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 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 1-3, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remus (US 11745638 B2) in view of Steffens and Crossman (US 20010035664 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Remus discloses a truck bed cover mounting frame, comprising: a frame body (Remus Annotated Figure 2); a clamping assembly (Remus Annotated Figure 2, each individual clamp forms a clamping assembly), … clamped to at least one side of a front panel of a truck bed (Remus Annotated Figure 2); and a connecting structure, configured to fixedly connect the frame body to a cover (Remus Col. 2 Lines 57-62 discloses a cover 60 that can be mounted to the frame body/ riser members. An arbitrary connecting structure, mentioned as Velcro, clamps or other attachment means exists to fixedly connect the frame body to a cover).
PNG
media_image1.png
590
858
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Remus fails to disclose a clamping assembly, connected to the frame body.
Steffans and Crossman teaches a clamping assembly (Paragraph [0043] discloses a bracket 160 that clamps onto side rail 200), connected to the frame body (Paragraph [0049] mentions that the bracket 160 is used to attach frame member/body 40 to the side rail 200. For this to occur, they must be connected).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take a clamp integrally attached to a portion of a frame body, as taught by Steffans and Crossman, and modify a frame body and clamping system, as disclosed by Remus, to replace a simple clamp resembling those bought from hardware stores because the integrally attached clamp provides a more durable attachment between the frame body and the truck bed sides.
Regarding claim 2, Remus, as modified by Steffans and Crossman, discloses the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 1, wherein the clamping assembly comprises a mounting element (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9) and a first bolt of the mounting element (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9) connected to the frame body (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9); a length direction of the first bolt is parallel to a thickness direction of the front panel of the truck bed (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9); and the first bolt is configured to apply a force to allow the mounting element to be tightly adhered to the at least one side of the front panel of the truck bed (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9, the mounting element is composed of two pieces joined by a bolt with a section of panel between them. The bolt applies a force that holds the two parts of the mounting element to the panel. The panel being a front panel is provided by Remus).
PNG
media_image2.png
567
884
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman disclose the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 2, wherein the mounting element comprise a first mounting element (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9) and a second mounting element (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9), wherein the first mounting element and the second mounting element are respectively clamped to two sides of the front panel of the truck bed (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9); the first mounting element is fixedly connected to the frame body (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9); and … and abuts against the second mounting element (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary states that abut means “to border on, to touch along an edge”. The bolt must necessarily touch the edge of the second mounting element as it passes through the second mounting element).
Remus as currently modified by Steffans and Crossman fail to disclose a structure where the first bolt is threaded to the frame body in the embodiment shown in Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9.
A different embodiment of Steffans and Crossman teaches a structure where the first bolt is threaded to the frame body (Steffans and Crossman Paragraph [0049] has bolts 156 and 157 pass through threaded holes 158 and 159 made in the mounting element 170. This mounting element is connected to the frame body).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the holes the first bolt pass through in the first mounting/clamping element, as disclosed by Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman, to be threaded, as taught by Steffans and Crossman, because a threaded hole will allow the bolt to apply more clamping force between the two objects it is being used to clamp together.
Regarding claim 7, Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman discloses the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 2, wherein the mounting element comprises a second clamping element (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9), and the second clamping element is clamped to a rear side of the front panel of the truck bed (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9, the inner surface the second clamping element is clamped to has the same orientation as the structure claimed to be the rear surface of the front panel of the truck bed in the third embodiment of the claimed invention).
PNG
media_image2.png
567
884
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman discloses the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 1, wherein the mounting frame is provided with a through hole (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9, the passage of a bolt through the mounting frame necessitates the existence of a through hole); the connecting structure comprises a second bolt embedded in the cover (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9); and the second bolt passes through the through hole and is threaded to a second nut (Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remus (US 11745638 B2) in view of Steffens and Crossman (US 20010035664 A1) and further in view of Hermon (US 3514152 A).
Regarding claim 4, Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman fail to disclose the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 3, wherein the first mounting element and/or the second mounting element are provided with an inner flange, wherein the inner flange is matched with the front panel of the truck bed in terms of shape.
Hermon teaches the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 3, wherein the first mounting element and/or the second mounting element are provided with an inner flange (Hermon Annotated Figure 2 shows a U shaped clamping element, which has an inner surface that forms an inner flange), wherein the inner flange is matched with the front panel of the truck bed in terms of shape (Hermon Annotated Figure 2, a U shaped structure approximates the shape of the front panel of the truck bed).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the first mounting element, as disclosed by Remus modified by Steffans and Crossman, and add a inner flange matched with the front panel of the truck bed in terms of shape, as taught by Hermon, because a inner flange matched with the front panel of the truck bed in terms of shape would have a larger contact are, with the increased contact area strengthening the connection between the first clamping element and the side panels of the truck bed.
PNG
media_image3.png
570
739
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman and further modified by Hermon disclose the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 4, wherein the second mounting element is provided with a limit groove for accommodating the first bolt (Steffans and Crossman Paragraph [0074] discloses an embodiment where a bracket nut 58 is integrated with the inner clamp plate/second mounting element 70. A limit groove is a structure that accommodates a bolt. A nut has a thread and a treaded hole accommodates a bolt. Therefore, the threading of a hole is a limit groove. Since the nut is integrated with the second mounting element, the second mounting element has a limit groove).
Regarding claim 6, Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman discloses The truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 2, wherein … ; the mounting element comprises a first clamping element (Steffan and Crossman Annotated Figure 9);.
Remus as currently modified by Steffans and Crossman fail to disclose a structure where the first bolt is threaded to the frame body … and the first clamping element is clamped to a front side of the front panel of the truck bed in the embodiment shown in Steffans and Crossman Annotated Figure 9.
A different embodiment of Steffans and Crossman teaches a structure where the first bolt is threaded to the frame body (Steffans and Crossman Paragraph [0049] has bolts 156 and 157 pass through threaded holes 158 and 159 made in the mounting element 170. This mounting element is connected to the frame body).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the holes the first bolt pass through in the first mounting/clamping element, as disclosed by Remus as modified by Steffans and Crossman, to be threaded, as taught by Steffans and Crossman, because a threaded hole will allow the bolt to apply more clamping force between the two objects it is being used to clamp together.
Remus, as further modified by Steffans and Crossman fail to disclose a structure where the first clamping element is clamped to a front side of the front panel of the truck bed.
Hermon teaches structure where the first clamping element is clamped to a front side of the front panel of the truck bed (Hermon Annotated Figure 2 shows structures 51 called U plates that wrap around the side panels of the truck bed such that the U plate is in contact with the inner and outer surfaces of the truck bed. Remus provides the use of structures on the side panels of the truck to mount on the front panel of the truck bed).
PNG
media_image3.png
570
739
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first clamping element, as disclosed in Remus modified by Steffans and Crossman, and modify the first clamping element to take on a U shape such that the first clamping element is in contact with and thereby clamped to the front side of the truck bed, as taught by Hermon, because the increased contact area would further strengthen the connection between the first clamping element and the side panels of the truck bed.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remus (US 11745638 B2) in view of Steffens and Crossman (US 20010035664 A1) and further in view of Dylweski (US 20230256800 A1).
Remus as modified by Steffens and Crossman discloses the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 7, wherein … and the first bolt passes through the frame body and is threaded to the second clamping element (Steffans and Crossman Paragraph [0074] discloses an embodiment where a bracket nut 58 is integrated with the inner clamp plate/second mounting element 70. Since there is a nut integrated with the second clamping mounting element and nuts have threads, the bolt that passes through the second clamping element is threaded to the second clamping element. Steffan and Crossman Annotated Figure 9 disclose the first bolt passing through the frame body/first mounting element).
Remus as modified by Steffens and Crossman fails to disclose the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 7, where in an inner side of the front panel of the truck bed is provided with a slot, and the second clamping element is embedded in the slot.
Dylweski teaches the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 7, wherein an inner side of the front panel of the truck bed is provided with a slot (Dylweski paragraph [0069] discloses a track clamp mount that attaches to a preexisting slot, it is known that truck bed panels may have preexisting slots), and the second clamping element is embedded in the slot (Dylweski paragraph [0069] mentions a clamp assembly that incorporates a track clamp mount 92, which forms a second clamping element).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to take the clamping assembly, as disclosed by Remus modified by Steffens and Crossman, and modify the clamping assembly into one optimized for mounting to a slot, as taught by Dyweski, to take advantage of any preexisting slots present on the front panel of the truck bed and use them to mount the truck cover to the vehicle.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remus (US 11745638 B2) in view of Steffens and Crossman (US 20010035664 A1) and further in view of Dylweski et al. (US 20200108702 A1).
Remus as modified by Steffens and Crossman fails to disclose the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 9, wherein the through hole is a kidney shaped hole; and a length direction of the kidney shaped hole is parallel to a length direction of the truck bed.
Dyweski teaches the truck bed cover mounting frame according to claim 9, wherein the through hole is a kidney shaped hole (Dyweski Annotated Figure 5, the through hole shown is a long slot. The kidney shaped hole of the truck bed cover frame is a slot of variable length, with the slot shown in figures 10 and 11 of the application being rather long. The through hole of Dyweski Annotated Figure 5 is a long slot similar to the long slot/kidney shaped hole of the application. Therefore, the through hole is kidney shaped); and a length direction of the kidney shaped hole is parallel to a length direction of the truck bed (Dyweski Annotated Figure 5, the kidney shaped hole is orthogonal to the surface of the closest truck panel. The clamp of Remus as modified by Steffens and Crossman is closest to the front panel because it clamps on the front panel. Since the kidney shaped hole is therefore orthogonal to the front panel, it extends in a length direction).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the making the through hole a kidney shaped hole parallel to a length direction of the truck bed allows for the truck cover to be mounted to a variety of truck beds with variable length.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL R SACKINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-0840. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 a.m. 6 p.m. ET..
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 5712705500. 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.
/G.R.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights