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 § 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 (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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams US 11,584,207 in view of Isler US 5,322,336.
Regarding claim 1, Williams discloses
A tonneau system (1; Fig. 1A) for a vehicle (Fig. 1A) including a cargo bed (Fig. 1A), comprising: a cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) having a leading edge towards the front of the vehicle and a trailing edge towards the rear of the vehicle moveable between a deployed position (the position in Fig. 1A and the upper horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B) and a retracted position (the lower horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B);
Note that while Fig. 1A shows a single piece cover 10 and Fig. 1B shows a multiple piece cover 20, the positions of the multiple piece cover shown in Fig. 1B may also be assumed by the single piece cover of Fig. 1A because of the same linkage assembly shown in Figures 1A and 1B.
and a mechanism (12, 22; Figs 1A and 1B) coupled to the cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) operable to move the cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) between a home position (the lower horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B), an aerodynamic position (the position shown in Fig. 1A) and an extended box position (the upper horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B), wherein at the home position (the lower horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B), the cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) extends substantially parallel to the ground at a first elevation, wherein the leading edge of the cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) is positioned a second elevation higher than the first elevation and the trailing edge remains at the first elevation when cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) is at the aerodynamic position (the position shown in Fig. 1A), and wherein the leading edge and the trailing edge of the cover (10; 20; Figs. 1A and 1B) are positioned at the second elevation when at the extended box position (the upper horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B). Note that while Fig. 1A shows a single piece cover 10 and Fig. 1B shows a multiple piece cover 20, the positions of the multiple piece cover shown in Fig. 1B may also be assumed by the single piece cover of Fig. 1A because of the same linkage assembly shown in Figures 1A and 1B.
However, Williams does not disclose that the cover includes a frame with coupled to the cover.
Notwithstanding, Isler discloses a tonneau cover with a cover portion (17; Fig. 3) and a perimeter frame (18; Fig. 3) which supports the cover (17; Fig. 3). The frame (18; Fig. 3) has a leading edge towards the front of the vehicle (12; Fig. 3) and a trailing edge at the rear of the vehicle (12; Fig. 3).
Therefore, it 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 to provide the tonneau system of Williams to include a frame coupled to the cover which has a leading edge and a training edge that correspond to the leading edge and trailing edge of the cover as taught by Isler with a reasonable expectation of success to provide support and rigidity to the cover.
Regarding claim 2, Williams, as modified by Isler, discloses:
The tonneau system of claim 1, as explained above, further comprising a drive system (in that the mechanism (12, 22; Figs 1A and 1B of Williams) are elevators which can be extended and retracted by hydraulic means, i.e., a drive therefor; see col. 7, line 17 and col. 7 line 25 which disclose that the mechanisms (12, 22; Figs 1A and 1B) are elevators and col. 8, lines 20-21 which discloses the hydraulic drive) operable to move the leading edge and the trailing edge of the frame between the first elevation and the second elevation.
Regarding claim 3, Williams, as modified by Isler, discloses:
The tonneau system of claim 2, wherein the mechanism (12, 22; Figs 1A and 1B of Williams) includes a first subsystem (of 12, 22, Fig. 1A and 1B on the left side of the vehicle) associated with a first rail (the left side longitudinal portion of the perimeter frame as taught by Isler) of the frame and a second subsystem (of 12, 22, Fig. 1A and 1B on the right side of the vehicle) associated with an opposite second rail (the right side longitudinal portion of the perimeter frame as taught by Isler) of the frame.
Regarding claim 4, Williams, as modified by Isler, discloses:
Claim 4. The tonneau system of claim 3, wherein the first subsystem includes a first linkage (forward ones of elements 12 and 22 in Figs. 1A and 1B function as linkages as can be seen from viewing Figures 1A and 1B) for moving the leading edge of the frame between the first elevation and the second elevation as well as a second linkage (rearward ones of elements 12 and 22 in Figs. 1A and 1B function as linkages as can be seen from viewing Figures 1A and 1B) operable for moving the trailing edge of the frame between the first elevation and second elevation.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams US 11,584,207 in view of Isler US 5,322,336, as applied above to claim 1, and further in view of Flemming et al. US 12,330,486.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Williams, as modified by Isler, discloses:
The tonneau system of claim 1, except for further comprising first and second side panels moveable between retracted and deployed positions, wherein the first and second side panels are at the retracted positions when the frame is at the home position, wherein the side panels are movable to the deployed positions when the frame is at the aerodynamic position, as recited in claim 9 and third and fourth side panels moveable between retracted and deployed positions, wherein the third and fourth panels are at the retracted positions when the frame is at either of the home or aerodynamic positions, wherein the third and fourth side panels are movable to their deployed positions when the frame is at the extended box position, as recited in claim 10.
Notwithstanding, Flemming et al. disclose a tiltable tonneau cover (48; Figs. 2, 3, 4) which can assume a home position (Fig. 2) an aerodynamic position (Fig. 3) and an extended position (Fig. 4). Flemming et al. also disclose first (left side) and second (right side) side panels (104; Figs. 3 and 4) as well as third (left side) and fourth (right side) side panels (106; Fig. 4). In operation, the first and second side panels (104; Figs. 3 and 4) are moveable between retracted and deployed positions, wherein the first and second side panels (104; Figs. 3 and 4) are at the retracted positions when the frame is at the home position (Fig. 2), wherein the side panels (104; Figs. 3 and 4) are movable to the deployed positions when the frame is at the aerodynamic position (Fig. 3) and the third and fourth side panels (106; Fig. 4) moveable between retracted and deployed positions, wherein the third and fourth panels (106; Fig. 4) are at the retracted positions when the frame is at either of the home (Fig. 2) or aerodynamic positions (Fig. 3), wherein the third and fourth side panels (106; Fig. 4) are movable to their deployed positions when the frame is at the extended box position (Fig. 4).
Therefore, it 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 to provide the tonneau system of Williams, as modified by Isler, with first and second side panels moveable between retracted and deployed positions, wherein the first and second side panels are at the retracted positions when the frame is at the home position, wherein the side panels are movable to the deployed positions when the frame is at the aerodynamic position as well as fourth side panels moveable between retracted and deployed positions, wherein the third and fourth panels are at the retracted positions when the frame is at either of the home or aerodynamic positions, wherein the third and fourth side panels are movable to their deployed positions when the frame is at the extended box position as taught by Flemming et al. with a reasonable expectation of success to selectively provide an enclosed space in cooperation with the cargo bed which creates a storage area that is protected from inclement weather.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 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.
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The recitation in claim 5 that the first subsystem includes a first linear actuator drivingly coupled to the first linkage and a second linear actuator drivingly coupled to the second linkage is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record. Specifically, Williams US 11,584,207, the closest prior art of record, teaches that the linkages are linear actuators rather than having linear actuators being coupled to the linkages. It would not be obvious to modify Williams to have linear actuators coupled to the linkages because the home position (the lower horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B), an aerodynamic position (the position shown in Fig. 1A) and an extended box position (the upper horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B) of the cover is achieved by telescopic linear actuators functioning as linkages and providing separate linkages in addition to the linear actuators, where such linkages are fixed in length, would destroy the ability of the cover to achieve a home position, an aerodynamic position and an extended box position.
Claim 6 is considered to contain allowable subject matter at least due to its dependence upon claim 5 which contains allowable subject matter.
The recitation in claim 7 of the cover including a plurality of transversely extending slats coupled to the frame is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record. Specifically, while Williams US 11,584,207, the closest prior art of record, discloses a plurality of transversely extending solar panels (20; Fig. 1B) which could be considered “slats”, if one were to mount such slats to a perimeter frame (like the one of Isler US 5,322,336) then the configuration shown in Fig. 1C would not be possible thereby destroying the reference.
Claim 8 is considered to contain allowable subject matter at least due to its dependence upon claim 7 which contains allowable subject matter.
The recitation in claim 11 of a tonneau system including a frame and a segmented cover coupled to the frame, the cover being moveable between a deployed position and a retracted position, the cover extending along a plane when in the deployed position and being compacted when in the retracted position; and a mechanism coupled to the frame and operable to move the frame between a home position, an aerodynamic position and an extended box position, is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record. Specifically, Williams US 11,584,207, the closest prior art of record, discloses the majority of the construction of the tonneau system recited in claim 11 and in view of Isler US 5,322,336 which teaches a frame for the cover of Williams. This combination of references is detailed above with respect to the rejection of claim 1. However, claim 11 differs from claim 1 by reciting that the cover is segmented and that the cover extends along a plane when in a deployed position and compacted when in the retracted position. The cover of Williams is a solar panel and is shown as a segmented planar cover in Fig. 1B. It is also shown compacted in Fig. 1C. However, the combination of Williams and Isler results in a perimeter frame (of Isler) extending around the entire perimeter of the cover (of Williams) which would preclude a segmented version of the solar panel cover of Fig. 1B from being compacted. Flemming et al. US 12,330,486 is another reference of record which shows the three different positions of a cover as recited in claim 11. However, it would not be obvious to construct the cover to be compacted when in a retracted position and such a modification would destroy the enclosed space feature of the reference.
The recitation in claim 15 that the first subsystem includes a first linear actuator drivingly coupled to the first linkage and a second linear actuator drivingly coupled to the second linkage is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record. Specifically, Williams US 11,584,207, the closest prior art of record, teaches that the linkages are linear actuators rather than having linear actuators being coupled to the linkages. It would not be obvious to modify Williams to have linear actuators coupled to the linkages because the home position (the lower horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B), an aerodynamic position (the position shown in Fig. 1A) and an extended box position (the upper horizontal position shown in Fig. 1B) of the cover is achieved by telescopic linear actuators functioning as linkages and providing separate linkages in addition to the linear actuators, where such linkages are fixed in length, would destroy the ability of the cover to achieve home position, an aerodynamic position and an extended box position.
Claim 16 is considered to contain allowable subject matter at least due to its dependence upon claim 15 which contains allowable subject matter.
The recitation in claim 17 of the cover including a plurality of transversely extending slats coupled to the frame is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record. Specifically, while Williams US 11,584,207, the closest prior art of record, discloses a plurality of transversely extending solar panels (20; Fig. 1B) which could be considered “slats”, if one were to mount such slats to a perimeter frame then the configuration shown in Fig. 1C would not be possible thereby destroying the reference.
Claim 18 is considered to contain allowable subject matter at least due to its dependence upon claim 17 which contains allowable subject matter.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Herndon US 5,951,095 discloses a tonneau system with a cover (16; Fig. 1) which can assume a home position (Fig. 1), a rearwardly slanted position (Fig. 2) and an extended position (Fig. 3). However, Herndon does not disclose the aerodynamic position as recited in current claims 1 and 11.
Schultz US 7,281,744 discloses a tonneau system (10; Fig. 1) with a home position (Fig. 6) and a rearwardly slanted position (Fig. 2). The system also includes side panels (24; Fig. 2). However, Schultz lacks the aerodynamic position as recited in current claims 1 and 11.
Herndon US 8,182,020 discloses a tonneau system (16; Fig. 1) with a cover 17 which can assume a rearwardly slanted position (Fig. 1) and an extended position (Fig. 6) However, Herndon lacks the aerodynamic position as recited in current claims 1 and 11.
Stamm, Jr. US 10,086,684 discloses a tonneau system (2; Fig. 1) with a cover 24 which can assume an aerodynamic position (Fig. 2) and a home position (Fig. 1). However, Stamm, Jr. does not disclose the extended position as recited in current claims 1 and 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph D. Pape whose telephone number is (571)272-6664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 AM-3:30 PM.
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.
/Joseph D. Pape/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights