DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 - 20 are pending and have been examined. This action is in response to the application filed March 28, 2025.
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
Claims 1 to 3, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Claim 6 is further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claims 4, 7 to 9 and 15 to 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claims 10 to 14 are objected to as containing allowable subject matter.
Claim 18 is objected to for an informality.
The drawings and the specification are objected to.
Priority
Applicant's claim of benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/571,855, filed March 29, 2024, is acknowledged. No foreign priority is claimed.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed April 10, 2025 has been considered. It was filed within three months of the filing date of the application and therefore complies with 37 CFR 1.97(b)(1); no statement under 37 CFR 1.97(e) or fee under 37 CFR 1.17(p) is required. An initialed and signed copy of the PTO/SB/08a is attached.
Drawings
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: 104 (traction wheel), 106 (power section), 108 (battery compartment), and 110 (battery), first appearing at paragraph [0073]; and 142 (mat), first appearing at paragraph [0075]. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
paragraph [00119]: "step 740 were the control unit" should read "step 740 where the control unit."
paragraph [00126]: the figure range "Figs. 15-34 and 36-40" is inconsistent with "Figs. 15-34 and 36-42" recited twice elsewhere in the same paragraph.
paragraph [00128]: "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 96, 7, 8, 9, or more carts 904" , "96" appears to be a typographical error for "6."
paragraph [00136]: "the clamping bar 256" should read "the clamping bar 254." Reference numeral 256 designates the housing at paragraph [0080].
paragraph [00138]: "the cart spacer 936," appearing twice, should read "the cart spacer 906." Reference numeral 936 designates the spacer wings.
paragraph [00141]: "auxiliary clamps 332" should read "auxiliary clamp wings 332" or "auxiliary clamps 306" (see paragraph [0084], Figure 7).
paragraph [00143]: "the carts 900" should read "the carts 904" (see paragraph [00128], Figure 37). Reference numeral 900 designates the plurality of clamps.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 objected to because of the following informalities: in the last line, "the second spacer is between the second cart and the fourth cart" should read "the second spacer wing is between the second cart and the fourth cart.". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Each of the terms recited in the claims is described in the specification. The following statements set out how the examiner reads the claimed language in view of the specification.
In claims 1, 5, 8, 9 and 15 to 20, the examiner considers the claimed "plurality of carts" to be material worked upon rather than a positively recited element of the vehicle or a step of the method, so that limitations directed to the number and the position of the carts limit only the capability of the platform, the clamps and the cart spacer, as described in paragraph [00128].
In claim 1, the examiner considers the claimed main clamp that "extends farther away from the clamping bar than the plurality of auxiliary clamps" to require the outer extents of the main clamp and of its main clamp wings to be farther from the clamping bar than the outer extents of each of the plurality of auxiliary clamps, as described in paragraph [00130] and shown in Figure 20.
In claim 4, the examiner considers the claimed main clamp wings that "extend to a position closer to the platform than each of the plurality of auxiliary clamp wings" to require the lowermost extent of the main clamp wings to be positioned below the lowermost extent of the auxiliary clamp wings.
In claims 7 to 14, 15 and 18, the examiner considers the claimed "cart spacer," "first spacer wing" and "second spacer wing" to be the cart spacer 906 and its two spacer wings 936, as described in paragraphs [00132] and [00133]. The base plate 926, first wall 928, second wall 930 and rods 932 also described in those paragraphs are not read into claims 7, 8, 9 and 15, which do not recite them.
In claims 7, 9, 10, 12, 15 and 18, the examiner considers the claimed movement of the spacer wings "between a first position and a second position" to be movement between a vertical position and a horizontal position, as described in paragraphs [00133] to [00135].
In claims 15 to 20, the examiner considers the claimed "first state" and "second state" of the clamping bar to be the lowered, secured position and the raised, open position of the clamping bar relative to the third horizontal post, as described in paragraphs [0086] and [0090] to [0091].
In claim 19, the examiner considers the claimed platform position of "6 inches (152.4 mm) from a ground" to be the stated dimension. The claim does not recite "about," so the plus or minus 5 percent convention of paragraph [0070] does not apply, notwithstanding that paragraph [00142] describes the forks and platform as raised about 6 inches (152.4 mm). See also paragraph [0022].
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.
Claim 6 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 6 recites the limitation "the main clamp wing" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 depends from claim 5, which depends from claim 1. Neither claim 1 nor claim 5 recites a main clamp wing; main clamp wings are first introduced in claim 2, which is not in the chain of dependency of claim 6. The scope of claim 6 is therefore indeterminate, as it cannot be ascertained whether the claim requires the main clamp to have a wing at all, or how many. Claim 6 has been examined as though it read "wherein the main clamp restricts movement of the third cart and the fourth cart."
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 to 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by King et al. (US 2023/0406683 A1, published December 21, 2023), hereinafter "King."
Regarding claim 1, King teaches:
a material handling vehicle (material handling vehicle 100; paragraph [0032], Figures 1 to 6).
a plurality of forks (a pair of forks 150; paragraph [0034]);
a platform attached to the plurality of forks (platform 170 attached to the forks 150, comprising main body 172 and ramp 174; paragraph [0035]);
a post assembly attached to the platform, the post assembly comprising one or more vertical posts and one or more horizontal posts (post assembly 202 secured to the main body 172 of the platform 170 by brackets 240; first, second and third vertical posts 210, 212, 214; first and second horizontal posts 220, 222; paragraphs [0036] to [0037]);
a clamping assembly secured with the post assembly and including a clamping bar (clamping assembly 204 comprising a third horizontal post 252 secured to the second and third vertical posts 212, 214, and a clamping bar 254 positioned above the third horizontal post 252; paragraph [0039]);
the clamping bar including a plurality of clamps positioned below the clamping bar (a plurality of clamps 302 secured on the clamping bar 254, the main clamp wings 312 and auxiliary clamp wings 332 extending downwardly and away from their respective bodies; paragraphs [0041] to [0043], Figures 7 to 8);
wherein the plurality of clamps comprises a main clamp and a plurality of auxiliary clamps spaced from the main clamp ("the clamping bar 254 comprises a single main clamp 304 positioned between two auxiliary clamps 306"; paragraph [0043]);
wherein the main clamp extends farther away from the clamping bar than the plurality of auxiliary clamps. As stated above, the examiner considers this limitation to require the outer extents of the main clamp and of its wings to be farther from the clamping bar than the outer extents of each auxiliary clamp (the main clamp 304 comprises a main clamp body 310 carrying the main clamp wings 312 at four corners of the body, the two wings on each side diverging from one another to form a main clamping cavity 316 between the wings, whereas each auxiliary clamp 306 comprises an auxiliary clamp body 330 with two auxiliary clamp wings 332 forming an auxiliary clamping cavity 334 with the clamping bar 254 itself, paragraphs [0042] and [0043]; Figures 6 and 7 show the main clamp 304 and its wings 312 extending farther from the clamping bar 254 than the auxiliary clamps 306 and their wings 332, and a drawing may be relied upon for what it reasonably discloses to one of ordinary skill in the art);
wherein the plurality of clamps are configured to secure a plurality of carts on the platform (the clamps 302 engage a frame 404 on each of the plurality of carts 400 to secure the carts to the platform 170; paragraphs [0047] to [0048], Figures 10 to 11).
Regarding claim 2,
King teaches the main clamp is positioned below a center of the clamping bar and includes a plurality of main clamp wings (the main clamp 304 positioned below a center of the clamping bar 254, the guide rod 264 being attached to the clamping bar 254 at its center, paragraph [0039], and passing through an aperture 318 extending through the main clamp 304 and the clamping bar 254, with a plurality of main clamp wings 312 extending from the main clamp body 310 at four corners thereof, paragraph [0042]; Figures 6 to 8).
Regarding claim 3,
King teaches each of the plurality of auxiliary clamps includes a plurality of auxiliary clamp wings (each auxiliary clamp 306 having two auxiliary clamp wings 332 positioned on opposite sides of the auxiliary clamp body 330; paragraph [0043]).
Regarding claim 5,
King teaches the plurality of carts include a first cart, a second cart, a third cart, and a fourth cart (four carts 400 held on the platform 170; paragraph [0048], Figure 10); and the platform is configured to hold the first cart and the second cart in a front portion of the material handling vehicle near an operator compartment (the front carts adjacent the operator compartment 112 and the load backrest 124; paragraphs [0033], [0035], [0048], Figure 10) and hold the third cart and the fourth cart in a rear portion of the material handling vehicle towards a ramp of the material handling vehicle (the rear carts adjacent the ramp 174 of the platform 170; paragraphs [0035], [0048], Figure 10).
Regarding claim 6,
King teaches the main clamp wing restricts movement of the third cart and the fourth cart (each of the main clamp wings 312 of the main clamp 304 holds the frame 404 of two of the plurality of carts 400, thereby restricting movement of the third and fourth carts; paragraph [0048], Figure 11).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 2023/0406683 A1).
Regarding claim 4, as stated above, the examiner considers the claimed main clamp wings that "extend to a position closer to the platform than each of the plurality of auxiliary clamp wings" to require the lowermost extent of the main clamp wings to be positioned below the lowermost extent of the auxiliary clamp wings.
King teaches a main clamp 304 having main clamp wings 312 extending downwardly and away from the main clamp body 310, and a plurality of auxiliary clamps 306 each having auxiliary clamp wings 332 extending down and away from the auxiliary clamp body 330 (paragraphs [0042] and [0043], Figure 8).
King does not teach that the main clamp wings extend to a position closer to the platform than the auxiliary clamp wings. In Figure 8 the main clamp wings 312 and the auxiliary clamp wings 332 extend to substantially the same position relative to the platform 170.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have extended King's main clamp wings 312 to a position closer to the platform 170 than the auxiliary clamp wings 332. The depth to which each clamp wing extends toward the platform is a matter of the relative dimensions of the clamps. The specification identifies no criticality in the recited relationship and describes no result that depends upon it. A change in the relative dimensions or proportions of a prior art element, absent a showing that the claimed dimensions are critical, is a matter of routine design choice within the skill of the art, and the skilled artisan would have selected the depth of each clamp wing to suit the frame height of the carts to be secured, with a predictable result.
Claims 7 to 9 and 15 to 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King (US 2023/0406683 A1) in view of Reges et al. (US 2017/0313335 A1, published November 2, 2017), hereinafter "Reges."
Regarding claim 7, King teaches:
a material handling vehicle comprising a platform (platform 170; paragraph [0035]);
a post assembly attached to the platform, comprising one or more vertical posts and one or more horizontal posts (post assembly 202; vertical posts 210, 212, 214; horizontal posts 220, 222; paragraphs [0036] to [0037]); and
a clamping assembly secured with the post assembly and including a clamping bar, the clamping bar including a plurality of clamps (clamping assembly 204, clamping bar 254, clamps 302; paragraphs [0039], [0041] to [0043]).
As stated above, the examiner considers the claimed cart spacer to be two wings carried on a horizontal member of the post assembly and spaced apart so that each lies between adjacent carts, movable between a vertical orientation and a horizontal orientation. King does not teach a cart spacer secured with one of the horizontal posts, the cart spacer including a first spacer wing and a second spacer wing spaced from the first spacer wing, wherein the first spacer wing and the second spacer wing are configured to move between a first position and a second position.
Reges teaches a cart transportation assembly having a platform 30 with a deck 32 and a frame 20 with uprights 22 and cross members 23 supporting a top rail 25 (paragraph [0044]), and a center cart latch 141 carried on the top rail 25 and comprising a fore ramp 144 and an aft ramp 143 situated at an angle ø′ (paragraph [0065], Figures 16 to 18). Reges teaches that the center cart latch 141 is pivotally coupled by a pivot pin 43 and is moved by the actuation rod 26 between a release position and a restrain position (paragraphs [0066] to [0067]), and that the center cart latch 141, when lowered into the restrain position, "serves to separate two carts 70" on the deck of the platform (paragraph [0065]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided King's material handling vehicle with a cart spacer as taught by Reges, secured with one of the horizontal posts 220, 222 of the post assembly 202. The motivation to do so is expressly provided by Reges, which teaches at paragraphs [0051] and [0065] that a center cart latch separates adjacent carts and restrains cart movement in the longitudinal direction of the platform, whereas the cart latches alone restrain movement only laterally. King's platform 170 carries four carts 400 (paragraph [0048], Figure 10) with no structure disclosed for preventing longitudinal shifting of the front pair of carts toward the rear pair. Applying Reges' teaching to King would predictably restrain such movement and positively locate the carts on the platform, using known elements according to their established functions to yield a predictable result.
Regarding claim 8,
King teaches the platform is configured to hold a plurality of carts (platform 170 configured to hold a plurality of carts 400; paragraph [0047]).
Regarding claim 9,
King teaches the plurality of carts further includes a first cart, a second cart, a third cart, and a fourth cart (four carts 400 held on the platform 170 in front and rear pairs; paragraph [0048], Figure 10). King does not teach a first spacer wing positioned between the first cart and the third cart and a second spacer wing positioned between the second cart and the fourth cart. Reges teaches the center cart latch 141 positioned between adjacent carts 70 on the deck 32 and separating two carts when in the restrain position (paragraph [0065], Figure 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have so positioned the cart spacer in King’s vehicle, for the reasons given with respect to claim 7.
Regarding claim 15,
King teaches a method for loading a material handling vehicle, the method comprising providing the material handling vehicle, the material handling vehicle comprising a platform (platform 170), a post assembly attached with a clamping assembly (post assembly 202 attached with clamping assembly 204), the clamping assembly comprising a clamping bar with a plurality of clamps, and the clamping bar being configured to move relative to the post assembly between a first state and a second state (clamping bar 254 with a plurality of clamps 302; paragraphs [0035] to [0039], [0045]); loading carts onto the platform of the material handling vehicle (a plurality of carts 400 loaded onto the platform 170 via the ramp 174; step 602, paragraph [0062]); moving the clamping bar from the second state to the first state (step 606; paragraph [0063]); and moving the platform from a down position to an up position after the clamping bar has moved from the second state to the first state (step 608; paragraph [0064]).
King does not teach providing a cart spacer, or moving the cart spacer from a first position to a second position between the loading of a first cart and a second cart and the loading of a third cart and a fourth cart. Reges teaches the center cart latch 141 movable between release and restrain positions and serving to separate two carts on the deck of the platform (paragraphs [0065] to [0067]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated Reges’ cart spacer into King’s loading method and to have positioned it between the front and rear carts, for the reasons given with respect to claim 7. Positioning a spacer between a front pair and a rear pair of carts necessarily entails loading the front carts, positioning the spacer, and then loading the rear carts.
Regarding claim 16,
King teaches the plurality of clamps are configured to secure with the first cart, the second cart, the third cart, and the fourth cart once the clamping bar is in the first state (the clamps 302 securing the frames 404 of the four carts 400 when the clamping bar 254 is in the first state; paragraphs [0048] to [0049]).
Regarding claim 17,
King teaches the plurality of clamps include a main clamp and a plurality of auxiliary clamps spaced from the main clamp (main clamp 304 and a plurality of auxiliary clamps 306 spaced from the main clamp; paragraph [0043]).
Regarding claim 18,
King teaches the first cart, the second cart, the third cart and the fourth cart (four carts 400 held on the platform 170; paragraph [0048], Figure 10). King does not teach that, when the cart spacer is in the second position, the first spacer wing is positioned between the first cart and the third cart and the second spacer wing is positioned between the second cart and the fourth cart. Reges teaches the center cart latch 141, in the restrain position, positioned between adjacent carts 70 on the deck (paragraph [0065]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have so positioned the cart spacer, for the reasons given with respect to claim 7.
Regarding claim 19,
As stated above, the examiner considers the claimed 6 inches (152.4 mm) to be the stated dimension. King teaches moving the platform from a down position to an up position, the up position being any position in which the platform 170 and the forks 150 are lifted out of contact with the ground (paragraph [0052]). King does not teach that, in the up position, the platform is positioned 6 inches (152.4 mm) from a ground. The lift height of the platform is a result effective variable, and the selection of a particular lift height would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as a matter of routine optimization. Reges further teaches raising the forks a specific distance of 2.5 inches off the floor 75 before traction is permitted (paragraph [0074]), confirming that the lift height of the platform is a recognized design parameter in the art.
Regarding claim 20,
King teaches the material handling vehicle will not move until the first cart, the second cart, the third cart and the fourth cart are clamped (the material handling vehicle 100 can only move while the forks 150 and the platform 170 are in the up position and the clamping bar 254 is in the first state securing the carts 400, and the control unit 502 disables the vehicle from driving until the lift limit is detected; paragraphs [0052], [0072], step 706). Reges further teaches a switch preventing traction until the latch assembly 145 secures the carts on board (paragraph [0074]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 to 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record teaches a cart spacer carried on a frame member of a cart carrying platform and movable between two positions to separate adjacent carts. Reges teaches a center cart latch 141 having a fore ramp 144 and an aft ramp 143, pivotally movable between release and restrain positions to separate two carts on the deck (paragraphs [0065] to [0067]). Bartels (US 8,591,154 B2) teaches spacers 31 mounted on a clamping channel 26 and placed between the rows of carts 90 on a cart carrier platform (col. 4). The prior art of record does not teach or suggest, however, a cart spacer in which each spacer wing comprises an aperture extending therethrough (claim 10), or a cart spacer having a first wall and a second wall (claim 11) with the spacer wings positioned between those walls (claim 12) and each spacer wing comprising a notch configured to secure with the first wall (claim 13). Reges’ center cart latch is a unitary pivoting member carried within the top rail and has no wall structure, no notch cooperating with such a wall, and no aperture through its ramps; Bartels’ spacers are fixed projections on a vertically translating channel and likewise lack these features. Claim 14 depends on claim 13 and is allowable for the same reason.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Bartels (US 8,591,154 B2) discloses a cart carrier having a vertically movable clamping channel carrying clamping bars and spacers placed between the rows of carts, biased toward a clamped position by a coil spring.
Brauer et al. (US 8,894,037 B1) discloses a lift truck platform apparatus for transporting rolling racks, having a clamp with downwardly extending clamp rods for securing racks on the platform.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HALBERT NHU NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1110. The examiner can normally be reached 7am – 6pm Mon - Thu.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/HALBERT N NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3652
/GREGORY W ADAMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
Prosecution Insights