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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
109 mentioned in
105 mentioned in page 11, line 5 of the specification
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
119
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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.
Figures 5-13 are objected to due to the following informalities: new corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the figures do not include numerical element citations. Numerical citations are required in order to particular point out objects of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The specification generally lacks a proper description of the drawings and claimed subject matter. The arrangement of the specification is non-standard, and the information needed to understand the drawings and claimed invention, if present, is scattered throughout the specification in such a way as to make understanding the claimed invention difficult or impossible. A signification revision of the specification is needed to provide proper antecedent basis and clarity for the claimed subject matter. Below is a general outline of a specification consistent with US practice.
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
The term "a substantially rectangular table" in claim 18 lacks clear antecedent basis in the specification and drawings. The specification does not mention a "table," and the drawings do not clearly illustrate this feature.
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 3 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.
Claims 3, 9 and 17 recites the limitation “one or more cylinders” However, it is unclear whether these cylinders are the same as, or separate from, the “two or more cylinders” previously recited in claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the angle of the turn" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 is indefinite because the phrase "configured to pivot to approximately one half of the angle of the turn" is vague and indefinite; specifically, the claim fails to provide an objective standard for measuring what falls within the scope of "approximately one half," and it is unclear how "the angle of the turn" is measured or determined in relation to the auxiliary dolly. The specifications or drawings do not make it clear either.
Claim 13 recited “loading cylinders” but the claim 1 introduces "two or more cylinders" but it does not previously establish or define "loading cylinders." It is unclear whether "loading cylinders" refers to the previously recited "two or more cylinders" or if it introduces a new, separate set of cylinders.
Claim 14 recites the limitation " the loading cylinders" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 is indefinite because it improperly states that it depends on itself (Claim 14), rendering the boundaries of the claim unclear
Claim 18 recites the limitation "pivoting payload portion" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 9-14, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160362146 A1 ("Trowbridge").
Claim 1: Trowbridge teaches an auxiliary dolly attachable to the rear of a primary trailer, the auxiliary dolly (32, 23) comprising: a first portion (23) attachable to the primary trailer (attachable via gooseneck 24; Fig. 1); a second portion (32) comprising a chassis (48) with one or more axles (53) with wheels (33) and a payload portion on the chassis wherein the payload portion (para. 32, lines 1-8) is configured to pivot relative to the chassis with one or more axles with wheels of the second portion (pivot at the pivot point of 42; Fig. 3); a pivot point (42) at which the first portion is coupled to and movable relative to the second portion (Figs. 3 and 4); and two or more cylinders (44) configured to pivot the payload portion of the second portion relative to the chassis with one or more axles with wheels of the second portion and wherein the pivot allows the payload portion to be substantially aligned with the primary trailer while turning (Figs. 3 and 4; para. 31, lines 1-13).
Claim 3: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising one or more cylinders (134) configured to apportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly, wherein the one or more cylinders comprise loading cylinders configured to apply and adjust vertical forces to apportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly (Figs. 3, 4 and 15-17; para. 47, lines 14-17 and para. 51, lines 1-8).
Claim 4: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein the two or more cylinders comprise driving cylinders in the first portion and driven cylinders in the second portion, wherein the driving cylinders and driven cylinders are fluidly connected (44 is a pair of hydraulic cylinders, since it is connecting both the first and second portion, the driven and driving cylinders are inherently part of the hydraulic cylinder; Fig. 4), and wherein the driven cylinders are configured to transfer fluid to the driven cylinders and pivot the payload portion when turning (Figs. 3 and 4; para. 31, lines 1-13).
Claim 5: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 4 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein the driving cylinders and driven cylinders are in a cross connection orientation (the simultaneous extension of one cylinder and retraction of the other is a cross connection; Figs. 3 and 4; para. 31, lines 1-13).
Claim 7: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein while turning the payload portion is configured to pivot to approximately one half of the angle of the turn (Figs. 3 and 4; para. 31, lines 1-13; the turning of 32 is effected by simultaneous extension of one cylinder and retraction of the other, which inherently coordinates the pivoting of the payload portion to approximate a split angle relative to the trailer and chassis during a turn).
Claim 9: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 3 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein the one or more cylinders (134) comprise loading cylinders configured to apply and adjust vertical forces on the first portion of the auxiliary dolly (Figs. 3, 4 and 15-17; para. 47, lines 14-17 and para. 51, lines 1-8).
Claim 10: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising one or more steering cylinders (44) configured to turn the first and second portions relative to each other (Figs. 3 and 4; para. 31, lines 1-13).
Claim 11: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a connection device (gooseneck 24) configured to couple the first portion (23) of the auxiliary dolly to a powered tractor (Fig. 1; para. 28, lines 1-4).
Claim 12: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein based on a feedback that excess weight is being applied to either the primary trailer or the auxiliary dolly, the first and second portions are adjustable relative to each other to reapportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly (via the cylinders 134; para. 51-53; Figs. 15-17).
Claim 13: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 12 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein loading cylinders (134) adjust relative vertical forces between the first and second portions relative to each other to reapportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly (forces are adjusted vertically in the different configurations of 134 shown in Figs. 15-17).
Claim 14: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 14 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein the loading cylinders are coupled between the first (23) and second portions (32) (connecting both portions via 129; Figs. 15-17).
Claim 16: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a steering system configured to turn the first and second portions relative to each other (steering system of the cylinders 44 when they are in simultaneous extension or retraction of the other; Fig. 3; para. 31, lines 1-13).
Claim 18: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein the pivoting payload portion (payload held on second potion 32; para. 32, lines 1-8) is a substantially rectangular table that is configured to rotate clockwise or counterclockwise in a horizontal plane (pivot at the pivot point of 42; Fig. 3; the rear turns left or right compared to the trailer).
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.
Claims 2 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160362146 A1 ("Trowbridge") in view of US 20100038868 A1 ("Zork").
Claim 2: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a sensor that monitors steering, wherein upon sensing a turn, the sensor causes the two or more cylinders to pivot the payload portion of the second portion relative to the chassis with one or more axles with wheels of the second portion such that the payload portion is substantially aligned with the primary trailer while turning.
However, Zork in a similar field of art teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a sensor (202) that monitors steering, wherein upon sensing a turn, the sensor causes the two or more cylinders (150) to pivot the payload portion of the second portion relative to the chassis with one or more axles with wheels of the second portion such that the payload portion is substantially aligned with the primary trailer while turning (Figs. 4-6 para. 30, lines 17-23; while Zork specifically describes this sensor to controller automated arrangement for vertical cylinders, it would have been obvious to apply this exact same feedback loop to horizontal cylinders instead, as rearranging the orientation or target of a sensing circuit to monitor steering deflection and actuate corresponding horizontal cylinders is a routine design choice that yields the predictable result of keeping the payload aligned). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Trowbridge with the features of Zork. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Zork teaches "automatically operates the hydraulic cylinder to effect the extension or retraction of the piston" (para. 12, lines 7-8)
Claim 17: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Trowbridge further teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising one or more cylinders (134, 44) configured to adjust the first and second portions relative to each other (44; para. 31, lines 1-13) and apportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly (134; para. 47, lines 14-17 and para. 51, lines 1-8); wherein the one or more cylinders comprise loading cylinders (134) and steering cylinders (44; para. 31, lines 1-13). But does not teach a sensor that monitors weight being apportioned between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly, wherein upon sensing excess weight being applied to either the primary trailer or the auxiliary dolly, the sensor causes the one or more cylinders to adjust the first and second portions of the auxiliary dolly relative to each other and thereby reapportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly.
However, Zork in a similar field of art teaches a sensor (200) that monitors weight being apportioned between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly, wherein upon sensing excess weight being applied to either the primary trailer or the auxiliary dolly, the sensor causes the one or more cylinders (150) to adjust the first and second portions of the auxiliary dolly relative to each other and thereby reapportion weight between the primary trailer and the auxiliary dolly (Figs. 4-6 para. 30, lines 17-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Trowbridge with the features of Zork. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Zork teaches "automatically operates the hydraulic cylinder to effect the extension or retraction of the piston" (para. 12, lines 7-8).
Claim 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160362146 A1 ("Trowbridge") in view of US 4265304 A ("Baugh").
Claim 6: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a coiled tubing injector on the payload portion.
However, Baugh in a similar field of art teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a coiled tubing injector (10) on the payload portion (Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Trowbridge with the features of Baugh. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Baugh teaches adding a coiled tubing injector the onto the payload portion in order to provide a highly mobile, road-ready transport system.
Claim 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160362146 A1 ("Trowbridge") in view of US 20140015223 A1 ("Banwart").
Claim 8: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the auxiliary dolly, wherein the second portion (32) is self-powered.
However, Banwart in a similar field of art teaches the auxiliary dolly, wherein the second portion (2) is self-powered (para. 87, lines 1-20). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Trowbridge with the features of Banwart. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Banwart teaches a method of powering hydraulic components, thereby rendering the booster self-contained and operationally independent.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160362146 A1 ("Trowbridge") in view of US 5626356 A ("Harwood").
Claim 15: Trowbridge teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a steering system configured to straighten the second portion relative to the first portion when the auxiliary dolly is moved in reverse.
However, Harwood in a similar field of art teaches the auxiliary dolly, further comprising a steering system configured to straighten the second portion relative to the first portion when the auxiliary dolly is moved in reverse (col. 4, lines 13-25). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Trowbridge with the features of Harwood. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Harwood teaches "can be moved straight without fishtailing" (col. 4, lines 15-16).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AL-BIRR RAHMAN CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-4661. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 6:00pm.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
/A.R.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3618
/MINNAH L SEOH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3618
