DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: foot-activated release mechanism in claims 2 and 3.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 9-12 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) and (a) (2) as being anticipated by US Patent 6401888 issued to Kuo (Here forth “Kuo”).
Regarding claim 1, Kuo discloses a bag, comprising: an elongated body configured to receive golf equipment (Fig 5 of Kuo, the bag shown comprises an elongated body that is capable of receiving golf equipment of a certain size);
a protective cover extending along a back side of the elongated body (Fig 3 of Kuo, groove 11 is formed by walls that are the protective cover and extend along the back side of the elongated body 1 of the bag), the protective cover comprising a recessed portion formed along a back side of the protective cover (Fig 3 of Kuo, Protective cover is formed by the walls that the groove 11 is formed within, the groove 11 is the recessed portion and is along the back side if the protective cover);
one or more wheels or rollers integrated with the protective cover (Fig 3 of Kuo, the wheel10 is within the groove 11/recessed portion of the protective cover); and
a leg assembly pivotably coupled to the protective cover (Fig 5 of Kuo, the leg assembly 2 is pivotably coupled to the protective cover as the protective cover is coupled to the elongated body 1),
wherein the leg assembly comprises (i) a leg member configured to move between a plurality of different locked positions (Fig 5 of Kuo, the leg assembly 3 can move between at least two locked positions as the pivot between elements 341 and 340 aid in locking the locked positions between the fully retracted position within the protective cover and fully extended position outside the protective cover), (ii) an additional wheel disposed on a distal end of the leg member (Fig 3 of Kuo, the leg assembly 3 contains an additional wheel 32), and (iii) a foot pedal provided along the leg member (Fig 5 of Kuo, the foot pedal 342 is provided along the leg member 3), wherein the foot pedal is configured to release the leg member from the plurality of different locked positions (Fig 5 of Kuo, the leg assembly 3 can move between at least two locked positions as the pivot between elements 341 and 340 aid in locking the locked positions between the fully retracted position within the protective cover and fully extended position outside the protective cover with the aid of foot pedal 342).
Regarding claim 2, Kuo further discloses wherein the leg assembly further comprises (iv) a foot-activated release mechanism configured to release the leg member from the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5 of Kuo, the foot-activated release mechanism includes elements 341, 340 and the pivot in-between those two elements).
Regarding claim 3, Kuo further discloses wherein the foot-activated release mechanism is provided within the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5-6 of Kuo, the foot-activated release mechanism includes elements 341, 340 and the pivot in-between; in the retracted position, the elements 341, 340 and the pivot in-between is provided within the recessed portion 11 of the protective cover).
Regarding claim 4, Kuo further discloses wherein the leg assembly comprises a hinged connection coupling the leg member to the protective cover (Fig 5-6 of Kuo, the leg assembly 3 comprises a hinged connection that can be seen between the elongated body 1 and leg assembly 3).
Regarding claim 5, Kuo further discloses wherein the hinged connection is disposed within the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5-6 of Kuo, the leg assembly 3 comprises a hinged connection that can be seen between the elongated body 1 and leg assembly 3 and is disposed within the recessed portion 11).
Regarding claim 6, Kuo further discloses, wherein the leg member is movable between (i) a retracted position in which at least a portion of the leg member is positioned within the recessed portion of the protective cover and (ii) an extended position in which at least a portion of the leg member is positioned outside of the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5-6 of Kuo).
Regarding claim 9, Kuo further discloses wherein the additional wheel is configured to swivel between (i) a first configuration in which the additional wheel is deployable to support or transport the bag and (ii) a second configuration in which the additional wheel is positionable within the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5-6 of Kuo, the wheel 32 swivels out via the leg assembly 3 between a first configuration and second configuration outside the recessed portion 11 and inside).
Regarding claim 10, Kuo further discloses wherein the additional wheel is configured to rotate about a first axis when the additional wheel is in the first configuration (Fig 5 of Kuo, the wheel 32 rotates about an axis).
Regarding claim 11, Kuo further disclose wherein the first axis is parallel to a rotational axis of the one or more wheels or rollers integrated with the protective cover (Fig 5 of Kuo, the rotational axis will across the axis of wheel 10 and the first axis will be across the axis of wheel 32 which are parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 12, Kuo further discloses wherein the additional wheel is configured to rotate about a second axis that is different than the first axis when the additional wheel is in the second configuration (Fig 6 of Kuo, the rotational axis will across the axis of wheel 10 and the second axis will be across the axis of wheel 32 which are parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 14, Kuo further discloses, wherein the leg member is movable between (i) a fully extended position in which the leg member is positioned along an upper portion of the elongated body and (ii) a retracted position in which at least a portion of the leg member is positioned within the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5-6 of Kuo).
Regarding claim 15, Kuo further discloses wherein the leg member is movable between (i) the fully extended position and (ii) one or more other extended positions in which at least a portion of the leg member is positioned outside of the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 5 of Kuo).
Regarding claim 16, Kuo further discloses wherein the protective cover includes a gap or a spacing provided along an upper edge of the protective cover (Fig 3 of Kuo, gap or spacing 11 is within the protective cover into which leg assembly 3 retracts).
Regarding claim 17, Kuo further discloses wherein the leg member is configured to pivot beyond the upper edge of the protective cover by moving through the gap or spacing provided along the upper edge of the protective cover (Fig 5 of Kuo).
Regarding claim 18, The bag of claim 14, further comprising a leg member receiving structure provided along the upper portion of the elongated body (Fig 3 of Kuo, leg member receiving structure 11 is within the protective cover into which leg assembly 3 retracts along a portion of the elongated body if the lower portion is considered everything below the wheel housing of wheels 10 and everything else is considered the upper portion), wherein the leg member is configured to lock into the leg member receiving structure to form a protective spine along the back side of the elongated body (Fig 1 of Kuo, leg member that is part of leg assembly 3 forms a protective spine along backside of the elongated body when received within leg receiving structure 11).
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 7-8 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo in view of US Patent 8764030 issued to Murphy (Here forth “Murphy”).
Regarding claim 7, Kuo does not expressly disclose wherein the additional wheel is rotatably coupled to the leg member.
Murphy discloses a similar bag that teaches wherein the additional wheel is rotatably coupled to the leg member (Fig 6 of Murphy, additional wheel 500 is rotatably couples via joint 514; the additional wheel 500 is configured to swivel about the distal end of the leg member 510).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kuo and Murphy before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the bag of Kuo to have the additional wheel be rotatable, as taught by Murphy, to advantageously adjust the angle of the wheel to aid the intended user.
Regarding claim 8, Kuo as modified includes all the limitations including wherein the additional wheel is configured to swivel about the distal end of the leg member (See the detailed description of the rejection of claim 7; Fig 6 of Murphy).
Regarding claim 19, Kuo as modified does not expressly disclose the limitation further comprising an actuator configured to release the leg member from the leg member receiving structure.
Murphy discloses a similar bag that teaches further comprising an actuator configured to release the leg member from the leg member receiving structure (Fig 2 of Kuo, handle 110 not only can be used to pull the bag after the additional leg 510 is deployed but is an actuator that when pulled in direction 112 deploys the legs).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kuo and Murphy before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the bag of Kuo to have the legs be deployed via actuator release, as taught by Murphy, to advantageously aid the user in easily deploying the additional leg.
Regarding claim 20, Kuo does not expressly disclose the limitation further comprising a panel or a layer of material configured to cover the recessed portion of the protective cover when the leg assembly is retracted into or positioned within the recessed portion of the protective cover.
Murphy further comprising a panel or a layer of material configured to cover the recessed portion of the protective cover when the leg assembly is retracted into or positioned within the recessed portion of the protective cover (Fig 1 of Murphy, material covers retracted legs when retracting within leg receiving portion).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Kuo and Murphy before them, when the application was filed, to have modified the bag of Kuo to have a layer of material configured to cover the recessed portion of the protective cover when the leg assembly is retracted into or positioned within the recessed portion of the protective cover , as taught by Murphy, to advantageously protect the additional legs when not in use.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo in view of US Patent 8033369 issued to Sherrell (Here forth “Sherrell”).
Regarding claim 13, Kuo does not expressly discloses wherein the second axis is skewed relative to a rotational axis of the one or more wheels or rollers integrated with the protective cover.
Sherrell disclose a similar bag that teaches wherein the second axis is skewed relative to a rotational axis of the one or more wheels or rollers integrated with the protective cover (Fig 5 of Sherrell, the second axis that would follow the axis of the additional wheel 620 is skewed relative to the rotation axis that would follow the axis of the wheels attached to the protective cover seen).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a bag where the second axis is skewed relative to the rotational axis, because Applicant has not disclosed why this position provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with Sherrell’s modified bag (details above) because they both would have the same reconfigurability, and operability. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Sherrell’s modified bag (details above) to obtain the invention as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA KAVINI TAMIL whose telephone number is (571)272-6655. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/JESSICA KAVINI TAMIL/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/DON M ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733