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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/29/2026.
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.
Limitations that are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) are “engaging means” from claim 5.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “transmission means”, “gear means”, and “drive means” in claims 1-3.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
At least claim 1 recites “hollow traverse rotatable shaft”, “shaft”, and “transverse rotatable shaft” when refereeing to element 4. Please use consistent terminology.
Claim 1 recites “the outer circumferential surface” on line 21-22 and “the inner surface” on line 23. These should read “an outer circumferential surface”, and “an inner surface” respectively.
Claim 4 recites “the electrical energy”, but should recite “electrical energy”
Claim 6 recites “the movement”, but should recite “movement”
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannan (US 20160236550) in view of Aimaq (US 20200031210), and Feldstein (US 20130126107).
Regarding claim 1, Hannan teaches a roll-up cover assembly for a truck bed including a rollable curtain (26) formed of a plurality of adjacent transverse panels (as shown in figs. 1 and 18) and a housing box (42) adapted to be mounted at the forward end of the truck bed (fig. 1) for receiving and storing said rollable curtain,
said housing box (42) comprising a hollow transverse rotatable shaft (44) mounted therein,
an electric motor assembly (48) adapted to be mounted by a user (the motor assembly is considered adapted to be mounted by a user, as it is mounted in the assembly), coaxially and slidably within the hollow transverse rotatable shaft (44, see fig. 11b), through an opening (on 132) arranged on a side wall of the housing box (42), to rotate said shaft (44);
a smart AI controller circuit board (162, it is noted that the term Smart-AI is intended use language and does not contribute to the structure of the apparatus) adapted to be mounted on the housing box (42) for receiving commanding signals from a remote controller or a smartphone device and driving the electric motor assembly (48) accordingly; and
a wiring harness (it is well understood that motors have at least two wires for power and ground and connectors, paragraph 126) comprising a plurality of connectors and wires, to connect the electric motor assembly to the controller circuit board (162) and to a power system of the vehicle (paragraph 126);
said electric motor assembly (48) comprising a substantially cylindrical outer housing (148), an electric motor (48) arranged within said outer housing and a transmission means (made of the gear means) comprising gear means (144) mounted to a first end section (left end) of said outer housing (148).
Hannan does not explicitly teach that the device is a conversion kit for converting a manually operated roll-up cover assembly for a truck bed to a motorized roll-up cover assembly, nor that the transmission means further comprises drive means mounted on said gear means for driving the transverse rotatable shaft; and wherein the drive means comprise engagement notches spaced about the outer circumferential surface thereof designed to be in driving engagement with depending portions arranged on the inner surface of the transverse rotatable shaft.
Aimaq teaches a conversion kit for converting a manually operated roll-up cover assembly for a truck bed to a motorized roll-up cover assembly (paragraph 42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hannan so that the device is a conversion kit from a manual cover to a motorized cover. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of automating the device, reducing effort on the part of a user and increasing convenience.
Feldstein teaches a roller device with a transmission means (shown in fig. 3) that comprises drive means (122) mounted on gear means (104 is considered the gear means) for driving a transverse rotatable shaft (114); and wherein the drive means comprise engagement notches (129) spaced about the outer circumferential surface thereof designed to be in driving engagement with depending portions arranged on the inner surface of the transverse rotatable shaft (as shown in fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hannan with teachings of Feldstein so that the transmission means further comprises drive means mounted on said gear means for driving the transverse rotatable shaft; and wherein the drive means comprise engagement notches spaced about the outer circumferential surface thereof designed to be in driving engagement with depending portions arranged on the inner surface of the transverse rotatable shaft. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of improving the connection between the components.
Regarding claim 2, modified Hannan includes the teachings of Feldstein and teaches that the drive means (122) are removably mounted on said gear means (104).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hannan includes the teachings of Feldstein and teaches that the drive means (122) comprise an internal shape (308 as shown in fig. 3 of Feldstein) that matches an external shape (124) of the gear means (104, see fig. 3), said shapes comprising tapered shapes or U-shapes (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, although modified Hanna does not explicitly teach that the electric motor assembly comprises a DC electric motor for converting the electrical energy of the vehicle into mechanical energy, Aimaq further teaches an electric motor that is direct current (per paragraph 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hannan so that the electric motor assembly comprises a DC electric motor for converting the electrical energy of the vehicle into mechanical energy. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of simplifying the device and allowing it to run off the vehicle battery.
Regarding claims 6-7, modified Hannan does not explicitly teach that the kit further comprises a remote-control element for remotely controlling the movement of the rollable curtain or any other electrical elements arranged on the rollable curtain, wherein the remote-control element includes a plurality of buttons allowing multiple inputs from the user.
Aimaq further teaches a remote-control element for remotely controlling the movement of the rollable curtain or any other electrical elements arranged on the rollable curtain (paragraphs 39-40), wherein the remote-control element includes a plurality of buttons allowing multiple inputs from the user (open and close are different buttons per paragraph 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hannan with teachings of Aimaq so that the kit further comprises a remote-control element for remotely controlling the movement of the rollable curtain or any other electrical elements arranged on the rollable curtain, wherein the remote-control element includes a plurality of buttons allowing multiple inputs from the user. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of making the device easier to use.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannan (US 20160236550) in view of Aimaq (US 20200031210), and Feldstein (US 20130126107) as applied above, and further in view of Brondex (US 20160376842).
Regarding claim 5, modified Hannan does not explicitly teach that a second end section of said outer housing comprises engaging means for engaging a side wall of said housing box.
Brondex teaches a roller unit with a second end section (left end in fig. 4) of an outer housing comprises engaging means for engaging a side wall of a housing box (described in paragraphs 103-106).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hannan so that a second end section of said outer housing comprises engaging means for engaging a side wall of said housing box. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of further securing the device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R SHEPHERD whose telephone number is (571)272-5657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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 Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/M.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights