DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Claims 15, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bequette (US 2006/0033353).
Bequette disclose a bedslide for use in a cargo box of a truck (60) comprising a bedslide deck (216), as shown in Figures 1-24. At least a portion of the bedslide deck (216) is configured to be movable into and out of the cargo box of the truck, as shown in Figures 1-24. At least one receiver (219) extends through the bedslide deck (216), as shown in Figure 24 and disclosed in paragraph [0065]. A periphery of an opening of the at least one receiver (219) extends through a top surface of the bedslide deck (216), as shown in Figure 24 and disclosed in paragraph [0065].
In reference to claim 16, the bedslide deck (216) includes a plurality of receivers (219), as shown in Figure 23. Each of the receivers (219) is spaced apart from each other and extends through the bedslide deck (16), as shown in Figure 24 and disclosed in paragraph [0065].
In reference to claim 18, the at least one receiver (219) extends through one side of the bedslide deck (216) to an opposite side of the bedslide deck (216), as shown in Figure 24.
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.
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.
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bequette (US 2006/0033353) in view of Sosnowich et al. (US 2020/0406986).
Bequette does not disclose the claimed shape.
Sosnowich et al. teaches forming receivers (81) with quadrilateral shaped openings, as shown in Figure 9A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the at least one receiver of Bequette as a quadrilateral shaped opening, as taught by Sosnowich et al., with a reasonable expectation for success as an obvious design choice that does not alter the function or operation of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14, 19, and 20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim 1 is the combination of the bed slide deck with a receiver, the base bracket attached to the support bracket, and the carrier bracket assembly having a receiver post sized to fit into the receiver, which is not found in the prior art of record. The closest prior art, the parent patent, does not claim the base bracket is attached to the support bracket. Other art lacks the specifics of the carrier bracket in combination with a bedslide deck.
The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim 19 is the receiver post is telescopingly fitted into and oriented coincident with a portion of the support post defining a first orientation of the receiver post and a second orientation where the receiver post is positionable adjacent the base bracket and fitted into and orientation transverse to another portion of the support post, which is not found in the prior art of record. The closest prior art, US 2019/0351837, discloses a receiver post (21) that pivots from a transverse position, as shown in Figure 2, to a position where the receiver post surrounds the support post (29), as shown in Figure 6. The receiver post is not telescopingly fitted into a portion of the support post.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Murray (US 2019/035187) is the closest prior art for the bike rack of claims 19 and 20. Harris et al. (US 9,828,045) discloses a tire carrier mounted in a cargo box of a truck.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 October 8, 2026
