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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Applicant’s claims, filed on 02/24/2025.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11, 13, 17, and 19-20 have been amended.
Claims 21-22 have been cancelled.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claim 11 recites: a second lifting mechanism that engages with the vehicle cover when the second runner is at the second end of the rail, the second lifting mechanism being configured to drive the second runner along the second rail in a direction from the second end of the second rail towards the first end of the second rail.
Claim 12 recites: a second hook configured to engage with the second lifting mechanism when the second runner is at the second end of the second rail.
Claim 13 recites: the third rail and the fourth rail each have a first end and a second end and comprise: a flat portion extending along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle at the first end; and a sloped portion inclined towards the floor of the vehicle at the second end.
Claim 17 recites: a third runner moveable along the third rail on the vehicle body and a fourth runner moveable along the fourth rail on the vehicle body.
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 § 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 1-7, 9-10, 13-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magill et al. (US2,332,158) in view of Noble et al. (US5,064,147).
Claim 1. Magill discloses: A vehicle having a vehicle floor (implicit floor of a cockpit, Fig. 1), a vehicle body (fuselage A, Fig. 1) and a vehicle cover (closure 18, Fig. 1) configured to move between an open position (open, Fig. 2) and a closed position (closed, Fig. 1), the vehicle body comprising:
a rail having a first end and a second end (end of tracks 40, Fig. 2-5), the rail comprising:
a flat portion extending along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle at the first end (central horizontal portion of 40, Fig. 2-5); and
a sloped portion inclined towards the vehicle floor at the second end (end angled portion of 40, Fig. 2-5; and
the vehicle cover comprising:
a runner moveable along the rail to permit the vehicle cover to move between the closed position and the open position (rollers 39, Fig. 3-5).
Magill does not disclose: a lifting mechanism that engages with the vehicle cover when the runner is at the second end of the rail, the lifting mechanism being configured to use stored elastic potential energy to drive the runner along the rail in a direction from the second end towards the first end to permit the vehicle cover to move from the closed position towards the open position, wherein the stored elastic potential energy provides enough force to cause the vehicle cover to travel along the length of the sloped portion and onto the flat portion of the rail.
Noble discloses a door latching and lifting mechanism for use on an aircraft.
Noble teaches: a lifting mechanism (structure of spring mechanism 34, cable 36, shaft 42, pully 46, cable 18; Fig. 4) that engages with the vehicle cover (door 10, Fig. 4) when the runner (rollers 14a-b, Fig. 4) is at the second end of the rail (rail 22, Fig. 4),
the lifting mechanism being configured to use stored elastic potential energy to drive the runner along the rail in a direction from the second end towards the first end to permit the vehicle cover to move from the closed position towards the open position (Fig. 4; Col. 5 line 49 – Col. 6, line 16),
wherein the stored elastic potential energy provides enough force to cause the vehicle cover to travel along the length of the sloped portion and onto the flat portion of the rail
(14a-b travels along the outwardly slope portion of 22 proximate the bottom of opening 26 to the relatively straight portion of 22, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the cockpit enclosure mechanism of Magill by including the spring powered lifting mechanism as taught by Noble with a reasonable expectation of success in order reduce operator effort in opening the cover as taught by Noble (Col. 6, lines 1-16).
Claim 2. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the vehicle comprises a latch mechanism arranged between the vehicle body and the vehicle cover and the lifting mechanism is configured to drive the runner along the rail to move from the closed position towards the open position in response to the latch mechanism being released (Magill: latch to lock closure member in its closed position when 39 is positioned in the angled portion of 40; Pg. 4, Col. 2, lines 1-18; Noble: latch 12, Fig. 1; Col. 5, lines 62-68).
Claim 3. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claims 1 or 2, wherein the vehicle cover comprises a hook configured to engage with the lifting mechanism when the runner is at the second end of the rail (Noble: coupling connection between 18 and 20 when 14a-b is at the end of the track, Fig. 15).
Claim 4. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 wherein the lifting mechanism comprises an arm biased by means of one or more of a spring, a gas strut and a weighted lever (Noble: 18 is biased by 34, Fig. 4).
Claim 5. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 3, wherein the lifting mechanism comprises an arm biased by means of one or more of a spring, a gas strut and a weighted lever and the arm is configured to engage the hook when the runner is at the second end of the rail (Noble: 18 is biased by 34, Fig. 4).
Claim 6. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 wherein the vehicle body and vehicle cover are arranged such that an external force is required to move the runner along the straight portion of the rail in a direction towards the closed position (Magill: implicit friction of roller against 39 must be overcome to open; Noble: weight of door must be overcome to open, Fig. 4).
Claim 7. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 the vehicle being configured such that when the runner is moving along the straight portion of the rail in a direction towards the closed position and engages the sloped portion of the rail, the runner is configured to sink towards the second end of the rail (Magill: 39 couples to angled portion of 40, Fig. 1; Noble: closed configuration would pull 10 toward the end of 22 by the angled portion of 22, Fig. 4).
Claim 9. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 wherein the vehicle body comprises:
a second rail, the second rail having a first end and a second end, the second rail comprising:
a flat portion extending along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle at the first end; and
a sloped portion inclined towards the vehicle floor at the second end; and
the vehicle cover comprises a second runner moveable along the second rail (Magill: opposing
track 40 and roller 39, Fig. 3; Noble: opposing rails and rollers, Fig. 4).
Claim 10. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the shape of the second rail is the same as the shape of the first rail (Magill: opposing rail is the same, Fig. 3; Noble: opposing rail is the same, Fig. 4).
Claim 13. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the vehicle body has a vehicle body front and a vehicle body rear and a longitudinal centre line extending between the vehicle body front and the vehicle body rear and intersecting the vehicle cover, wherein the rail is located on a first side of the longitudinal centre line and the second rail is located on a second side of the longitudinal centre line (rails of Magill is symmetric about an implicit longitudinal center line of the vehicle, Fig. 3).
Claim 14. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 13, wherein the vehicle body comprises a third rail located on the first side of the longitudinal centre line and a fourth rail located on the second side of the longitudinal centre line (Magill: duplicity of rails 36 on both sides of fuselage, Fig. 5-6) .
Claim 15. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 14, wherein the third rail and the fourth rail each have a first end and a second end and comprise:
a flat portion extending along a longitudinal direction of the vehicle at the first end; and
a sloped portion inclined towards the floor of the vehicle at the second end (Magill: 40 has similar geometry as 36 with a flat and sloped portions, Fig. 5).
Claim 16. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 15, wherein the first end of the third rail is located between the first rail and the vehicle body front (Magill: end of 36 is between 40 and front, Fig. 5) and the first end of the fourth rail is located between the second rail and the vehicle body front (Magill: end of opposing end of 36 is between opposing 40 and front, Fig. 5) .
Claim 17. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 14, wherein the vehicle cover comprises a third runner moveable along the third rail on the vehicle body and a fourth runner moveable along the fourth rail on the vehicle body (Magill: rollers 39 in duplicity of 40, Fig. 7).
Claim 19. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 wherein the sloped portion is curved (Noble: sloped portion is curved, Fig. 4).
Claim 20. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 wherein the sloped portion is straight and transverse to the flat portion (Magill: sloped portion is transverse; Fig. 2, 5).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magill et al (US2,332,158) in view of Noble et al. (US5,064,147) and further in view of Jones (US2012/0068006).
Claim 8. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 1 wherein the vehicle body has a vehicle body front and a vehicle body rear (Magill; Fig. 1).
Magill in view of Noble does not teach: motion of the vehicle cover from the closed position towards the open position is towards the vehicle front.
Jones discloses a plane with a forward sliding canopy.
Jones teaches: motion of the vehicle cover from the closed position towards the open position is towards the vehicle front (canopy slides forward on rails to open, [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have substituted the cockpit enclosure of Magill in view of Noble with the canopy of Jones with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have a forward sliding canopy as taught by Jones ([0027]) because both perform the same function in similar contexts. Such a substitution represents the use of a known element according to its established function, and the results would have been predictable. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 11-12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magill et al (US2,332,158) in view of Noble et al. (US5,064,147) and further in view of White (US2,033,893).
Claim 11. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 9, second runner, and second rail.
Magill in view of Noble does not teach: a second lifting mechanism.
White discloses a plurality of lifting devices to open and close a door.
White teaches: a second lifting mechanism (structure of dual counterweight 28 and springs 35 on each side of guideways 14, Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the lifting mechanism of Magill in view of Noble by including the lifting mechanism on each side of the closure as taught by White with a reasonable expectation of success in order ease the effort to open the closure as taught by White (Col. 1, lines 12-14).
Claim 12. Magill in view of Noble and further in view of White teach: A vehicle according to claim 11, wherein the vehicle cover comprises a second hook configured to engage with the second lifting mechanism when the second runner is at the second end of the second rail (White: implicit coupling of duplicate cable 25 to door 10 when the roller 13 is at the end of the rail, Fig. 5).
Claim 18. Magill in view of Noble teach: A vehicle according to claim 17.
Magill in view of Noble does not teach: the lifting mechanism is further configured to drive the third runner along the third rail in a direction from the second end of the third rail towards the first end of the third rail and the second lifting mechanism is further configured to drive the fourth runner along the fourth rail in a direction from the second end of the fourth rail towards the first end of the fourth rail.
White further teaches: the lifting mechanism is further configured to drive the third runner along the third rail in a direction from the second end of the third rail towards the first end of the third rail and the second lifting mechanism is further configured to drive the fourth runner along the fourth rail in a direction from the second end of the fourth rail towards the first end of the fourth rail (White: duplicity of lifting mechanisms would drive the third and fourth runners along the rails, Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the lifting mechanism of Magill in view of Noble by including the lifting mechanism on each side of the closure as taught by White with a reasonable expectation of success in order ease the effort to open the closure as taught by White (Col. 1, lines 12-14).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Craig whose telephone number is (571)270-0747. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thurs 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM CST.
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 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.
/DANIEL T CRAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights