DETAILED ACTION
The following action is in response to application 18/979,455 filed on December 12, 2024.
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 Objections
Claim 7 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 6. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
It is suggested applicant amend claim 6 to depend on claim 1 instead of claim 2.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 2, “the rear of the upper frame section” should be replaced with “a rear of the upper frame section.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretations
In Claim 1, the limitation of “a plurality of upper vehicle mounts configured to mount the hardtop shell to the top of a vehicle” has been interpreted as mounts connected to the hardtop (at any location) that will mount the hardtop to the top of a vehicle (when can be the top of a cab, frame, truck bed, etc.).
The limitation of “a hardtop shell” has been interpreted as any hardtop body with the claimed structure of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Richters (US 5738405). With regard to claim 1, Richters teaches a hardtop shell for a vehicle, comprising: an upper frame section 7a comprising: a plurality of upper vehicle mounts 21/29 (Col. 5, lines 32-35) configured to mount the hardtop shell to the top of a vehicle; and one or more upper accessory mounts (for 12/10); a rear section 7b/7d/14a; and a pair of side sections 7b/7c/7d, each adjacent to the rear section. With regard to claim 2, Richters teaches the shell, wherein the upper frame section comprises a central opening therethrough (Fig. 5). With regard to claim 3, Richters teaches the shell, wherein the upper frame section comprises a further plurality of hardtop accessory mounts (left and right sides for mounting either 12 or 10) configured to mount an accessory 12/10 over the opening of upper frame section. With regard to claim 4, Richters teaches the shell, wherein the rear section comprises one or more rear accessory mounts 47. With regard to claim 5, Richters teaches the shell, wherein the rear section comprises a central opening therethrough (Fig. 5). With regard to claims 6 and 7, Richters teaches the shell, wherein the side sections each comprise one or more side accessory mounts 42. With regard to claim 8, Richters teaches the shell, wherein the upper frame section comprises one or more seals 22/23/24 around edges of the upper frame section configured to abut the top of the vehicle. With regard to claim 12, Richters teaches the shell, further comprising at least one lower vehicle mounts configured to mount the hardtop shell to the vehicle in a separate location than the plurality of upper vehicle mounts (Col. 3, lines 56-59). With regard to claim 13, Richter teaches a hardtop for a vehicle, comprising a hardtop shell comprising: an upper frame section 7a comprising: a plurality of upper vehicle mounts 21/29 (Col. 5, lines 32-35) configured to mount the hardtop shell to the top of a vehicle; and one or more upper accessory mounts (for 12/10); a rear section 7b/7d/14a comprising one or more rear accessory mounts 47; and a pair of side sections 7b/7d/7c, each adjacent to the rear section and comprising one or more side accessory mounts 42; and at least one accessory 12/10 mounted to one of the upper frame section, 39 the rear section, or 11a one of the pair of side sections. With regard to claim 14, Richters teaches the hardtop, wherein the at least one accessory comprises one or more of a roof rack, a gull wing, a window 39, a panel, or a door.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Facchinello (US 20230373570). With regard to claim 1, Facchinello teaches a hardtop shell for a vehicle, comprising: an upper frame section 106 comprising: a plurality of upper vehicle mounts (paragraph 36) configured to mount the hardtop shell to the top of a vehicle; and one or more upper accessory mounts (paragraph 49); a rear section 104/106; and a pair of side sections 104, each adjacent to the rear section. With regard to claim 2, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the upper frame section comprises a central opening therethrough (Fig. 3). With regard to claim 3, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the upper frame section comprises a further plurality of hardtop accessory mounts (paragraphs 49 and 54) configured to mount an accessory 120 over the opening of upper frame section. With regard to claim 4, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the rear section comprises one or more rear accessory mounts (paragraph 49). With regard to claim 5, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the rear section comprises a central opening therethrough (Fig. 2). With regard to claims 6 and 7, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the side sections each comprise one or more side accessory mounts (paragraph 49). With regard to claim 10, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the one or more upper accessory mounts comprise a plurality of mounting holes arranged along each longitudinal side of the upper frame section (paragraph 49; Fig. 3). With regard to claim 11, Facchinello teaches the shell, wherein the one or more upper accessory mounts comprise a plurality of mounting holes (paragraph 49) arranged along a rear of the upper frame section, adjacent to the rear section (@ 108” or end of 106).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richter as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Durham (US 20230137099). With regard to claim 9, Richters teaches the shell, but lacks the specific teaching wherein the upper frame section 7a comprises one or more seals around the central opening to provide a seal between the accessory and the upper frame section. Durham teaches a similar hardtop shell comprising: an upper frame section 102 with a central opening (Fig. 2) with an accessory 104 mounted over the opening, wherein the upper frame section comprises one or more seals 106 around the central opening to provide a seal between the accessory 104 and the upper frame section 102. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify Richters to employ one or more seals around the central opening in view of Durham with reasonable expectation for success in order to prevent water from entering the vehicle.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richters as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Craig (US 20190366820). With regard to claim 15, Richters teaches the hardtop, wherein the shell is metal (Col. 4, lines 42-43), but lacks the specific teaching wherein the shell comprises aluminum. Craig teaches a similar hardtop shell (Fig. 1), wherein parts comprise of aluminum (paragraph 17). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify Richters to employ aluminum as the metal with reasonable expectation for success in view of Craig in order to produce a lightweight yet structurally stable hardtop shell material. Also, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bulldawg (available in the year 2020) has been cited to show a similar hardtop shell comprising: a top, side and rear frame section, the top section having a central opening with a seal (around the window) for an accessory (window) and holes alongside the opening (screw holes for the roof rack rails), a rear accessory (rear window) and side accessories (side windows), a plurality of upper vehicle mounts and lower vehicle mounts (at stock mount points on the Jeep Wrangler LJ).
Block (US 20040007900) has been cited to show a similar hardtop shell comprising: an upper frame 108, a rear section 106, side sections 104, a seal between the shell and top of the vehicle (paragraph 24), holes for accessories on the rear and sides (screw holes for the hinges (paragraph 32).
Gemayel (US 20240375495) has been cited to show a similar hardtop shell 110 comprising: an upper frame 121, mounts to mount the upper section to the top of a vehicle (paragraph 20), a rear section 140, side section 135, and seals 300.
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
Submission of your response by facsimile transmission is encouraged. The central facsimile number is (571) 273-8300. Recognizing the fact that reducing cycle time in the processing and examination of patent applications will effectively increase a patent's term, it is to your benefit to submit responses by facsimile transmission whenever permissible. Such submission will place the response directly in our examining group's hands and will eliminate Post Office processing and delivery time as well as the PTO's mail room processing and delivery time. For a complete list of correspondence not permitted by facsimile transmission, see MPEP 502.01. In general, most responses and/or amendments not requiring a fee, as well as those requiring a fee but charging such fee to a deposit account, can be submitted by facsimile transmission. Responses requiring a fee which applicant is paying by check should not be submitting by facsimile transmission separately from the check.
Responses submitted by facsimile transmission should include a Certificate of Transmission (MPEP 512). The following is an example of the format the certification might take:
I hereby certify that this correspondence is being facsimile transmitted to the Patent and Trademark Office (Fax No. (571) 273-8300) on ____________ (Date)
Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate: _____________________________________
_____________________________________
(Signature)
If your response is submitted by facsimile transmission, you are hereby reminded that the original should be retained as evidence of authenticity (37 CFR 1.4 and MPEP 502.02). Please do not separately mail the original or another copy unless required by the Patent and Trademark Office. Submission of the original response or a follow-up copy of the response after your response has been transmitted by facsimile will only cause further unnecessary delays in the processing of your application; duplicate responses where fees are charged to a deposit account may result in those fees being charged twice.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROGER L PANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 05:30-16:00.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at 571-270-3415. 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.
/ROGER L PANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/ROGER L. PANG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3655B
August 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights