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 .
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.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s amendments and remarks filed 23 July 2026. The Applicant has amended claims 1, 3-14, 16-18 and 20-21 and canceled claims 2, 15 and 19. Claims 22-24 are new claims. Claims 1, 3-14, 16-18 and 20-24 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Reply to Applicant’s Remarks
Applicant’s remarks filed 23 July 2026 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Claim Interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed 23 July 2026 have avoided the first/second /third control module being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) previously set forth.
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112:
Applicant’s amendment to the claims filed 23 July 2026 have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections previously set forth.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-14, 16-18 and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “a first processor configured to: receive input power from the battery…”, “a second processor configured to: receive the input power and the vehicle door unlock signal from the first processor…” which is not explicitly, implicitly or inherently disclosed in the specification. The specification does not recite the steps of “receive…”, “activate…”, “send…” being performed by a first processor and/or a second processor. Further, the specification does not disclose “a second processor…receive the input power…from the first processor”, i.e. the specification does not disclose a processor providing power to another processor. Therefore, the claim recites new matter and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a).
Claims 14 and 18 recite similar languages as claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons above.
Claims 3-4, 8-11, 16-18 and 20-21 recite “…processor” and are rejected for reasons similar to the rejection of claim 1 above.
Claims 3-13, 16-17 and 20-24 are rejected by virtue of the dependency on previously rejected claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-14, 16-18 and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a first processor configured to receive input power from the battery” and further recites “a second processor configured to receive the input power…from the first processor”. It is unclear if the “input power” received by the first processor and the second processor are the same “input power”, i.e., in “a second processor configured to receive the input power…from the first processor”, “the input power” has antecedent basis from “a input power” to the first processor, but the input power to the first processor is from a battery while the input power to the second processor is from the first processor. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The claim is interpreted by the examiner as “a first processor configured to receive a first input power from the battery…a second processor configured to receive a second input power…from the first processor” for the purpose of examination.
Claims 14 and 18 recite similar languages as claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons above.
Claims 3-13, 16-17 and 20-24 are rejected by virtue of the dependency on previously rejected claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-14, 16-18 and 20-24 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), 112(b) as set forth in this Office Action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art of McDonald et al. US20210129646 (A1) teaches a latching assembly for use on a pick-up truck, and particularly on a truck bed cover configured to sit over a truck bed section is provided. The latching assembly includes an electronic release assembly and a mechanical override system. An electronic release assembly includes a first rod coupled to a first electronic actuator and a second rod coupled to a second electronic actuator. The electronic release assembly also includes a first electronic actuator that selectively moves the first latch catch and the second electronic actuator that selectively moves the second latch catch. A switch is engaged to send a signal to the first and second electronic actuators to cause the first and second latch catches to disengage from the truck bed section. The first and second rods and the first and second electronic actuators also serve as part of a mechanical override system that selectively unlatches at least a portion of the truck bed cover from the truck bed section. The mechanical override system moves the first and second rods to mechanically cause the first and second electronic actuators, respectively, to manually move the first and second latch catches, respectively, to unlatch the at least the portion of the truck bed cover from the truck bed section as an alternative to moving the first and second latch catches by electrically moving the first and second electronic actuators.
In regard to independent claims 1, 14 and 18, McDonald taken either individually or in combination with other prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious a first processor configured to receive input power from the battery; receive a vehicle door unlock signal from the vehicle; activate the first switch based on the vehicle door unlock signal; receive a first actuation signal from the first switch; and send a first signal to a first latch associated with the door or window on the vehicle accessory cap or tonneau cover, to open the door or window on the vehicle accessory cap or tonneau cover based on the first actuation signal; and a second processor configured to: receive the input power and the vehicle door unlock signal from the first processor; activate the second switch based on the vehicle door unlock signal; receive a second actuation signal from the second switch; and send a second signal to a second latch for opening a second door or window on the vehicle accessory cap or tonneau based on the second actuation signal.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Examiner’s Notes
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraph and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP §2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131(b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as "Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced" may be deemed insufficient.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HONGYE LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5410. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on 571-272-4896. 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.
/HONGYE LIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
