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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the ramp frame of claim 1, 12 and 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 2, 9, 10, 11, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perrot (US 5,249,532) in view of Dennison (EP 3141422 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Perrot teaches, a tow cart comprising:
a main frame (1) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end (fig. 1 – tow cart with first and second end);
a first bogie (fig. 1 – first bogie supporting rail cart) supporting the main frame proximal the first end of the main frame;
a ramp frame (2) comprising:
a first end proximal to the second end of the main frame, a second end opposite to the first end of the ramp frame (fig. 8 – ramp has first and second end proximal and opposite to first end of ramp frame),
the ramp frame being shiftably connected (rotatable around axis (6)) to the second end of the main frame between a ramp position in which the second end of the ramp frame is proximal to the ground and a stowed position in which the second end of the ramp frame is distal to the ground (fig. 7/8 – shows ramp in stowed and extended position),
and one or more actuators (19) connected to the main frame and the second bogie and configured to shift the second bogie so that the one or more ramp engagement surfaces engage the one or more guide members to shift the ramp frame from the ramp position to the stowed position (actuator engages ramp engagement surfaces to lower and raise ramp, does not explicitly shift second bogie to lower/raise ramp).
Perrot fails to teach,
and one or more guide members;
a second bogie shiftably supporting the main frame proximal the second end of the main frame and including one or more ramp engagement surfaces operable to engage the one or more guide;
However, Dennison teaches,
and one or more guide members (18);
a second bogie (10) shiftably supporting the main frame proximal the second end of the main frame and including one or more ramp engagement surfaces (18) operable to engage the one or more guide members (fig. 1 and 2 – show bogie shifting to adjust chassis length of trailer and engaging guide members);
Perrot and Dennison are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field Rail trailer construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position. Perrot teaches, a rail cart with an actuated ramp, but does not explicitly teach the shiftably supported bogie as taught by Dennison. Dennison teaches a ramp member, combining the two lowers the angle of entry for a ramp member during loading and allows the shifting of the bogie and actuation of the ramp to be controlled by a single actuator.
Regarding claim 2, Perrot fails to teach, The tow cart of claim 1,
further comprising a plurality of track rollers connected proximal to the second end of the main frame and supported by the second bogie,
wherein the second bogie comprises two or more roller engagement surfaces that support the plurality of track rollers.
However, Dennison teaches, The tow cart of claim 1,
further comprising a plurality of track rollers (26) connected proximal to the second end of the main frame and supported by the second bogie (fig. 7 – rollers support second bogie top surface),
wherein the second bogie comprises two or more roller engagement surfaces that support the plurality of track rollers (fig. 7 – second bogie (10) has surface for rollers to slide on).
Perrot and Dennison are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field of rail trailer construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie with rollers that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position for the reasons disclosed above.
Regarding claim 9, Perrot teaches, The tow cart of claim 1,
further comprising an engine (59 – hydraulic motor) supported by the main frame and configured to supply power to the one or more actuators.
Regarding claim 10, Perrot teaches, the tow cart of claim 1,
further comprising a plurality of extendable legs (8) pivotally connected to sides of the main frame for engaging the ground for lateral stability.
Regarding claim 11, Perrot teaches, the tow cart of claim 1,
further comprising a hinge (6) connecting the main frame and the ramp frame (fig. 6-8 – show ramp (2) rotating around hinge).
Regarding claim 17, Perrot teaches, A tow cart comprising:
a main frame (1) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end (fig. 1 – tow cart with first and second end);
a first bogie (fig. 1 – first bogie supporting rail cart) supporting the main frame proximal the first end of the main frame;
a ramp frame (2) comprising:
a first end proximal to the second end of the main frame, a second end opposite to the first end of the ramp frame (fig. 8 – ramp has first and second end proximal and opposite to first end of ramp frame),
the ramp frame being shiftably connected (rotatable around axis (6)) to the second end of the main frame between a ramp position in which the second end of the ramp frame is proximal to the ground and a stowed position in which the second end of the ramp frame is distal to the ground (fig. 7/8 – shows ramp in stowed and extended position),
Perrot fails to teach,
one or more guide members;
a plurality of track rollers connected proximal to the second end of the main frame;
and a second bogie having two or more roller engagement surfaces that support the plurality of track rollers so that the second bogie is shiftable relative to the main frame and one or more ramp engagement surfaces operable to engage the one or more guide members to shift the ramp frame from the ramp position to the stowed position.
However, Dennison teaches,
and one or more guide members (18);
a plurality of track rollers (26) connected proximal to the second end of the main frame (fig. 7 – rollers support second bogie top surface)
a second bogie (10) shiftably supporting the main frame proximal the second end of the main frame and including one or more ramp engagement surfaces (18) operable to engage the one or more guide members (fig. 1 and 2 – show bogie shifting to adjust chassis length of trailer and engaging guide members);
Perrot and Dennison are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field of rail trailer construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie with rollers that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position for the reasons disclosed above.
Regarding claim 18, Perrot teaches, The tow cart of claim 17,
further comprising one or more actuator (19) configured to shift the second bogie relative to the main frame so that the one or more ramp engagement surfaces shift along the one or more guide members to lower the ramp frame from the stowed position to the ramp position (actuator engages ramp engagement surfaces to lower and raise ramp, does not explicitly shift second bogie to lower/raise ramp).
Claims 3, 12, 13, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perrot (US 5,249,532) in view of Dennison (EP 3141422 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jackson (US 4562775).
Regarding claim 3, Neither Perrot or Dennison teach, the tow cart of claim 2,
wherein the second bogie comprises:
a pair of longitudinally spaced axles;
wheels connected to the axles;
a plurality of bearings rotatably attached to the axles;
a base assembly supported on the plurality of bearings;
a middle assembly rotatably mounted on the base assembly so that the middle assembly is operable rotate about a longitudinal axis;
and a top assembly rotatably mounted on the middle assembly so that the top assembly is operable rotate about a vertical axis.
However, Jackson teaches, the tow cart of claim 2,
A second bogie (1) comprising:
a pair of longitudinally spaced axles (fig. 3 – 7/9);
wheels (5) connected to the axles;
a plurality of bearings (11) rotatably attached to the axles;
a base assembly (13/17) supported on the plurality of bearings;
a middle assembly (63) rotatably mounted on the base assembly so that the middle assembly is operable rotate about a longitudinal axis (fig. 4 – middle assembly (63) is connected to base assembly (13) and can rotate around (87);
a top assembly (27) rotatably mounted on the middle assembly so that the top assembly is operable rotate about a vertical axis (fig. 3 - top assembly can rotate around cylindrical boss (29);
Perrot, Dennison and Jackson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the field Rail rolling stock construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position and the multi-level bogie assembly taught by Jackson. Both Perrot or Dennison include bogies, but do not explicitly detail their construction, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot and Dennison to use the bogie construction taught by Jackson to accommodate lateral movement of the bogies during loading/unloading processes.
Regarding claim 12, Perrot teaches, A tow cart comprising:
a main frame (1) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end (fig. 1 – tow cart with first and second end);
a first bogie supporting the main frame proximal the first end of the main frame (fig. 1 – first bogie supporting rail cart);
a ramp frame (2) comprising:
a first end proximal to the second end of the main frame, a second end opposite to the first end of the ramp frame (fig. 8 – ramp has first and second end proximal and opposite to first end of ramp frame),
the ramp frame being shiftably connected (rotatable around axis (6)) to the second end of the main frame between a ramp position in which the second end of the ramp frame is proximal to the ground and a stowed position in which the second end of the ramp frame is distal to the ground (fig. 7/8 – shows ramp in stowed and extended position),
Perrot fails to teach,
and one or more guide members;
and a second bogie shiftably supporting the main frame proximal the second end of the main frame
and comprising: a pair of longitudinally spaced axles;
wheels connected to the axles;
a plurality of bearings rotatably attached to the axles;
a base assembly supported on the plurality of bearings;
a middle assembly rotatably mounted on the base assembly so that the middle assembly is operable rotate about a longitudinal axis;
a top assembly rotatably mounted on the middle assembly so that the top assembly is operable rotate about a vertical axis;
and one or more ramp engagement surfaces operable to engage the one or more guide members to shift the ramp frame from the ramp position to the stowed position.
However, Dennison teaches,
and one or more guide members (18);
a second bogie (10) shiftably supporting the main frame proximal the second end of the main frame and including one or more ramp engagement surfaces (18) operable to engage the one or more guide members (fig. 1 and 2 – show bogie shifting to adjust chassis length of trailer and engaging guide members);
Perrot and Dennison are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field Rail trailer construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position. Perrot teaches, a rail cart with an actuated ramp, but does not explicitly teach the shiftably supported bogie as taught by Dennison. Dennison teaches a ramp member, combining the two lowers the angle of entry for a ramp member during loading and allows the shifting of the bogie and actuation of the ramp to be controlled by a single actuator.
Neither Perrot or Dennison teaches,
A bogie comprising:
a pair of longitudinally spaced axles;
wheels connected to the axles;
a plurality of bearings rotatably attached to the axles;
a base assembly supported on the plurality of bearings;
a middle assembly rotatably mounted on the base assembly so that the middle assembly is operable rotate about a longitudinal axis;
a top assembly rotatably mounted on the middle assembly so that the top assembly is operable rotate about a vertical axis;
However, Jackson teaches,
A second bogie (1) comprising:
a pair of longitudinally spaced axles (fig. 3 – 7/9);
wheels (5) connected to the axles;
a plurality of bearings (11) rotatably attached to the axles;
a base assembly (13/17) supported on the plurality of bearings;
a middle assembly (63) rotatably mounted on the base assembly so that the middle assembly is operable rotate about a longitudinal axis (fig. 4 – middle assembly (63) is connected to base assembly (13) and can rotate around (87);
a top assembly (27) rotatably mounted on the middle assembly so that the top assembly is operable rotate about a vertical axis (fig. 3 - top assembly can rotate around cylindrical boss (29);
Perrot, Dennison and Jackson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the field Rail rolling stock construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position and the multi-level bogie assembly taught by Jackson. Both Perrot or Dennison include bogies, but do not explicitly detail their construction, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot and Dennison to use the bogie construction taught by Jackson to accommodate lateral movement of the bogies during loading/unloading processes.
Regarding claim 13, Perrot teaches, The tow cart of claim 12,
and one or more actuators (19) connected to the main frame and the second bogie and configured to shift the second bogie so that the one or more ramp engagement surfaces engage the one or more guide members to shift the ramp frame from the ramp position to the stowed position (actuator engages ramp engagement surfaces to lower and raise ramp, does not explicitly shift second bogie to lower/raise ramp).
Regarding claim 14, Perrot teaches, The tow cart of claim 13,
wherein the one or more actuator (19) is configured to shift the second bogie relative to the main frame so that the one or more ramp engagement surfaces move along the one or more guide members to shift the ramp frame from the stowed position to the ramp position (actuator engages ramp engagement surfaces to lower and raise ramp, does not explicitly shift second bogie to lower/raise ramp).
Regarding claim 16, Perrot fails to teach, The tow cart of claim 12,
further comprising a plurality of track rollers connected proximal to the second end of the main frame,
wherein the top assembly comprises a plate that engages the plurality of track rollers to support the second end of the main frame.
However, Denison teaches, the tow cart of claim 12,
further comprising a plurality of track rollers (26) connected proximal to the second end of the main frame and supported by the second bogie (fig. 7 – rollers support second bogie top surface),
wherein the second bogie comprises two or more roller engagement surfaces that support the plurality of track rollers (fig. 7 – second bogie (10) has surface for rollers to slide on).
Perrot, Dennison and Jackson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the field Rail rolling stock construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position and the multi-level bogie assembly taught by Jackson for the reasons disclosed above.
Regarding claim 19, Perrot and Dennison fail to teach, the tow cart of claim 17,
wherein the one or more ramp engagement surfaces comprise rollers.
However, Jackson teaches, the tow cart of claim 17,
wherein the one or more ramp engagement surfaces (56) comprise rollers.
Perrot and Dennison are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they
are both in the field of rail trailer construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie with rollers that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position for the reasons disclosed above.
Perrot, Dennison and Jackson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are all in the field Rail rolling stock construction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Perrot’s rail car to include the shiftable supported bogie that is able to engage the guide members to shift the ramp from a lowered to a raised position and the multi-level bogie assembly taught by Jackson for the reasons disclosed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4–8, 15 and 20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Williams (US 5211413) – teaches a rail car with a shiftable bogie
Smith (US 3916799) – teaches a rail car with a shiftable ramp
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN SALVADOR MOSCOSO whose telephone number is (571)272-8604. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/J.S.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/SAUL RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights