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 § 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 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gang (US 2018/0147716) in view of Panosian (US 2024/0150079).
Claims 1 and 4
Gang discloses a mobile toolbox system (100A) comprising a toolbox (102A) having a frame (defined by legs/rail 110 in combination with crossbar 116 and holding member 118A) and a plurality of wheels (108A) attached thereto, the frame being capable for positioning proximate a vehicle; a leg/rail (110) having a plurality of apertures (defined by apertures from where any of trays 106B or 106C are coupled to the rail) (see [0017] and figure 1) formed therein, the rail disposed proximate a corner of the toolbox; and an accessory (106B and/or 106C) configured to hold an item proximate a perimeter of the toolbox (see [0015]), the accessory being further configurable for repositioning to other apertures on the rail (see figure 1). Gang does not explicitly disclose the accessory having means for connecting the accessory in at least one of the apertures, and from the argument that Gang does not disclose apertures in the rail, Panosian discloses a storage container comprising a rail (834) with attachment slots (835) for connecting an accessory (1004) comprising a phone holder including means for connecting/hooks for attaching to the rail (see figure 10a, [0184], [0232], and [0233]). It would have been obvious top one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rail of Gang having apertures and replacing the accessory for the accessory disclosed by Panosian for as a type of accessory attached to the toolbox.
Claim 2
Gang further discloses the rail is made of steel (see [0016]).
Claim 3
Gang and/or Panosian discloses the apertures are spaced equidistant from each other (see Gang figure 1; Panosian figure 10A).
Claim 7
Gang further discloses at least two rails disposed apart from each other at different corners of the toolbox (see figure 1).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gang (US 2018/0147716) and Panosian (US 2024/0150079) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lucas (11,332,177).
Gang does not disclose a tie-down aperture formed in the rail and configured for receiving a strap to secure the toolbox for transport. However, Lucas discloses a storage cart comprising a panel (103 or 400) comprising rows of apertures (404 and 406) and additional apertures/tie down apertures (414) capable of receiving a strap to secure the toolbox for transport (see figure 1A and 4). Lucas discloses the panel is configured to receive an extension or projection of a component to be secured to the panel (see column 5 lines 16-51). 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 rail of Gang having different size and/or shapes of apertures as taught by Lucas for attaching different engagement types of components.
Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gang (US 2018/0147716) in view of Panosian (US 2024/0150079) and Lucas (11,332,177).
Claim 13
Gang discloses a mobile toolbox kit (100A) comprising a toolbox (102A) having a frame (defined by legs/rail 110 in combination with crossbar 116 and holding member 118A) and a plurality of wheels (108A) attached thereto, the frame being capable for positioning proximate a vehicle; a leg/rail (110) having a plurality of apertures (defined by apertures from where any of trays 106B or 106C are coupled to the rail) (see [0017] and figure 1) formed therein and spaced equidistant from each other, the rail disposed proximate a corner of the toolbox (see figure 1); and an accessory (106B and/or 106C) being connectable in at least one of the apertures (see figure 1), the accessory being configured to hold an item external to the toolbox which could be any of a phone holder, wherein the accessory is configurable for repositioning to other apertures on the rail (see figure 1). Tray (106 B) is capable of holding a phone. Gang does not disclose a tie-down aperture formed proximate the plurality of apertures. From the argument that Gang does not disclose the item external to the toolbox being selected from one of a phone holder, a hook, a towel bar, a power tool holder, a parts holder, a spool holder, and a cup holder; and from the argument that Gang does not disclose apertures in the rail, Panosian discloses a storage container comprising a rail (834) with attachment slots (835), spaced apart equidistant from each other, the attachment slots for connecting an accessory (1004) comprising a phone holder, the accessory connectable to the slots by hooks (see figure 10a, [0184], [0232], and [0233]). 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 rail of Gang having apertures and having the accessory including hooks for attaching into the apertures as taught by Panosian for simply attaching the tray to the rail. Regarding the limitation of the tie-down aperture, Lucas discloses a storage cart comprising a panel (103 or 400) comprising rows of apertures (404 and 406) and additional apertures/tie down apertures (414) capable of receiving a strap to secure the toolbox for transport (see figure 1A and 4). Lucas discloses the panel is configured to receive an extension or projection of a component to be secured to the panel (see column 5 lines 16-51). 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 rail of Gang having different size and/or shapes of apertures as taught by Lucas for attaching different engagement types of components.
Claim 14
Gang and/or Panosian discloses the apertures are spaced equidistant from each other (see Gang figure 1; Panosian figure 10A).
Claim 15
Gang further discloses the accessory is at least two accessories (defined by trays 106B and 106C) disposed apart from each other (see figure 1).
Claim 16
After Gang is modified by Panosian and Lucas, the tie-down aperture will be formed in the rail and capable of receiving a tie-down strap for securing the toolbox for transport.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 08/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s argument that the combination of Gang and Panosian, the examiner disagrees. It is believed that the applicant is arguing more than the claimed limitations. Claim 1 only requires “means for connecting the accessory” which Gang and Panosian discloses an alternative type of structure to attach an item to a leg/rail of a toolbox frame. Applicant argued that the means for connecting requires a “button and plurality of latches” but this is structure from objected claim 5. After the examiner reviewed the rejection based on the prior art of Gang and Panosian, the examiner noticed that it was meant to interpret Gang disclosing the required frame as the combination of structures of legs/rail 110 in combination with crossbar 116 and holding member 118A. Regarding applicants’ argument of the rejection of claim 13 based on the prior art of Gang, Panosian, and Lucas, the examiner disagrees. The rails of Gang appear to disclose apertures which appear to allow trays to engage. Both, Panosian and Lucas disclose the apertures being spaced apart equidistant from each other. After Gang is modified by Panosian, the attached trays (106B and 106C) would be properly attached and detached from the rail. After Gang is further modified by Lucas, different type of attachment structure would be able to attach into the toolbox frame.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant, in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or prior art(s) disclosed by the Examiner (in the attached PTO-892 form).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6pm.
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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
RAFAEL A. ORTIZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
/RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights