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 § 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 8-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. With respect to claim 8, line 5, “the lower retaining device” lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears applicant means to say “the lower retaining element” as recited in claim 7 from which claim 8 depends.
Claims 9-15 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 10, “pivoting of the lower support toward its transport position brings about lengthening of the second elastic return means whatever the position of the upper retaining element.” is vague and indefinite as to “whatever the position of the upper retaining element”. Examiner suggest replacing “whatever” to “regardless of”. Additionally with respect to claim 10, “a second elastic return means” is vague and indefinite since “second” infers there’s a “first elastic return means”, however, claims 10 and the claims from which it depends does not recited “a first elastic return means”.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, “the second elastic return means” lacks proper antecedent basis.
With respect to claim 13, “a second abutment means” is vague and indefinite since “second” infers there’s a “first abutment means”, however, claims 13 and the claims from which it depends does not recited “a first abutment means”.
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 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett (US 3655082 A) in view of Monroig, Jr. (US 6413033 B1).
With respect to claim 1, Garrett discloses a support device for receiving and retaining a cycle with two wheels on the back or on the side of a mechanical lift vehicle (1, figure 7) intended to be moved in a longitudinal direction, said support device comprising an upper support (2, figure 7) conformed to receive and retain a first wheel of said cycle with two wheels oriented in a substantially vertical retaining plane (plane of page herein referred to as PM) containing said longitudinal direction, said support device including:- a lower support (17, figure 7) extending lengthwise between a proximal end section (18) and a distal end section (46),- an intermediate receptacle (47, 50, figure 7) on said lower support (17) between the proximal end section and the distal end section conformed to receive in bearing engagement a second wheel of said cycle with two wheels, wherein:- the proximal end section (18) of the lower support (17) is articulated to pivot in said retaining plane (PM) between: a. a transport position (figure 1) in which the lower support is at a first angle (180 degrees, figure 1) to the longitudinal direction, b. a loading position (figure 7) in which the lower support is at a second angle (A2) to the longitudinal direction, the second angle (A2, angle less than 180) being less than the first angle (180 degrees, figure 1),
However, Garrett does not disclose rolling means on the distal end section of the lower support conformed to roll on a surface such as the ground.
Monroig, Jr. (US 6413033 B1) discloses a support device for receiving and retaining a cycle (11) with two wheels on the back or on the side of a mechanical lift vehicle (38) intended to be moved in a longitudinal direction, said support device comprising an upper support (24, figure 1D); said support device including:- a lower support (20, figure 1D) extending lengthwise between a proximal end section and a distal end section; rolling means (28C,D) on the distal end section of the lower support (20) conformed to roll on a surface such as the ground.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the support device of Garrett such that rolling means on the distal end section of the lower support conformed to roll on a surface such as the ground as taught to be desirable by Monroig, Jr..
With respect to claim 2, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 1 as advanced above, wherein Garrett discloses the proximal end section (18) of the lower support (17) is articulated to the upper support (2).
With respect to claim 3, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 1 as advanced above, wherein Garrett discloses first abutment means (46) oppose downward rotation of the lower support (17) beyond a predetermined limit oblique orientation in which the second wheel is behind the first wheel (figure 7).
With respect to claim 4, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 1 as advanced above, wherein Monroig, Jr. discloses the rolling means (28C,D) are conformed to roll in any direction in a plane (rolling means 28, C, D rolls along forward and backward of a single plane).
With respect to claim 5, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 4 as advanced above, wherein Monroig, Jr. discloses the rolling means (28C, D) include a castor carried by a mount (hole in wheels) pivoting freely about a pivot axis (hole in wheels pivot along the axis of the pin).
With respect to claim 6, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 1 wherein Garrett discloses the intermediate receptacle (47-50, figure 10) is conformed to retain said second wheel in said retaining plane (PM) and preferably has a cross section in said retaining plane (PM) that is substantially U-shaped shaped (figure 10).
With respect to claim 7, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 1 as advanced above, wherein Garrett discloses the upper support (2) includes a lower retaining element (12-16, figure 7) intended to receive said first wheel in vertical bearing engagement.
With respect to claim 16, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 1 as advanced above, wherein Garrett includes locking means (35, figure 5) conformed to fix the support device to the back of a mechanical lift vehicle (36 of camper step 34) having a width in a transverse direction, said mechanical lift vehicle being intended to be moved in the longitudinal direction.
Claims 8, 9, 11, 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett (US 3655082 A) in view of Monroig, Jr. (US 6413033 B1) as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Rayl et al (US 20170190369 A1).
With respect to claim 8, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 7 as advanced above except for wherein:- the upper support includes an upper retaining element intended to come to bear vertically on said first wheel,- the upper retaining element is articulated so as to pivot in said retaining plane relative to the lower retaining device between: a. at least one open position in which the first wheel can penetrate between the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element by a forward introduction movement in said retaining plane,b. at least one closed position in which the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element oppose extraction of the first wheel by a rearward extraction movement in said retaining plane.
Rayl et al (US 20170190369 A1) discloses a support device for bicycles comprising an upper support (20 or 120, figures 1-6) includes a lower retaining element (22 ) intended to receive said first wheel in vertical bearing engagement; and wherein:- the upper support (120, figure 6) includes an upper retaining element (24, figure 1) intended to come to bear vertically on said first wheel,- the upper retaining element is articulated so as to pivot in a retaining plane (PM) relative to a lower retaining device (22, 28) between: a. at least one open position (figure 2B) in which the first wheel can penetrate between the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element by a forward introduction movement in said retaining plane (PM),b. at least one closed position (figure 2C) in which the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element oppose extraction of the first wheel by a rearward extraction movement in said retaining plane.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the upper support of Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined such that the upper support includes an upper retaining element intended to come to bear vertically on said first wheel,- the upper retaining element is articulated so as to pivot in said retaining plane relative to the lower retaining device between: a. at least one open position in which the first wheel can penetrate between the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element by a forward introduction movement in said retaining plane,b. at least one closed position in which the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element oppose extraction of the first wheel by a rearward extraction movement in said retaining plane for positively capturing the front wheel as taught to be desirable by Rayl.
With respect to claim 9, Garrett, Monroig, Jr. and Rayl combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 8 as advanced above, wherein Rayl discloses first elastic return means (44, figure 2A-2C) between the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element urge the upper retaining element and the lower retaining element at all times toward their closed position.
With respect to claim 11, Garrett, Monroig, Jr. and Rayl combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 9 as advanced above, wherein Rayl discloses the first elastic return means (44) and/or the second elastic return means include(s) a spring (44, see paragraph [0023]);
With respect to claim 13, Garrett, Monroig, Jr. and Rayl combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 8 as advanced above, wherein Rayl discloses the support device includes second abutment means (42, figure 1) opposing pivoting of the upper retaining element (24, figure 1) toward the lower retaining element (22) beyond a predetermined waiting position.
With respect to claim 14, Garrett, Monroig, Jr. and Rayl combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 8 as advanced above, wherein Rayl discloses the upper retaining element (24) includes two lateral arms spaced from one another and on respective opposite sides of the retaining plane (figure 1) so as to receive between them a part of the first wheel (60, figures 2B-2C), said lateral arms each having a free end,- the free ends of the lateral arms are connected to one another by connecting means (26, figures 1-2C) intended to come to bear vertically on the first wheel (60).
With respect to claim 15, Garrett, Monroig, Jr. and Rayl combined discloses the support device as claimed in claim 14 as advanced above, wherein Rayl discloses the connecting means include a castor (90, figure 3) disposed to pivot about a transverse axis (88, figure 3) substantially perpendicular to said retaining plane.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrett (US 3655082 A) in view of Monroig, Jr. (US 6413033 B1) as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of DuBois (FR 2958255 A1).
With respect to claim 17, Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined disclose the support device as claimed in claim 1 as advanced above except for a mechanical lift vehicle in combination thereof.
DuBois discloses a mechanical lift vehicle (30, figure 5) having a width in a transverse direction and intended to be moved in a longitudinal direction, including a support device (12, figure 5), and said support device (12) being fixed to the back of the mechanical lift vehicle (30, figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have mounted the support device of Garrett and Monroig, Jr. combined to a mechanical lift vehicle as taught to be desirable by DuBois.
With respect to claim 18. Garrett, Monroig, Jr., and DuBois combined disclose the support device as claimed in claim 17 as advanced above, wherein DuBois discloses a mechanical lift including at least one mechanical lift vehicle (30) and said mechanical lift vehicle being of the chair type (30, figure 5).
Claims 10 and 12 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art of record further demonstrate bike racks of interests.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ko (Korie) H Chan whose telephone number is (571)272-6816. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Friday, 8:00 - 5:00 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Liu can be reached on 571-272-8227. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Ko H Chan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Khc
Prosecution Insights