DETAILED ACTION
This action is a first action on the merits. The claims filed on January 13, 2025 have been entered. Claims 1-10 are pending and addressed below.
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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
This application claims foreign priority to Chinese Application No. CN202411408358.8 filed on October 10, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on June 6, 2026 has been considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “frame assemblies” and the “frame connection structure” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the recitation of “The present invention”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No.12,391,101. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1-10 of the instant invention are anticipated by claim 1-6 of U.S. Patent No.12,391,101.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: they contain multiple periods (“.”) in the body of the claims. Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claim except for abbreviations. See Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2nd 1211 (D.D.C. 1995). 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 1-10 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. The following is a list of such examples that must be considered as merely examples and not encompassing all of the errors present in the claims.
Claim 1: The recitation of “It is characterized” in lines 1-2 is unclear as to what “It” is referring to. For example is “it” the car cover plate, rear trunk or the vehicle body.
The recitation of “it” in line 4 is unclear as to what “it” is referring to. For example is “it the cover plate or a plate material.
The limitation "the other frame" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The limitation "the periphery" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The limitation "the pickup truck body" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3: Claim 3 recites “a connecting piece” in line 4, As “a connecting piece” is set out in claim 2, it is unclear if the applicant is referring back to the original connecting piece or is setting out a new connecting piece in claim 3.
Claim 4: Claim 4 recites “the guide rail is installed on the left and right sides of the rear truck of the vehicle body” in line 2. As only a singular guide rail has been set forth in the claims, it is unclear as to how a single guide rail can be installed on opposite parallel sides of a rare truck at the same time.
Claim 5: Claim 5 recites “screws and nut” in line 3. As “screws and nuts” are set out in claim 1, it is unclear if the applicant is referring back to the original screws and nuts or is setting out a new pair of screws and nuts in claim 5.
Claim 5 recites “the tension” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6: Claim 6 recites “the top end of the side” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites “the bottom end” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites “the first through hole” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7: Claim 7 recites “the nut” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites “the tip of the screw” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8: Claim 8 recites “the frames” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites “the abutting portion” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites “each frame” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites “the plate material” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites “the recess” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9: Claim 9 recites “the limiting part a second passing part is opened” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the limiting part” in the claim. Further, it is unclear as to what “the limiting part a second passing part is opened” is referring to.
Claim 9 recites “the second passage” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites “the first passing part” in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The language of claim 9 is confusing and unclear. It is unclear if this is a translation error from the native Chinese application or if the applicant is attempting to be their own lexicographer to the detriment of the claim language. Limited examples include it is unclear as to if “the part to be fixed” is the same as “the fixing part” and if the “part to be limited” is the same as “the limiting part” or as to how “in the limiting part a second part is opened”. These are merely examples and not encompassing all of the errors present in the claim 9.
Claim 10: Claim 10 recites the limitation “the end of one if the frames” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the end of the adjacent other frame” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the notch” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 is subsumed by the previously noted rejections because of its dependance either directly or indirectly. Appropriate corrections are required.
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) 1-6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luo et al., US 10,994,648 (hereinafter Luo).
Claim 1: Luo discloses a car cover plate (cover assembly 102) is detachably installed on the rear trunk (rear portion 107) of the vehicle body (vehicle 100), characterized in that the car cover plate (102) is formed by connecting multiple cover plate frame assemblies (a first panel 122a, a second panel 122b, a third panel 122c, and a fourth panel 122d) in series (a plurality of panels 122 engaged to each other and supported on the sidewalls 112, 114 of the bed 108).
each of the cover plate assemblies (a first panel 122a, a second panel 122b, a third panel 122c, and a fourth panel 122d) includes a plate material (panel portion labeled as 122a, 112b, 112c, 112d) and multiple frames (engagement structure 202) arranged around it (frames are shown about each panel portion 122a-d in Fig 1);
one of the frames is connected to an adjacent frame through a frame connection structure (plurality of couplers 200a-c), and the other frame is also connected to another adjacent frame through a frame connection structure (plurality of couplers 200a-c) until the multiple frames (202) are connected and fixed in series to surround the periphery of the plate material (as shown in Fig 1, 8).
The cover plate (102) is connected to the pickup truck body (as seen in Fig 1-3).
The car cover plate (102) further includes: through a fixed guide rail clamp (as shown in Fig 7) a guide rail (fixed rail 126) is connected to the rear trunk of the vehicle body.
Among them, the fixed guide rail clamp includes:
an outer clamp (first rod 160), and
an inner clamp (second rod 162), and
is fixed by screws and nuts (as shown in Fig 6).
Claim 2: Luo discloses that every two adjacent cover plate frame assemblies (122a-d) are connected in series through a connecting piece (hinge structure 206) (Fig 8, col 7, ln 48-54).
Claim 3: Luo discloses that a clamping groove (222) is opened in the frame of one of the cover plate frame assemblies (122a-d), and a clamping groove (222) is also opened in the frame of the other adjacent cover plate frame assembly (see Fig 9), the two clamping grooves (222) are connected through a connecting piece (206) (as shown in Fig 9).
Claim 4: Luo discloses that it further includes: a guide rail (first rail 126, second rail 128), the guide rail (126, 128) is installed on the left and right sides of the rear trunk of the vehicle body (see Fig 3), and a strip-shaped groove is machined on the inner side wall (at 144, see Fig 4, 7);
a waterproof rubber strip (seal 152), installed between the guide rail (126) and the rear trunk of the vehicle body (at first sidewall 112 as shown in Fig 4, 13, col 5, 44-51).
Claim 5: Luo discloses characterized in that the outer clamp (160) and the inner clamp (162) are arranged oppositely (as shown in Fig 6), and the tension between the outer clamp (160) and the inner clamp (162) is adjusted through the cooperation of screws and nuts (clamp is adjusted via screw 180, shown in Fig 6, col 5, ln 52-54).
Claim 6: Luo discloses the outer clamp (160) includes:
a body (body of 160, see Fig 6), which is in a vertical shape (shown in Fig 6), and a first through hole is opened at the center (to pass screw 180 through);
a clamping plate (at top end 166), located at the top end of the side of the body (as shown in Fig 6) close to the inner clamp (162) (see Fig 6), and a toothed surface (teeth 170) is machined (see Fig 6);
a guide cylinder (socket 172), located at the bottom end of the side of the body (160) close to the inner clamp (162), and a part of it is open (socket 172 is an open shape as shown in Fig 6);
a limiting area, located at the center position of the side of the body away from the inner clamp (162), corresponding to the position of the first through hole, and the limiting area is surrounded by two parallel horizontal plates (the limiting area is defined by plate like vertical end surface of the clamp body perpendicular to the through hole, see Fig 6-7);
the inner clamp (162) includes:
a base body (body of 162), which is in a vertical shape (shown in Fig 6), and a second through hole is opened at the center (to receive screw 180);
a slider (at 178), located at the top end of the side of the base body (body of 162) close to the outer clamp (160), and is smoothly connected to the strip-shaped groove (shown in Fig 6);
a guide post (ball portion 176), located at the bottom end of the side of the base body (body of 162) close to the outer clamp (71) (as shown in Fig 6), and is plugged into the guide cylinder (ball portion 176 is arranged inside the socket 172 forming a ball socket type joint, see Fig 6, col 6, ln 8-12).
Claim 8: Luo discloses a frame connection structure (see Fig 9) for connecting the frames on the peripheral side of the plate material to each other (see Fig 8), comprising:
a groove (as shown in Fig 9 and Fig 6, far right for grooves receiving plate 122) is opened at the abutting position of each frame and the peripheral side of the plate material (122), and the peripheral side of the plate material (122) is embedded in the recess of the groove (see Fig 6) to surround the peripheral side of the plate material (122) (as seen in Fig 6);
a fixing part and a limiting part are respectively set at the connection of two adjacent frames (clamping grooves 222 are fixing and limiting parts in each frames, see Fig 9), the fixing part (222) is located in one of the frames, and the limiting part (222) is located in the adjacent other frame (as shown in Fig 8-9), the limiting part (34) through a fastener (hinge structure 206) is connected to the fixing part (clamping grooves 222 are located on either end of hinge structure 206), fixing the two adjacent frames on the peripheral side of the plate material (as shown in Fig 8).
Claim 9: Luo discloses the fastener (hinge structure 206) includes a part to be fixed and a part to be limited (clamping grooves 222 are fixing and limiting parts in each frames and are located on either end of hinge 206, see Fig 9);
in the limiting part (222) a second passing part (shank portion 274) is opened, at the position where the second passage (cylindrical portion 272) extends in the direction away from the limiting part (222),
a first passage (cylindrical portion 278) is opened, the first passing part (shank portion 280) is in communication with the second passing part (274) and is located on the same straight line (both shanks portions 274, 280 are located on the same flexible members 230, 232);
the part to be fixed (222) passes through the first passing part (280) and the second passing part (274) in turn and is connected to the fixing part (222), and the part to be limited (222) abuts against the limiting part (222).
Claim 10: Luo discloses a notch (opening 308) is opened at the end of one of the frames (see Fig 8) and an abutting part (reinforcement structures 310) is set at the end of the adjacent other frame (see Fig 8, col 8, ln 58-col 9, ln 9),
the abutting part (310) matches the notch (308) and abuts together (as shown Fig 8, col 8, ln 58-col 9, ln 9).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo in view of Wheatley, US 2004/0164583 (hereinafter Wheatley).
Claim 7: Luo fails to disclose the nut is located in the limiting area, and the tip of the screw passes through the second through hole and the first through hole in turn and is spirally connected to the nut.
Wheatley discloses a tonneau cover for a pickup truck with side rails mounted to the bed and further including clamps (Fig. 2) to mount the rails to the bed, wherein a nut (retaining nut 88) is located in a limiting area (located between flanges 90) of the outer clamp (back member 42), and a tip of a screw (74) sequentially passes through a second through hole (73) of the inner clamp (40) and a first through hole of the outer clamp (as shown in Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in that art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the threaded clamp half of the limiting area of Luo with the a screw and nut as disclosed by Whatley, as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of a screw and a nut in place of a threaded clamp would have yielded the predictable results of an easily replaceable part (nut) should the threads be stripped during use as opposed to having to obtain an entire new clamp with the tapped threaded hole if an issue arose.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The disclosures of Cai et al., US2024/0198772 drawn to a full-coverage car cover, Xu et al., US 11,180,010 drawn to a tonneau cover system, Zheng et al, Chinese Patent No. 117841631A drawn to a ultra-thin embedded hard cover, and Gu, US2021/0053427 drawn to an embedded waterproof bed cover for a pickup truck are relevant to the claims but were not relied upon in the current rejections.
Claims 1-10 are rejected. No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAROLINE N BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1623. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 pm 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, Tara E Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/CAROLINE N BUTCHER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights