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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3 and 11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1,10,12 and 14-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,679,269. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1,10-12, and 14-15 of US Patent No. 12,679,269 encompass in its entirety, the claim language found in claims 1-3 and 11 of the instant application. More specifically:
Claims 1 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,679,269 teach all of the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application.
Claims 14 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,679,269 teach all of the limitations of claim 2 of the instant application.
Claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,679,269 teach all of the limitations of claim 3 of the instant application.
Claims 10 and 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,679,269 teach all of the limitations of claim 11 of the instant application.
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 1, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beelman (US 9,789,916) in view of Lightner (US 1594464 A).
Regarding claim 1, Beelman teaches a tank vehicle 10 (Fig 1), comprising:
A main body 26 (Figs 1 and 2 , Col 4 lines 27-30) [adapted to carry a load] (“Pneumatic tank trailers are commonly used to haul a variety of dry bulk materials, such as, for example, lime products, cement, fly ash, food products, etc.” Col 1 lines 22-24);
a false bulkhead 222,242 (Fig 11) [removably engaged with the main body 26 (Fig 11) ] (“The rear end cover 222 may be made of aluminum, fiberglass, or other suitable materials. The rear end cover 222 includes an access, such as a hatch, door, or other removable cover that provides access to tanks, hoses, etc. stored in the rear end portion 29 of the trailer 11.” (Emphasis added) Col 10 Lines 33-38), the false bulkhead 222,242 (Fig 11) being [located a distance away from one of a front bulkhead 212 (Fig 11, “ The trailer 11 is generally the same or similar to trailer 10 in construction, except for a front end cover 212 and a rear end cover 222.” Col 9 lines 30-32), a rear bulkhead 221 (Fig 11, Col 5 lines 1-5 and Fig 11 shows the front and rear ends of the tank are opposed to one another ), ] (Fig 11 shows a false bulkhead 242 being positioned a distance away from a front bulkhead 211 and a rear bulkhead 221).
A frame 500 (Fig 10) [operably engaged with the main body at one of the front bulkhead 212 and the rear bulkhead 221] (“The bottom rail 500 is mounted to the tank 20. The bottom rail 500 also limits the deflection of the hoppers 90a-e and helps to maintain the stresses at an acceptable level. The bottom rail 500 also makes it easier to manufacture the trailer 20 right side up… With reference to FIG. 10, the bottom rail 500 extends along the bottom of the hoppers 90a-e from the most forward hopper 90a to the most rear hopper 90e. The bottom rail 500 lies along a central axis for the trailer 10. The tank 20 may include a single bottom rail 500 as its frame.”, Col 8 lines 1-10, See also, The tanker vehicle bulkheads are integrally formed with the hoppers 90a-e to form a continuous tank volume see “The trailer 11 is generally the same or similar to trailer 10 in construction, except for a front end cover 212 and a rear end cover 222” in Col 9 lines 30-31). Beelman further teaches a stand 520,530,540,550 (Fig 10) [operably engaged with the frame 500 (Fig 10) and the main body 26 (Figs 1 and 2) for vertically supporting the frame 500 (Fig 10) with the main body 26 (Figs 1 and 2 , Col 4 lines 27-30)] (“The bottom rail 500 is integrated with one or more triangular supports 520. The triangular supports 520 generally include three surfaces. A bottom surface 530 of the triangular support 520 engages a top surface 503 of the bottom rail 500. A front surface 540 of the triangular support 520 engages the exterior surface of one of the hoppers 90a-e, while a rear surface 550 of the triangular support 520 engages the exterior surface of an adjacent hopper 90a-e.” Col 8 lines 13-20).
Beelman does not teach a travel lighting assembly operably engaged with one of the rear bulkhead and the false bulkhead, the travel lighting assembly having a plurality of signaling devices operably engaged with and facing into the frame and configured to emit a set of indicator lights into the frame and through a portion of the false bulkhead and behind the main body to indicate travel of the tank vehicle.
Lightner teaches a travel lighting assembly 10,12,14 (Figs 1-3, “…a casing or housing 1 of any desired material or shape, carrying a transparent or translucent medium 2 such as ground glass.’ Pg 1 lines 74-77) [operably engaged with one of the rear bulkhead and the false bulkhead] (“Above the horizontal partitions is situated lamps C and D separated by a vertical partition, each lamp lighting one of the symbols, the partition preventing light from that lamp from reaching the opposite symbol. It will thus be seen that by lighting the lamps A the word Stop is flashed and by lighting lamps B the word Turn is illuminated with either a right or left arrow as lamps D or C are included in this latter circuit..” Pg 2 lines 29-40- It is well known in the art to attach a lighting source onto the back of a trailer to provide cues to vehicle behind the vehicle); wherein the travel lighting assembly 10,12,14 (Figs 1 and 2 ) having a [plurality of signaling devices] (“It will thus be seen that by lighting the lamps A the word Stop is flashed and by lighting lamps B the word Turn is illuminated with either a right or left arrow as lamps D or C are included in this latter circuit.” pg 2 lines 35-39) operably engaged with and facing into a frame and is configured to emit [a set of indicator lights into the frame and through a portion of the false bulkhead and behind the main body to indicate travel of the tank vehicle] (“It will thus be seen that by lighting the lamps A the word Stop is flashed and by lighting lamps B the word Turn is illuminated with either a right or left arrow as lamps D or C are included in this latter circuit.” pg 2 lines 35-39, as shown in Figures 1 and 2 the lights shine through the rear bulkhead behind the vehicle). wherein the at least one signaling device Lamps A and B (Figs 1 and 2), [is configured to emit the set of indicator lights to indicate the travel of the tank vehicle] (“It will thus be seen that by lighting the lamps A the word Stop is flashed and by lighting lamps B the word Turn is illuminated with either a right or left arrow as lamps D or C are included in this latter circuit.” pg 2 lines 35-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the travel lighting assembly and graphics of Lightner with the assembly of Beelman with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for full lighting visibility on the rear of the vehicle so that a vehicle behind the tanker has full visibility of the lighting signals and graphics. By including the signaling devices and graphics of Lightner on both the false bulkhead and rear bulkhead, the light can dissipate through the rear of the tank and clearly signal to a vehicle behind the tanker while either the false bulkhead or rear bulkhead is exposed and can light up any graphics that are visible on the false bulkhead.
Regarding claim 13, Beelman fully teaches the tank vehicle of claim 1, further comprising: a stand operably engaged with the frame and the main body for vertically supporting the frame with the main body (See Modification of Beelman and Lightner in claim 1 above).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beelman (US 9,789,916) and Lightner (US 1594464 A) in further view of Stopper (US 5489037).
Regarding Claim 2, Beelman and Lightner teach the tank of claim 1 wherein a rear bulkhead 221 (Fig 11, Col 5 lines 1-5 and Fig 11 shows the front and rear ends of the tank are opposed to one another ), made of a first material (“the front end cone 201, and the rear end cone 221 and the barrel portion 26 may be formed from metals and metal alloy materials, such as aluminum, having a thickness of approximately ⅛ inch to ⅜ inch, although the thickness of the material may vary throughout the construction” Col 9 lines 4-10) and wherein the first material (metal alloy) is [configured to reflect each indicator light of the set of indicator lights opposite to the front bulkhead] (It is inherent for metal alloys to have a reflective appearance that reflects lighting that interacts with it).
However, Beelman and Lightner do not teach a second material forming the false bulkhead and is different than the first material; and wherein the second material is configured to transmit each indicator light of the set of indicator lights.
Stopper teaches an equivalent container to Beelman with a bulkhead 96 Figs 4A-4C (“Removable bulkheads used in cargo containers are well known. For the most part, however, such bulkheads are very heavy, wall-like structures requiring substantial support to withstand a load. Certain designs require the bulkhead to serve as the principal load-bearing member replacing, for example, the rear doors of a container.” col 2 lines 10-16) [made of a material that allows light and makes the internal components visible to an outside user] (“A preferred rigid, transparent bulkhead material is an acrylic resin sheet. However, it is anticipated that a variety of other materials are also suitable, including safety-reinforced glass, fiber reinforced plastic, structurally molded plastic, and other products which possess the necessary rigidity and transparency.” Col 5 lines 38-43). Stopper additionally teaches a second material forming the false bulkhead and [is different than the first material] (“A preferred rigid, transparent bulkhead material is an acrylic resin sheet. However, it is anticipated that a variety of other materials are also suitable, including safety-reinforced glass, fiber reinforced plastic, structurally molded plastic, and other products which possess the necessary rigidity and transparency.” Col 5 lines 38-44) [and the second material is configured to transmit each indicator light of the set of indicator lights] (“Special features include a transparent bulkhead to permit observation of the cargo” Col 1 lines 17-18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the transparent bulkhead of Stopper with the false bulkhead of Beelman and Lightner with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for greater visibility. By using a transparent bulkhead, the materials inside the bulkhead can be monitored and any light can pass through the material, increasing the visibility of the bulkhead.
Claims 3-4 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beelman and Lightner in further view of Neal (US 20170253170 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Beelman and Lightner teach a tank vehicle of claim 1, but do not teach a divider operably engaged with at least the frame and spaced apart from the false bulkhead; wherein the divider separates a first group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices and a second group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices.
Neal (US 20170253170 A1) teaches a divider 13 (Fig 1, para 0022) that separates a grouping of lights 14 (Fig 1, “In the illustrated embodiment, the groupings of lights 14 are separated by a horizontal divider 13 and a vertical divider 18, defining an upper left portion 16, a lower left portion 17, an upper right portion 19, and a lower right portion 20. A grouping of lights 14 is disposed within each of the four portions, providing for an even distribution of light.” para 0022), the divider separates the lights 14 (Fig 1) into four groups 16,17,19 and 20 (Fig 1, para 0022) away from one another. Neal additionally teaches the divider 13 (Fig 1) [having a first end and a second end opposite the first end with a first and second side wall extending between the first end and second end and the side walls face in opposite directions] (See Annotated Neal Fig 1 below). Further, Neal teaches the divider 13 (Fig 1) further comprises: [a first group of openings of a plurality of openings that receives a first group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices; and a second group of openings of the plurality of openings that receives a second group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices] (“The lights 14 are disposed in a sequential pattern, forming a grouping of lights 14. In the illustrated embodiment, the groupings of lights 14 are separated by a horizontal divider 13 and a vertical divider 18, defining an upper left portion 16, a lower left portion 17, an upper right portion 19, and a lower right portion 20. A grouping of lights 14 is disposed within each of the four portions, providing for an even distribution of light.” para 0022).
PNG
media_image1.png
414
774
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Neal Figure 1 above showing the divider having a first and second end with a first and second wall extending between the first and second ends of the divider 13.
PNG
media_image2.png
392
735
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Neal Figure 1 above showing the divider separating at least two groupings of signaling devices (element 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the divider of Neal to be installed integrally with the frame and false bulkhead of Beelman and Lightner with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for a more focused output of each signal light and prevent bleeding into the other signal area. further, the divider would provide additional structural support to the false bulkhead and the frame. By installing a divider on the frame, the light of each signal can be more focused and is less likely to bleed into the other signal of the tanker truck so that the light output is more clearly defined to a vehicle driving behind the truck. Additionally, Beelman, Lightner and Neal disclose the claimed invention except for a third group of signaling devices is operably engaged with the divider. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to duplicate the signaling devices, since it has been held that duplication of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation.
Regarding Claim 4, Beelman Lightner and Neal fully teach a third group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices operably engage with the divider (See modification of Beelman and Lightner in view of Neal in claim 3 above).
Regarding Claim 10, Beelman Lightner and Neal fully teach the divider further comprises: a first group of openings of a plurality of openings that receives a first group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices; and a second group of openings of the plurality of openings that receives a second group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices (See modification of Beelman and Lightner in view of Neal in claim 3 above).
Regarding Claim 11, Beelman Lightner and Neal fully teach a first compartment collectively defined by the rear bulkhead Beelman-221 (Fig 11, Col 5 lines 1-5), an inner surface of the frame Beelman-500 (Fig 10), and a first side wall of the divider Neal-13 (See annotated Neal Fig 1 above for the first wall); and a second compartment collectively defined by the rear bulkhead Beelman-221 (Fig 11, Col 5 lines 1-5), the inner surface of the frame Beelman-500 (Fig 10), and a second side wall of the divider Neal-13 (See annotated Neal Fig 1 above for the second wall); wherein the first group signaling devices Lightner-Lamps A and B (Figs 1 and 2), [first compartment and the at least another signal device is located inside of the second compartment] (Lamps A and B are separated from one another in different compartments, “Another partition extends between the horizontal partitions and also between the horizontal partitions and also between the S and the T thereby cutting off the light from the letter S when the lamps B are lighted.”, Pg 2 lines 18-21).
Regarding Claim 12, Beelman Lightner and Neal discloses the claimed invention except for the signaling devices operatively engaged with a side wall of the divider and facing into the compartments. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to rearrange the lights to face into the compartments from the inner facing walls, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beelman and Lightner in further view of Maiorana (US 20180354409 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Beelman and Lightner teach the tank vehicle of claim 1.
Beelman and Lightner do not teach a plurality of apertures defined in the frame between an inner surface of the frame and an outer surface of the frame.
Maiorana teaches an aperture 255 (Figs 10 and 12) [defined in an equivalent frame between an inner surface of a frame and an outer surface of a frame] (“As shown in FIG. 10, bottom surface of frame member 223 may define a slot 255 which may extend the length thereof.” para 0068 and “, light source 220 may be provided in slot 255 defined in bottom surface of frame member 223.” para 0070). Maiorana further teaches a first group of apertures 255 (Figs 10 and 12) [of the plurality of apertures configured to receive a first group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices] (“As shown in FIG. 10-FIG. 12, light source 220 may be provided on frame member 223 to emit light towards a work area. More specifically, and in one example, light source 220 may be provided in slot 255 defined in bottom surface of frame member 223.” para 0070); and a second group of apertures 255 (Figs 10 and 12) [of the plurality of apertures configured to receive a second group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices] (“As shown in FIG. 10, bottom surface of frame member 223 may define a slot 255 which may extend the length thereof.” Para 0068 and “More specifically, and in one example, light source 220 may be provided in slot 255 defined in bottom surface of frame member 223.” para 0070).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the aperture of Maiorana to be installed integrally with the frame and false bulkhead of Beelman and Lightner with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for a way to secure the lighting elements with the frame and bulkhead elements. By installing an aperture onto the frame, the aperture is integrally formed with the frame and is more secure overall. Additionally, Maiorana discloses the claimed invention except for a plurality of apertures. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to duplicate the apertures, since it has been held that duplication of parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 6, Beelman, Lightner and Maiorana fully teach the tank vehicle wherein a first group of apertures of the plurality of apertures configured to receive a first group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices; and a second group of apertures of the plurality of apertures configured to receive a second group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices (See modification of Beelman and Lightner in view of Neal in claim 5 above).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beelman and Lightner in further view of Elwell (US 20210136899 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Beelman and Lightner teach a tank vehicle but do not teach a controller operable with the plurality of signaling devices to emit light from one or more signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices to indicate the travel of the tank vehicle.
Elwell teaches a controller 64 (Fig 2 and Figs 9a-g) [operable with the plurality of signaling devices to emit light from one or more signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices to indicate the travel of the tank vehicle] (“The microprocessor 64 is programmed to instruct light emitting devices, such as LEDs 46, to emit light according to one or more selected strobing patterns. The microprocessor can be further configured to restrict the emission of light in at least one of the at least four different colors such that the manufacturer can limit the capability of the light bar 10 before sale to a consumer.” para 0109 and paras 0117 and 0118 ). Elwell further teaches a plurality of wiring harnesses 56 (Fig 2, para 0103) [operably connecting the plurality of signaling devices and the controller with one another] (“In one arrangement, wiring 56 also includes one or more signal leads 62. Signal lead 62 is an electrical lead that is configured to be electrically connected to electrical system of vehicle 30, and more specifically a reverse light lead, a left turn signal lead, a right turn signal lead or another electrical lead of vehicle 30. In combination, plug 60 and signal lead(s) 62 are configured to receive power and operational signals from vehicle 30 and provide operational signals to light bar 10.’ para 0106); each wiring harness 56 (Fig 2, para 0103) of the plurality of wiring harnesses comprising:
[a first electrical connection capable of supporting a first electrical signal having a first amperage transmitted by the controller; and
a second electrical connection capable of supporting a second electrical signal having a second amperage transmitted by the controller that is greater than the first amperage] (Para 0106 describes the use of signal leads and the connections between the light bar and the vehicle power so as to control the LED light output based on different input into the vehicle). Further, Elwell teaches [the first electrical signal is transmitted by the controller, the plurality of signaling devices emits a first signaling light at a first brightness; and when the second electrical signal is transmitted by the controller, a group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices emits a second signaling light at a second brightness that is greater than the first brightness] (“The lights in FIGS. 11-14 may strobe by turning off for one pulse and then turning back on; by pulsing in triplets; or by an operator manually pulsing the lights, potentially via the use of a remote control, such as the remote control 70 in FIG. 10. Such a remote control may be wireless and may allow an operator to manually choose the timing, color, and brightness of a pulse by sending an instruction to the microprocessor 64 to perform a specific strobing pattern.” para 0116 and “ A pulse with modulated (PWM) signal with duty cycle PWM can be applied to the DIM pin, to adjust the output current to a value below the nominal average value set by the current sense resistor. PWM dimming provides reduced brightness by modulating the LEDs 46 forward current between 0% and 100%.” (Emphasis added) Para 0124 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the controller and controller logic of Elwell with the tank truck of Beelman and Lightner with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for a way to have more control over the output of the lighting elements. By using a controller to control the light output, the output of the lights can be more easily adjusted to the different conditions of the road.
Regarding claim 8, Beelman, Lightner and Elwell fully teach a plurality of wiring harnesses operably connecting the plurality of signaling devices and the controller with one another; each wiring harness of the plurality of wiring harnesses comprising:
a first electrical connection capable of supporting a first electrical signal having a first amperage transmitted by the controller; and
a second electrical connection capable of supporting a second electrical signal having a second amperage transmitted by the controller that is greater than the first amperage ( See modifications of Beelman in view of Lightner and Elwell in claim 7 above).
Regarding claim 9, Beelman, Lightner and Elwell fully teach the vehicle wherein when the first electrical signal is transmitted by the controller, the plurality of signaling devices emits a first signaling light at a first brightness; and when the second electrical signal is transmitted by the controller, a group of signaling devices of the plurality of signaling devices emits a second signaling light at a second brightness that is greater than the first brightness ( See modifications of Beelman in view of Lightner and Elwell in claim 7 above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Timms (US 11104270 B1) teaches a signal light system for a vehicle including a measuring device, control unit, signal light, and flasher module.
Weedon (US 10308169 B1) teaches an auxiliary vehicle direction light is an optical signaling system. The auxiliary vehicle direction light is adapted for use with an emergency vehicle. The auxiliary vehicle direction light is a visual display that indicates the intended direction of the emergency vehicle when the emergency vehicle is in route to its dispatched destination.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MORGAN M KNAUF whose telephone number is (703)756-4532. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM -4:30 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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.
/M.M.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU, Ph.D./Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights