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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the tent fabric with a rolling curtain region (claim 16), must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
Additionally, it is noted that the shaft pin 640, figure 10, is quite light and therefor the boundary of the pin unclear. It is suggested the definition line of the shaft pin be darkened/clarified.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The examiner does not see where in the original disclosure it is explained how the tent fabric would be arranged between the top cover and the mounting base, wherein the tent fabric forms a rolling curtain region corresponding to an area of the top plate, as claimed in claim 16. While it is understood how a tent fabric can be attached to the top plate and mounting base, and extending over the U-shaped support frame (i.e. external draping and connections), the additional details of how the fabric is arranged between the top cover a mounting base, that would allow for a rolling curtain region corresponding to an area of the top plate, appear to be lacking from the description. Via the disclosure, specifically paragraph [0064], it appears the curtain is intended to align with the underside of the transparent top plate, meaning the tent fabric would need to extend in the inside of the space defined between the top cover from the mounting base. The supposed arrangement would require connections not disclosed in the specification, nor depicted in the drawings.
If the applicant cannot show where there is support for the claimed arrangement, without adding new matter, the corresponding limitations should be canceled from the claims.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4, first recites “a plurality of top bars”, in line 2, then later in line 6 recites “the top bar is made of a transparent hard material”, rendering the claim indefinite and unclear as it is not known if the applicant intends to claim just one top bar made of transparent material, at least one of the top bars made of transparent material, or the plurality of top bars being made of a transparent material.
Appropriate correction and clarification are 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, 9, 15 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (CN 117418740) in view of Zhou (CN 216714040).
Yu discloses:
1. A roof tent (10, figure 1), comprising a mounting base (120, figure 3), a top cover (110, figure 3), and a support rod assembly (130, figure 3); wherein the mounting base (120) is used to be mounted on a top of a vehicle (abstract), wherein one end of the mounting base is connected to one end of the top cover through a hinge (140, figure 9);
wherein two ends (upper and lower ends) of the support rod assembly (130) are respectively connected to the mounting base (120) and the top cover (110, figure 3), the support rod assembly (130) being used to support the top cover (figure 3); wherein the top cover (110, figure 4) comprises a top frame (1111, figure 5) and a top plate (112, figure 5), wherein the top frame (1111) is annular (figure 5), wherein edges of the top plate are connected to inner sides of the top frame (figure 4), and
and wherein the top plate (112) is made of a hard material (carbon fiber, abstract).
Yu does not disclose the top plate to be transparent.
However, Zhou teaches: and wherein the top plate (transparent shell 1, figure 3) is transparent (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the top plate of Yu with a transparent material, as taught by Zhou, so that a user can view their surroundings while in the tent, and enjoy the night sky, improving user comfort and satisfaction (Zhou, Abstract).
Re: claim 2, while Zhou discloses a hard transparent top plate, they do not specify it to be made of an acrylic material. However, However, Examiner refers to MPEP 2144.07 wherein it is explained that reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle. In the instant case, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious, when considering available materials and known material options, to use an acrylic material for the transparent top plate as it a well-known, readily available, hard plate material option, known for is clarity, impact resistance, weather resistance and light weight.
2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose [R-08.2012]
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (Claims to a printing ink comprising a solvent having the vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol so that the ink would not dry at room temperature but would dry quickly upon heating were held invalid over a reference teaching a printing ink made with a different solvent that was nonvolatile at room temperature but highly volatile when heated in view of an article which taught the desired boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of a solvent for printing inks and a catalog teaching the boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol. "Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle." 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.).
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.).
Yu further discloses: claim 3. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 1, wherein the top plate (112) is of an integrated flat plate structure (figure 4), and wherein the edges of the top plate are bonded to the inner sides of the top frame (top plate 112 and upper frame 1111 disclose as being bonded at their juncture with waterproof glue; see translation).
Re: claim 4, Yu discloses the transparent roof tent as recited in claim 1, wherein the top cover (110, figure 4) further comprises a plurality of top bars (1112, figure 4), which are arranged in parallel on a side of the top plate facing towards the mounting base (figure 3) and abut against the top plate (figure 3), and wherein two ends of each of the plurality of top bars are respectively connected to two opposite sides of the top frame (figure 4), but does not disclose wherein the top bar is made of a transparent hard material. However, Zhou teaches the entirety of the top cover being transparent, and modifying Yu with the teachings of Zhou would lead to transparent bars, as they part of the top cover.
Yu further discloses:
9. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 1, wherein the mounting base and the top cover are each rectangular (Yu, figure 3), each having two opposite long-axis sides and two opposite short-axis sides (Yu, figure 3), wherein the two short-axis sides of the mounting base are defined as a mounting base front end and a mounting base rear end (Yu, figure 3), respectively, and wherein the two short-axis sides of the top cover are defined as a top cover front end and a top cover rear end, respectively (Yu, figure 3); wherein the mounting base rear end and the top cover rear end are connected to each other by a hinge (140, figure 9,Yu), wherein the support rod assembly comprises two air springs (130, figue3, Yu), wherein each of the two long-axis sides of the mounting base is connected to the corresponding long-axis side of the top cover by a respective one of the two air springs (figure 3, Yu).
15. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 9, further comprising a plurality of locking buckles (300, Yu), which are respectively distributed on the two long-axis sides and the front end of the roof tent (figure 3, Yu); wherein each of the plurality of locking buckles comprises a locking core (310) and a locking hook (320), wherein the locking core is fixed to an outside of the mounting base (figure 3, Yu), wherein the locking hook is fixed to an outside of the top cover (figure 3, Yu), wherein the locking core and the locking hook are operative to be engaged with each other so as to be locked up together (figure 2).
17. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 1, wherein the mounting base (120, figure 9, Yu) comprises a bottom frame (121, figure 9, Yu), at least two mounting bars (123, figure 9, Yu), and a plurality of cross bars (122, figure 9, Yu); wherein the bottom frame is annular and arranged around the plurality of cross bars (figure 9); wherein the bottom frame comprises two opposite long bottom frame bars (long sides of 121, figure 9, Yu), two opposite short bottom frame bars (short sides of 121, figure 9, Yu), and four bottom wrapping corners (corners of 121, figure 9,Yu); wherein each long bottom frame bar and the respective short bottom frame bar that are adjacent to each other are connected by a respective one of the four bottom wrapping corners (figure 9, Yu); wherein the plurality of cross bars are arranged in parallel (figure 9, Yu), and wherein two ends of each of the plurality of cross bars are respectively connected to the two long bottom frame bars (figure 9, Yu); wherein each of the at least two mounting bars is disposed on a side of the plurality of cross bars facing away from the top cover and is connected to the plurality of cross bars (figure 9, Yu); wherein the plurality of cross bars, the two long bottom frame bars, and the two short bottom frame bars are each made of a carbon fiber material (abstract).
Re: 18. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 1, wherein the top frame (110, figure 3, Yu) comprises two opposite long top frame bars (figure 3, Yu), two opposite short top frame bars (figure 3, Yu), and four top wrapping corners (1111d, figure 6, Yu); wherein each long top frame bar and the respective short top frame bar that are adjacent to each other are connected by a respective one of the four top wrapping corners Figure 6, Yu). While Yu discloses some tent frame components to be made of carbon fiber and some to be made of an aluminum alloy, they do not disclose specifically wherein the two long top frame bars and the two short top frame bars are each made of an aluminum alloy. However, Examiner again refers to MPEP 2144.07 wherein it is explained that reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle. In the instant case, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious, when considering available materials and known material options, to consider aluminum alloy for the frame members, as it a well-known, readily available, option, known for its strength, toughness and light weight.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Zhou as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Heineman (US 12,065,850). Yu in view of Zhou do not disclose wherein the top cover further comprises a one-way perspective film attached to a surface of the top plate and used to allow light to be transmitted from an inside of the transparent roof tent to an outside, and to block light transmitted from the outside to the inside of the transparent roof tent.
However, Heineman teaches: wherein the transparent panel (180) comprising one-way view, used to allow light to be transmitted from an inside of the transparent roof tent to an outside, and to block light transmitted from the outside to the inside of the transparent tent (column 6, lines 40-43). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the transparent roof panel of Yu in view of Zhou with a one-way perspective transparent panel, as taught by Heineman, to provide a user in the tent with additional privacy and light control.
While Heineman does not specifically disclose the one-way perspective window to comprise a film on the outside, examiner notes that such language could be considered product by process claim language and so long as the end product functions in the same way, the process of arriving at the product (in this case the product being a one-way perspective window/transparent panel) does not affect the patentability of the product. The examiner refers to MPEP 2113 Product by Process Claims for further explanation interpreting such limitations.
Claim(s) 6-8 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Zhou as applied to claims 1 and 3-4 above (note that claim 19 is a combination of claims 1, 3-4 and 7-8), and further in view of Kaspar et al. (US 9,803,041). Yu in view of Zhou do not disclose the transparent top panel comprising a transparent heat insulation film or an elastic transparent buffer film made of polyphthalamide.
Re: claim 6: Zhou teaches the transparent roof tent as recited in claim 1, wherein the top cover further comprises a heat insulation film (22, figure 6) attached to a side of the top plate facing the mounting base (figure 6), and Kasper et al. teach wherein the heat insulation film is a transparent film (col. 19, line 32).
Additionally, re: claim 7, 8, 19: Kaspar et al. teach: a transparent panel (“windows” column 14, line 42) comprising an elastic transparent buffer film (col. 14, lines 34-39) made of polyphthalamide (column 15, line 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the transparent top panel of Yu in view of Zhou with a transparent heat and buffer film as taught by Kaspar et al., so as to provide improved light and weathering resistance of the panel, extending the lifespan of the tent and protection to users thereof. (see also MPEP 2113 regarding the placement of films, as explained with respect to claim 5 above).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Zhou as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Jin et al. (US 2020/0180498). Yu does not disclose a U-shaped support frame, wherein both ends of the U-shaped support frame are each connected to the mounting base front end through a respective hinge, and wherein the U-shaped support frame is operative to rotate around the mounting base front end.
However, Jin et al. teach:
10. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 9, further comprising a U-shaped support frame (5, figure size), wherein both ends of the U-shaped support frame are each connected to the mounting base front end through a respective hinge ([0037]), and wherein the U-shaped support frame is operative to rotate around the mounting base front end ([0037]).
11. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 10, wherein both sides of the U-shaped support frame are retractable (vertical rods 51 can be telescopic, [0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the roof tent of Yu in view of Zhou with a U-shaped support frame, wherein both ends of the U-shaped support frame are each connected to the mounting base front end through a respective hinge, and wherein the U-shaped support frame is operative to rotate around the mounting base front end, as taught by Jin et al. So as to allow the user to customize the height and/or tension of the tent fabric stretched over the frame, creating a desire headspace/clearance for a user occupying the tent.
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Zhou and further in view of Jin et al. as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of LeJuerrne (US 4,754,998). While Yu in view of Zhou and Jin et al. teach the U-shaped support frame comprises a U-shaped tube (Jin, 5, figure 5), they do not teach two sleeve tubes, and two locking pieces ; wherein one end of each of the two sleeve tubes is connected to the mounting base front end through a hinged locking portion,
However, LeJuerrne teaches: a sleeve tube (lower sleeve of 186, figure 3), and locking pieces (pins from locking telescoping tubes 186); wherein one end of each of the sleeve tubes is connected to the mounting base front end through a hinged locking portion (176, 184, figure 9), and wherein the locking piece respectively arranged on the sleeve tubes to control the depth of the ends of the sleeve tubes (figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the telescopic U-shaped tube of Jin et al with locking sleeve tubes, as taught by LeJuerrne, so as to securely hold the U-shaped support frame at a select height.
Additionally, LeJuerrne teaches:
13. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 12, wherein each hinged locking portion (176, 184) comprises a fixing base (176), a rotating arm (184), a latch (locking pin of 184), and a shaft pin (locking pin of 176); wherein the fixing base (176) has a bottom plate and two opposite side walls (figure 1); wherein the bottom plate of the fixing base is fixed to the mounting base front end (figure 1); wherein the two side walls of the fixing base are arranged opposite to each other about a long-axis side of the fixing base (figure 1); wherein the rotating arm(184) is of a C-shaped structure (figure 3), wherein a first end of the rotating arm is connected to the two side walls of the fixing base through a shaft pin (figure 1); wherein there is further defined a slide slot in one side wall of the fixing base (figure 1), and there is further defined a socket in another side wall of the fixing base (figure 1); wherein the latch passes through the slide slot and the first end of the rotating arm to be fitted with the socket (figure 1)t; wherein a second end of the rotating arm is connected to a respective one of the two sleeve tubes (figure 1).
14. The transparent roof tent as recited in claim 13, wherein there are defined at least two sockets in the other side wall of the fixing base (figure 1), and wherein the at least two sockets are arranged along a trajectory of the slide slot (figure 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 provide the tent of Yu in view of Zhou and Jin et al., with the locking portion, rotating arm, latch and shaft pin as taught by LeJuerrne so as to provide a more versatile and adaptable U-shaped support frame, allowing a user to lock the frame at multiple different angles and extensions as needed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE whose telephone number is (571)272-6289. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM-4:00PM.
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, 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.
COLLEEN M. CHAVCHAVADZE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3634
/COLLEEN M CHAVCHAVADZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights