DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Upon Reconsideration, the Non-Final Rejection mailed on February 5, 2026 is vacated. The New Non-Final Rejection is set forth as follows:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 3-11, 13, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saxon et al. (US 7,072,763 B2).
Regarding claim 1, notes Figure 1, Saxon invention teaches a method for loading a trailer [col. 2, lines 11-12 teaches the present invention relates to a system for optimizing load distribution on a tractor/trailer or other vehicle] comprising: providing a trailer (40) having at least two axles (28d, 28e) connected to a trailer chassis [Figures 3-4 illustrates trailer chassis] by independently adjustable suspension systems (suspension 50) [col. 4, lines 33-35 teaches a position sensors may also monitor position of suspension member (50) and the distance between the axle and a frame], the at least two axles (28d, 28e) including a frontmost axle (28d) and a rearmost axle (28e), the trailer (40) further comprising a kingpin (32) configured to be removably connected to a fifth wheel of a tractor (38) [Figure 1 illustrates the connection between the tractor (38) and trailer (40) via kingpin (32)]; a first loading step comprising loading the trailer (40) until a threshold load is reached on the kingpin [col. 4, lines 10-11 teaches loading at the tractor/trailer’s kingpin is determined and analyzed; Figure 5-8; and col.6, line 47-col. 7, line 33]; and a second loading step comprising: loading the trailer further and adjusting a suspension parameter of the rearmost axle to ensure that the load on the kingpin remains at or below the threshold load [Figure 5-8; and col.6, line 47-col. 7, line 33].
Regarding claim 3, as discussed in claim 1, Figures 5-8, which described a suspension parameter(s) are adjusted continuously while the trailer is being loaded.
Regarding claim 4, as discussed in claims 1 and 3, see Figures 5-8.
Regarding claim 5, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention further teaches calculating the threshold load based on parameters of a tractor (38) connectable to the trailer (40), the parameters including an admissible load on the axles (28a-28c) of the tractor (38), the wheelbase of the tractor [distance between front and rear axles (28a and 28c) of tractor (38), Figure 1] and the longitudinal position of the fifth wheel of the tractor relative to the axles [col. 5, lines 46-55 teaches Force F represents force through kingpin (32)…the value for F is determined from load sensors (24B-24H), Figures 1 and 5]. Furthermore, see col. 2, lines 30-40; col. 4, lines 50-54; and col. 6, line 47-col. 7, line 33.
Regarding claim 6, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention further teaches wherein adjusting the suspension parameter(s) includes reducing the load on the rearmost axle [Figures 5-6] to reduce a virtual wheelbase [Figure 8].
Regarding claim 7, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention further teaches wherein the suspension system includes air bags and the suspension parameter(s) is an air pressure in the respective air bags [col. 3, lines 46-49 teaches pressure sensors measuring load on a vehicle’s air suspension can also function as load sensors].
Regarding claim 8, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention further teaches wherein the mass of air in each airbags is regulated so as to set the ride height at a predetermined level and/or inclination [col. 4, lines 18-28].
Regarding claim 9, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention further teaches wherein the trailer (20) comprises load measurement devices [hand-held air pressure gauge] configured to assess or calculate the load on the kingpin and on each of the at least two axles, and the trailer further comprises a control unit which automatically performs the adjustment of the suspension parameter(s) based on the load measured or calculated by the load measurement devices [col. 4, lines 18-28; col. 5, lines 46-55; and col. 6, line 47-col. 7, line 33].
Regarding claim 10, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention further teaches the suspension parameter(s) is adjusted so as to increase the load on the frontmost axle up to a predetermined threshold [Figures 5-8].
Regarding claim 11, as above discussion, notes Figures 5-7, Saxon invention further teaches before or after loading the trailer, connecting the trailer (40) to a tractor (38), the tractor (38) having at least one driving axle; moving the tractor (38) and the trailer (40); and adjusting suspension parameters to increase the load on the driving axle(s) of the tractor (38) and on a driving axle of the trailer (40), while ensuring that the load on the kingpin remains equal or less than the threshold load [Figure 8].
Regarding claim 12, see discussions in claims 1 and 11.
Regarding claim 13, see rejection in claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, see rejection in claim 9.
Regarding claim 16, see rejection in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 2 and 18 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over Saxon in view of DE102012015554 A [hereinafter as ‘554 Patent].
Regarding claim 2, Saxon invention fails to specifically teaches three axles which would be included the frontmost axle, the rear most axle and an intermediate axle.
Notes Figure 1, ‘554 Patent teaches a dump truck (1) includes a semi-trailer (2) and a trailer [dump body (3)]; the trailer (3) comprising the frontmost axle (21), the rearmost axle (24), and an intermediate axle (22/23); and the trailer (3) further includes a control device (52) is controlling and/or adjusting the suspension device (20).
Since the prior art references are both from the same field of endeavor. The purpose disclosed by ‘554 Patent would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Saxon invention.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary in the art to have modified the new configuration structure for the trailer which would be included the frontmost axle (21), the rearmost axle (24), and an intermediate axle (22/23) as taught by ‘554 Patent in to the Saxon invention for the purpose of providing more weight and/or load to the trailer.
Regarding claim 18, as discussed and motivated in claim 2, the modified Saxon further teaches adjusting the suspension parameter(s) includes reducing the load on the rear most axle and on an intermediate axle to reduce the virtual wheelbased.
7. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over Saxon in view Tuhro et al. (US 2020/0164711 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Saxon invention fails to specifically teaches adjusting suspension parameters to reduce a virtual wheelbase when the speed of the tractor and trailer is below a given threshold.
Tuhro invention teaches a system and method for adjusting the air suspension system based on the vehicle inputs; wherein the vehicle inputs may include, but are not limited to vehicle speed…[para.0014]; Para. 0005 further teaches This occurs when the vehicle is towing an improperly balanced trailer, and exceeds the critical damping speed of the system. The critical damping speed of a vehicle/trailer is primarily a function of vehicle cornering stiffness, trailer loading, mass, and trailer/vehicle geometry.
Since the prior art references are both from the same field of endeavor. The purpose disclosed by Tuhro invention would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Saxon.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary in the art to have provided the teaching of using the speed of the tractor and trailer is below a given threshold as a condition or input for adjusting the suspension parameter as taught by Tuhro invention into the system of Saxon for the purpose of preventing the extra weight that can be loaded from the speed of tractor and trailer.
8. Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over Saxon in view of Oldeide et al. (US 2021/0107349 A1).
Regarding claim 15, as discussed in claim 1, Saxon invention fails to specifically teaches wherein at least one of the at least two axles is an electrically driven axle.
Oldeide invention teaches a vehicle (10) includes a tractor portion (14) and trailer portion (16); Trailer portion (16) may include a frame 18 that supports a plurality of wheels 20. As shown in FIG. 2, frame (18) may support a first pair of wheels (22) supported by a first electric axle (e-axle 24) and a second pair of wheels (28) supported by a second electric axle (e-axle 30) [para. 0049 and Figure 2]
Since the prior art references are both from the same field of endeavor. The purpose disclosed by Oldeide invention would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Saxon.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary in the art to have provided a trailer with at least one of electrically driven axle as taught by Oldeide invention to modify the system of Saxon for the purpose of increasing the payload as the legally allowed load on the driven axle to be higher than the allowed load on the other axle (idle axle).
Regarding claim 17, see discussion and motivation in claim 15.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHNNY H HOANG whose telephone number is (571) 272-4843. The examiner can normally be reached on [Monday-Friday [Maxi-Flex]].
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, Logan Kraft can be reached on (571) 270-5065. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)? If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.H.H./
May 2, 2026
/Johnny H. Hoang/
Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/LOGAN M KRAFT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights