cab in the top towing or hauling position and the rear deadheading or bobtailing position, as disclosed on line 24 of page 13 through line 11 of page 15.
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.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2012/078096 in view of Kangas (US 4,102,548).
WO 2012/078096 does not explicitly state the cab comprises a sleeper unit.
Kangas teaches a cab comprising a sleeper unit, as disclosed on lines 39-41 of column 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the cab of WO 2012/078096 with a sleeper cab, as taught by Kangas, with a reasonable expectation for success to provide the driver with a comfortable sleeping quarters for long haul trips.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 9, and 12-15 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: The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 2 and 12 is the arm configure to rotatably connect the cab to move between the claimed top towing or hauling position and the rear deadheading or bobtailing position, which is not found in the prior art.
The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim 9 is the wind deflector comprises a length that substantially matches a height of the cab to substantially cover the rear of the cab in the deadheading or bobtailing position, which is not found in the prior art of record.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
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, 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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 June 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights