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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The claims generally contain numerous phrases and terms that appear to be a result of idiomatic issues that make the claims difficult to follow or fully ascertain their scope. The claims are generally narrative, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. Some pertinent examples are shown below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “3” has been used to designate both a first rotating shaft and a first pivot shaft.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Figs. 1-19 in the drawings are objected to because they are not clear and do not show the proper cross-hatching of the solid parts that are being shown in section. See MPEP 608.02 V (h) “Hatching must be used to indicate section portions of an object, and must be made by regularly spaced oblique parallel lines spaced sufficiently apart to enable the lines to be distinguished without difficulty. Hatching should not impede the clear reading of the reference characters and lead lines”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-3, 6, 8, 11, and 16 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(i) as being improper form because each claim must be presented as a single sentence. Claims 1-3, 6, 8, 11, and 16 contain multiple sentences. MPEP 608.01(m) states that “Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations.”
Claims 1-16 are objected to under MPEP 6-8.01(m) as being improper form because the claim contain multiple instances of improper capitalization following semicolons. Since each claim must be presented as a single sentence, the first word following a semicolon should not be capitalized unless otherwise required. Repeatedly
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-16 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.
Throughout the claims, elements are initially recited and subsequently introduced again using the indefinite article of “a” or “an”, rather than the definite article of “the” or another appropriate antecedent basis. For example, claim 1 initially recites “a guide rail system” and subsequently recites “a guide rail system” when referring to the previously recited element. Similar antecedent basis deficiencies repeatedly occur throughout claims 1-16. Accordingly, it is unclear whether such subsequently recited elements are intended to refer to the previously recited elements or to constitute additional elements. The claims therefore fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter regarded as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the second rotating shaft middle rubber strip (5A2) is provided with a protrusion of the second rotating shaft rubber strip (34).” It is unclear whether the protrusion is part of the second rotating shaft rubber strip, is disposed on the second rotating shaft middle rubber strip, or whether some other structural relationship between these elements is intended.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35.U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite because the claim inconsistently refers to the element identified as reference numeral (3). Specifically, the claim initially recites a “first pivot shaft (3)” but subsequently recites a “first rotating shaft (3)”. It is unclear whether the first rotating shaft (3) is intended to refer to the previously recited first pivot shaft (3) or to a separate element.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the plate body" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the front plate fixing square head rod" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the vehicle body" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
These and any other informalities should be corrected so that the claims may particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant, regards as the invention, as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claims 1-2, 6, and 8, Gu et al. (U.S. 2021/0053427A1) disclose an embedded hard cover, characterized by comprising a car cover body and a guide rail system (see fig. 1 and refer to abstract), wherein the car cover body comprises a large front rail system (6), a large plate (4 or 5), a middle plate (3), a small plate (2), a first rotating shaft (13, fig. 3 and para 0049), a second rotating shaft (14, fig. 3 and para 0049), a guide rail system (see fig. 1), and a rear rail (1); One end of the large plate (4 or 5) is connected to a large front rail system (8), and the other end of the large plate (4 or 5) is connected between the middle plate (3) through a first rotating shaft (13; see fig. 3). The end of the middle plate (3) away from the large plate (4 or 5) is connected to the small plate (2) through a second rotating shaft (14), and the small plate (2) is connected to a rear rail (1); The guide rail system is connected to both ends of the car cover body (refer to para 0003).
However, Gu et al. fail to teach the limitations of: The large front rail system (6) comprises a large front rail (12), a front large plate pad (13), and a front plate buckle (14). The large front rail (12) is provided with a large front rail central hole (1201) and a large front rail edge hole (1202), and the large front rail edge hole (1202) is equipped with a front plate lock (17). The large front rail central hole (1201) corresponds to a front plate unlocking mechanism (21); The first rotating shaft (3) comprises a right rotating shaft (31), a first rotating shaft rubber strip (32), a middle rotating shaft (33), a second rotating shaft rubber strip (34), and a left rotating shaft (35). The right rotating shaft (3 1) and the middle rotating shaft (33) are connected by the first rotating shaft rubber strip (32), and the left rotating shaft (35) and the middle rotating shaft (33) are connected by the second rotating shaft rubber strip (34). The upper surfaces of the first rotating shaft rubber strip (32) and the second rotating shaft rubber strip (34) are both provided with first rotating shaft rubber strip protrusions (3202); The second rotating shaft (SA) comprises a second rotating shaft left rod (5A1), a second rotating shaft middle rubber strip (5A2), and a second rotating shaft right rod (5A3). The second rotating shaft left rod (SA1) and the second rotating shaft right rod (5A3) are connected by the second rotating shaft middle rubber strip (5A2), and the second rotating shaft middle rubber strip (5A2) is provided with a protrusion of the second rotating shaft rubber strip (34).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Muirhead (U.S. 2024/0318480A1) and Qiu et al. (U.S. 2024/0100921A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YANICK A AKARAGWE whose telephone number is (469)295-9298. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7:30-5:30.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571) 272-5405. 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.
/YANICK A AKARAGWE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights