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 .
Drawings
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: reference character “4” in Figure 1 is mentioned nowhere in the Specifications. 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.
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: first surface of support member 11 in the Specifications is mentioned nowhere in the drawings. 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.
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 1-4 are 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.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear whether the tire is claimed in combination with the support member. The claim recites “support member operably coupled to a vehicle adjacent a tire thereof”, which implies the tire is not part of the claimed invention. The claim also recites "said first side of said support member facing the tire" which implies the tire is claimed in combination with the advertising device. The applicant is required to clarify whether the claim is drawn to the tire in combination with the support member or if the claim is drawn only to the support member. For examination purposes, the examiner contends the claim is drawn to the support member only.
Regarding claims 2-4, they recite "The advertising device configured to be operably coupled to a vehicle", it is unclear if the "vehicle" is the same as claim 1. The applicant is required to clarify whether the claims are drawn to the vehicle in combination with the advertising device like in claim 1 or if the claim is drawn only to the advertising device. For examination purposes, the examiner contends the claim is drawn to the advertising device only.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6938929 B2 to Cicansky in view of US 9016912 B1 to Gustafson.
Regarding claim 1, Cicansky teaches a Vehicle Mud Flap (advertising device configured to be operably coupled to a vehicle) comprising: a support member (mud flap panel 12, see Figure 5, column 2, lines 66-67), said support member being planar in manner (not shown, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 6-9), said support member (mud flap panel 12, see Figure 5, lines 66-67) having a first side (front surface of mud flap panel 14, see Figure 4, column 3, line 3) and a second side (rear surface of mud flap panel 16, see Figure 5, column 3, line 3), said support member operably coupled to a vehicle adjacent a tire thereof (see column 2, lines 60-62), said first side of said support member (front surface of mud flap panel 14, see Figure 4, column 3, line 3) facing the tire, said support member being vertically oriented (not shown, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 6-9); a display member (accent plate 28, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 24-29), said display member being secured to said second side of said support member (not shown, see column 3, lines 24-29), said display member being planar in manner (not shown, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 29-33), said display member having an outer surface (peripheral edge of accent plate 38, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 39-42), said display member (accent plate 28, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 24-29) covering at least a portion of a surface area of the second side of said support member (lower recessed portion 26, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 25-29).
PNG
media_image1.png
298
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
539
669
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Cicansky teaches a display member. Cicansky does not teach that the indicia is imprinted on the outer surface of said display member.
Gustafson teaches indicia is imprinted on the outer surface of said display member (logo 15, see Figure 1, column 2, lines 11-14).
Where the only difference between a prior art product and a claimed product is printed matter that is not functionally related to the product, the content of the printed matter will not distinguish the claimed product from the prior art. In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1864 (Fed. Cir. 2004). (See MPEP 2112.01).
PNG
media_image3.png
500
464
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Cicansky teaches the support member is manufactured from rubber or plastic (not shown, mud flap panel 12 made out of a resilient rubber material, see column 2, lines 66-67).
Regarding claim 3, Cicansky teaches that the display member is secured to the support member employing a plurality of fasteners (apertures 36, see Figure 5, column 3, lines 37-42).
Regarding claim 4, Cicansky teaches that the display member is manufactured from metal (not shown, accent plate 28 made out of a rigid metallic plate of stainless steel, see column 3, lines 24-29).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 3241857 A to Goetz and US 3237963 A to Menzer comprises of mud flaps in front of tires with advertising devices on their front surfaces.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISHFAR AHMED whose telephone number is (571)270-3775. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am to 5 pm.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728287. 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.
/ISHFAR AHMED/Examiner, Art Unit 3631
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631
