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 .
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 1-4, 6-7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang CN 202368279 U (page/line numbering used for foreign references below corresponds to the machine-translation preceding the original patent, as attached to the present Office Action – note page numbers of the translation are marked as TP-1, TP-2, etc.).
Regarding independent claim 1, Zhang discloses [a tow hook assembly comprising: a housing 2 including a front wall and a rear end opposite the front wall, a front aperture formed in the front wall;] (Annotated Fig. 4 below; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 4, Zhang illustrates a tow hook assembly comprising housing 2 including a front wall and a rear end opposite the front wall, a front aperture formed in the front wall.) [a tow hook 1 at least partially extending through the front aperture of the housing,] (Annotated Fig. 4 below; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 4, Zhang illustrates a tow hook 1 at least partially extending through the front aperture of the housing 2.) [the tow hook movable between an extended position and a retracted position relative to the housing;] (Fig. 3-4; Paragraph 0033) [a groove 4 formed in one of the housing and the tow hook, the groove including a front end and a rear end opposite the front end;] (Annotated Fig. 4 below; Paragraph 0037) and [a rib 3 formed on the other of the housing and the tow hook, the rib received within the groove,] (Annotated Fig. 4 below; Paragraph 0037) [wherein, when the tow hook is in the extended position, the rib abuts against the front end of the groove, wherein, when the tow hook is in the retracted position, the rib abuts against the rear end of the groove.] (Fig. 3-4; Paragraph 0037; As shown in Fig. 3-4, Zhang illustrates wherein, when the tow hook 1 is in the extended position, the rib 3 abuts against the front end of the groove 4, wherein, when the tow hook is in the retracted position, the rib abuts against the rear end of the groove.)
PNG
media_image1.png
437
872
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Zhang
Regarding claim 2, Zhang further discloses [wherein a length of the groove 4 defines a total stroke of the tow hook 1 relative to the housing 2.] (Fig. 3-4; As shown in Fig. 3-4, Zhang illustrates wherein a length of the groove 4 defines a total stroke of the tow hook 1 relative to the housing 2.)
Regarding claim 3, Zhang further discloses [wherein, when the tow hook 1 is in the extended position, the tow hook extends farther outward from the housing 2 than when the tow hook is in the retracted position.] (Fig. 3-4; As shown in Fig. 3-4, Zhang illustrates wherein when the tow hook 1 is in the extended position, the tow hook extends farther outward from the housing 2 than when the tow hook is in the retracted position.)
Regarding claim 4, Zhang further discloses [wherein the groove 4 is formed in an inner surface of an upper wall of the housing 2, and wherein the rib 3 extends from an upper surface of the tow hook 1.] (Fig. 3-4; As shown in Fig. 3-4, Zhang illustrates wherein the groove 4 is formed in an inner surface of an upper wall of the housing 2, and wherein the rib 3 extends from an upper surface of the tow hook 1.)
Regarding claim 6, Zhang further discloses [wherein the tow hook 1 comprises a tow hook body including a rear end portion 6, an elongated portion 12 extending from a front surface of the rear end portion, a front end portion 9, and a neck portion extending from a front surface of the elongated portion and a rear surface of the front end portion,] (Annotated Fig. 2 below) [wherein a height of the elongated portion in a vehicle vertical direction is greater than a height of the neck portion in the vehicle vertical direction.] (Annotated Fig. 2 below; As shown in the annotation Fig. 2 below, Zhang illustrates wherein a height of the elongated portion 12 in a vehicle vertical direction is greater than a height of the neck portion in the vehicle vertical direction.)
PNG
media_image2.png
343
883
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Zhang
Regarding claim 7, Zhang further discloses [wherein a height of the rear end portion 6 in the vehicle vertical direction is greater than the height of the elongated portion 12, and a height of the front end portion 9 in the vehicle vertical direction is greater than the height of the neck portion.] (Annotated Fig. 2 above; As shown in the annotation Fig. 2 below, Zhang illustrates wherein a height of the rear end portion 6 in the vehicle vertical direction is greater than the height of the elongated portion 12, and a height of the front end portion 9 in the vehicle vertical direction is greater than the height of the neck portion.)
Regarding claim 9, Zhang further discloses [wherein, when in the extended position, the front surface of the rear end portion 6 against a rear end of the housing 2.] (Annotated Fig. 2 above; As shown in the annotation Fig. 2 below, Zhang illustrates wherein, when in the extended position, the front surface of the rear end portion 6 against a rear end of the housing 2.)
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.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang.
Regarding claim 5, Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the groove is formed in an upper surface of the tow hook, and wherein the rib extends from an upper wall of the housing. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A) (In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955)), the mere reversal of parts does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, reversing locations of the groove and the rib such that the groove is formed on the upper surface of the tow hook and the rib extends from the upper wall of the housing would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding claim 15, Zhang, as modified, does not explicitly teach that the predetermined force threshold is 1 kN +/- 50%. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Uz to use predetermined force threshold that is 1 kN +/- 50%, so as to achieve an optimal release force for retaining the tow hook in the extended position while permitting intentional retraction when a sufficient opposing force is applied, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. See, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Moreover, Applicant should note that nothing of record, nor known in the art, suggests that using the specific claimed range or value yields any previously unexpected results.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Dornbos US 7290783 B2.
Regarding claim 8, Zhang does not disclose wherein, when in the extended position, the front surface of the elongated portion abuts against a rear surface of the front wall of the housing.
Dornbos teaches [wherein, when in the extended position, the front surface of the elongated portion abuts against a rear surface of the front wall of the housing.] (Annotated Fig. 3; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 3 below, Dornbos illustrates wherein when in the extended position, the front surface of the elongated portion abuts against a rear surface of the front wall of the housing 70.)
PNG
media_image3.png
347
847
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3 of Dornbos
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 extended-position stop configuration of Dornbos with the tow hook assembly of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for the elongated portion of the tow hook to abut the rear surface of the front wall of the housing when fully extended, thus improving the positioning and support of the tow hook during use while maintaining predictable operation of the tow hook assembly.
Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Uz DE 102006009675 A1 (page/line numbering used for foreign references below corresponds to the machine-translation preceding the original patent, as attached to the present Office Action – note page numbers of the translation are marked as TP-1, TP-2, etc.).
Regarding claim 10, Zhang does not disclose wherein, when in the retracted position, the rear surface of the front end portion abuts against a front surface of the front wall of the housing.
A first embodiment of Uz teaches [wherein, when in the retracted position, the rear surface of the front end portion abuts against a front surface of the front wall of the housing.] (Fig. 17; As shown in Fig. 17, the first embodiment of Uz illustrates wherein when in the retracted position, the rear surface of the front end portion 1 abuts against a front surface of the front wall of the housing 2.)
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 retracted-position stop arrangement of the first embodiment of Uz with the tow hook assembly of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for the rear surface of the front end portion of the tow hook to abut the front surface of the front wall of the housing when the tow hook is fully retracted, thus providing a mechanical stop that defines the fully retracted position and prevents further rearward movement, thereby improving the positioning and retention of the tow hook in its stored position.
Regarding claim 11, Zhang does not wherein a detent formed in an inner surface of the housing and the tow hook includes a biasing member received within a biasing channel formed in the tow hook and a bearing provided at an end of the biasing member, the biasing member biasing the bearing into the detent when the tow hook is in the extended position, the biasing member prohibiting movement of the tow hook from the extended position to the retracted position until a force exceeding a predetermined force threshold in a direction opposite a towing direction is applied against a front end of the tow hook.
A second embodiment Uz teaches [wherein a detent 27 formed on an outer surface of the tow hook and a biasing member 34 received within a biasing channel formed in an inner surface if the housing and a bearing 35 provided at an end of the biasing member,] (Annotated Fig. 9-10 below; Page 4, lines 12-17; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 9-10 below, Uz illustrates wherein a detent 27 formed on an outer surface if the tow hook and a biasing member 34 received within a biasing channel formed in an inner surface if the housing and a bearing 35 provided at an end of the biasing member.) [the biasing member biasing the bearing into the detent when the tow hook is in the extended position, the biasing member prohibiting movement of the tow hook from the extended position to the retracted position until a force exceeding a predetermined force threshold in a direction opposite a towing direction is applied against a front end of the tow hook;] (Annotated Fig. 9-10 below; Page 4, lines 12-17) [wherein the detent is formed closer to the front wall of the housing than to a rear end of the housing.] (Fig. 9; As shown in Fig. 9, Uz illustrates wherein the detent is formed closer to the front wall of the housing than to a rear end of the housing.)
PNG
media_image4.png
568
787
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9-10 of Uz
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 detent and biasing mechanism of the second embodiment of Uz with the tow hook assembly of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for the tow hook to be releasably retained in the extend position by requiring a predetermined force to overcome the spring-biased bearing engaged with the detent before the tow hook can be retracted, thus preventing unintentional retraction of the tow hook during towing while permitting intentional retraction when the predetermined force threshold is exceeded.
Zhang, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the detent is formed in an inner surface of the housing and the tow hook includes a biasing member received within a biasing channel formed in the tow hook. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A) (In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955)), the mere reversal of parts does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, reversing locations of the detent and the biasing channel such that the detent is formed on the upper inner surface of the housing and the biasing channel is formed within the tow hook would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding claim 12, Zhang, as modified, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the detent arrangement recited in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 13, Zhang, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the detent is formed in an upper wall of the housing closer to the front wall of the housing than to a rear end of the housing. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of know elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, rearranging the detent to be formed between the groove and the front wall of the housing would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding claim 13, Zhang, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the detent is formed in an upper wall of the housing closer to the front wall of the housing than to a rear end of the housing. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of know elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, rearranging the detent to be formed between the groove and the front wall of the housing would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the biasing channel is formed between the rib and the front surface of the elongated portion. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of know elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, rearranging the biasing channel to be formed between the rib and the front surface of the elongated portion would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ito et al. US 20150115618 A1 – comprises a lid lock device including a housing configured to be fixed to a vehicle; a lock member configured to be movably assembled in the housing and to lock a lid of the vehicle in a closed state; a driving source configured to be assembled in the housing and to drive the lock member toward a side where the lock is released; a side surface through-hole formed at a position that opposes a side surface of the lock member in the housing; and a protrusion which is formed in a side surface of the lock member, passes through the side surface through-hole to protrude from the housing, and receives a manual operation force for moving the lock member toward the side where the lock is released.
Barrios et al. US 11807056 B2 – comprises an apparatus including a tow hook configured to extend in a first direction from a surface of a vehicle and to receive a towing line. A mount is configured to secure the tow hook to the surface. The mount is configured to maintain a position of the tow hook relative to the surface in response to a pulling force being applied to the tow hook in a first direction away from the surface of the vehicle. The mount is further configured to enable the tow hook to move relative to the surface in response to the tow hook incurring a force in a second direction, wherein the second direction is at least partially toward the surface of the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohamed Medani whose telephone number is (703)756-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00 am - 7:30 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.
/Mohamed M Medani/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/JACOB D KNUTSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights