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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 11/11/2024 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because the foreign document (DE 10084957 T1) and the non-patent literature document (Examination report Appln No. DE 10 2023 131 734.2 dated November 14, 2023) are not translated to English. However, an English version of DE 10084957 T1 has been found and is identified as WO 0118522 A1. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because
The loading assemblies (first 104, second 108, third 110, fourth 106, and fifth 111) are pointed out too broadly in both figures. It is unclear exactly what components comprises the “load assembly”. In addition, the axis of 154 and 158 are not shown as clearly as the Wheel axis (A). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Component 174 in figure 2 is not identified in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Each loading assembly is unclear which transfer element, lever element, axis, and drive rods are used. It is necessary to clearly label which element is associated with each loading assembly. The specification describes many elements associated with other loading assemblies, so it is unclear of what is the “loading assembly”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 introduces first, second, third, and fourth loading assemblies that are not clearly described in the specification or figures, rendering them indefinite or distinct.
Claims 2-15 are rejected due to their dependency of claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “a transfer element…”, “a first transfer element…”, and “the transfer element”. The wording for “transfer element” is confusing which renders the claim indefinite.
Claims 3-11 are rejected due to their dependency of claim 2.
Claim 8 recites “the second axis” which is unclear in both figures and specification rendering the claim indefinite.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected due to their dependency of claim 8.
Claim 9 recites “lever arm” however, the specification recites “lever element” which is not consistent and renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 10 is rejected due to their dependency of claim 9.
Note the examiner may have missed a specific element that has not been identified. Please ensure that all generic elements are clearly labelled in figures, specification, and claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 1-15 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 1-15 are allowable over the closest prior art reference by Godau et al. (EP 0114327A2, hereafter, Godau).
As per claim 1, Godau teaches the following:
“An apparatus for introducing force in a test vehicle, wherein the apparatus comprises the following: a wheel adapter element configured so as to be connected to a test vehicle;” para 2-4 on page 21;
“… a first loading assembly for moving the wheel adapter element in a first, in particular translational, direction;” 15a in fig 5; para 2 on page 23;
“… a second loading assembly for moving the wheel adapter element in a second, in particular translational, direction, wherein the second direction extends substantially orthogonal to the first direction;” 16a in fig 5; para 2 on page 23;
“… a third loading assembly for moving the wheel adapter element in a third, in particular translational, direction, wherein the third direction extends substantially orthogonal to the first and second directions;” 17a in fig 5; para 2 on page 23;
“… a fourth loading assembly for rotating the wheel adapter element about a wheel axis (A),” 17c and force introduction element 11 in fig 5; para 3 of page 23;
“… wherein the first, second, and third loading assemblies are connected to the wheel adapter element via a common three-joint node.”, 13 in fig 5; para 4 of page 23.
Godau does not teach a fourth rotating loading assembly that is parallel to the third direction.
Gong et al. (CN 208705062U) teaches a rotating loading assembly. However, it fails to teach the fourth loading assembly that is parallel to the third, and a ball joint for the three loading assemblies.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tessalie A. Caze-Cortes whose telephone number is (571)270-3235. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am to 4pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at 5712724107. 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.
/TESSALIE A. CAZE-CORTES/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights