DETAILED ACTION
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 4 and 5 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 4 recites “where each of the pair of holes align with corresponding holes in the digital license plate” which is indefinite. The “digital license plate” is never positively recited by any of the preceding claims. Rather, claim 1 recites “at least one tab is configured to at least partially secure a digital license plate to the cover”. Thus, it is unclear whether a digital license plate, or components of the plate (e.g. corresponding holes) are actually claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Currat (CH 706,259) (See NPL for English Translation).
In respect to claim 1, Currat discloses a license plate cover comprising: a front plate 3 having a cutout portion configured to expose an underlying license plate (and capable of exposing a digital license plate)* (Fig. 3); a plurality of side walls connecting to a perimeter of the front plate, including a top wall and a bottom wall, wherein all of the side walls are perpendicular to the front plate (Fig. 4); and at least one tab 6’ connected to the top wall (Figs. 4-5), wherein the at least one tab is configured to secure a license plate 1 to the cover (Fig. 6). *Note: a “digital” license plate does not confer any special properties or differences, as far as its dimensions. Any capability to secure a traditional license plate, extends to the same capability for a digital license plate, as broadly claimed.
In respect to claims 2 and 3, Currat discloses that a bottom portion of the front plate comprises at least one mounting feature (pair of holes) 8 configured to secure the (digital) license plate and over to a vehicle (Figs. 2-3).
In respect to claims 6 and 8, Currat discloses that the at least one tab is parallel to the front plate (Fig. 6) and consists of two tabs 6’ (Fig. 3).
In respect to claims 9 and 10, Currat does not disclose any particular dimensions of the device, specifically, a width of the side walls (distance from the perimeter of the front plate to a “free end” of the plurality of side walls (including the front and bottom wall)), however, one of ordinary skill in the art can readily ascertain this ambiguous distance as at least 4mm from the Drawings in either the thickness (Fig. 4) or the distance from the cutout to the perimeter (Fig. 3).
In respect to claims 11 and 12, Currat discloses that the front plate includes one or more mounting holes 9 below a lowermost extend of the cut out portion (only in the lower half) (Fig. 3).
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Masanek, Jr et al. (US 2014/0331530).
In respect to claim 1, Masanek, Jr. et al. disclose a license plate cover comprising: a front plate 100 having a cutout portion configured to expose an underlying license plate 108 (and capable of exposing a digital license plate)* (Fig. 3); a plurality of side walls connecting to a perimeter of the front plate, including a top wall and a bottom wall, wherein all of the side walls are perpendicular to the front plate; and at least one tab 114 connected to the top wall (Fig 1), wherein the at least one tab is configured to secure a license plate 108 to the cover (Fig. 1). *Note: a “digital” license plate does not confer any special properties or differences, as far as its dimensions. Any capability to secure a traditional license plate, extends to the same capability for a digital license plate, as broadly claimed.
In respect to claims 2 and 3, Masanek, Jr. et al. discloses that a bottom portion of the front plate comprises at least one mounting feature (pair of holes) on bottom tabs 114, configured to secure the (digital) license plate and over to a vehicle (Fig. 1).
In respect to claim 4, Masanek, Jr. et al. disclose that the (digital) license plate has a pair of holes 110 which align with the corresponding holes of the front plate (Fig. 1).
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chadwick (US 1,776,618).
Chadwick discloses a license plate cover comprising: a front plate 2 having a cutout portion configured to expose an underlying license plate 2a (and capable of exposing a digital license plate)* (Fig. 1); a plurality of side walls connecting to a perimeter of the front plate, including a top wall and a bottom wall, wherein all of the side walls are perpendicular to the front plate; and at least one tab 2b is a single continuous tab and is connected to the top wall (Fig. 5), wherein the at least one tab is configured to secure a license plate 2a to the cover (Fig. 1). *Note: a “digital” license plate does not confer any special properties or differences, as far as its dimensions. Any capability to secure a traditional license plate, extends to the same capability for a digital license plate, as broadly claimed.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masanek, Jr et al. (US 2014/0331530) in view of Camisasca et al. (US 2019/0291662).
Masanek, Jr. et al. substantially disclose the claimed invention including a fastener 112 that extends through each pairs of holes, but do not disclose an “anti-theft assembly” comprising a base and cap which define an interior space to receive a head of the fasteners, however, Camisasca et al. teach a very similar fastener assembly for a license plate (Fig. 13), wherein the fasteners may further include an “anti-theft assembly” including a base 38 and cap 16, which define an interior space for the fastener head (Fig. 12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the effective filing date of the present application to provide the fasteners taught in Masanek, Jr. et al. with the “anti-theft assembly” taught in Camisasca et al. to prevent overtightening of the fastener (Abstract). Although “anti-theft” is merely an intended use of the structural cap and base (and thus irrelevant to the taught structure), it is further noted that the cap, per se, may be considered “anti-theft” due to hiding of the fastener.
Claims 9 and 10 are additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Currat (CH 706,259) (See NPL for English Translation).
Although the dimensions disclosed would be readily inferred from the Drawings of Currat, it further would have been obvious to select the incredibly large array of dimensions claimed (over 4mm) where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Umoh (US 2019/0381957), Pacleb (US 2008/0034625), and Lee Yang (US 2012/0096747), disclose similar inventions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT GRABOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3518. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm.
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, Daniel Troy, can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
/KYLE R GRABOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637