DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on 08/21/2025, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a Non-Final Office Action on the merits in response to applicant’s filing from 08/21/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Priority
The application claims priority to foreign application KR 10-2021-0021891, filed on 02/18/2021; KR 10-2021-0038098, filed on 03/24/2021; and KR 10-2021-0041191, filed on 03/30/2021; and is a continuation of 17/672,121, filed on 02/15/2022. The priority is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Several of the prior art references cited have been struck through because they listed the filing date, instead of the publication date. These references were also considered, but they need to be corrected with the proper publication date.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,420,697. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the phrase “barrier” is a substitute for “falling protection device” (claim 1), “front barrier” is a substitute for “front device”, and “rear barrier” is a substitute for “rear device”, “when the vehicle is decelerated” is a substitute for “when the vehicle is braked”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 8-10, 15, and 18-19 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:
Regarding claim 5, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in obvious combination, discloses the vehicle of claim 3, wherein the front barrier comprises a front panel slidably and rotatably mounted to the cargo platform, and a front actuator configured to extend and push the front panel to rotate and erect the front panel rearward.
Regarding claim 8, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in obvious combination, discloses the vehicle of claim 6, wherein the rear barrier comprises a rear panel slidably and rotatably mounted to the cargo platform, and a rear actuator configured to extend and push the rear panel to rotate and erect the rear panel forward.
Regarding claim 9, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in obvious combination, discloses the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a weight detector installed on a bottom surface of the cargo platform and configured to measure a weight of cargo loaded on the cargo platform, wherein the controller is further configured to control deployment of the barrier based on a change in the measured weight.
Accordingly, claim 10 is allowable by virtue of dependence from claim 9.
Regarding claim 15, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in obvious combination, discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the front barrier comprises a front panel slidably and rotatably mounted to the cargo platform, and a front actuator configured to extend and push the front panel to rotate and erect the front panel rearward.
Regarding claim 18, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in obvious combination, discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the rear barrier comprises a rear panel slidably and rotatably mounted to the cargo platform, and a rear actuator configured to extend and push the rear panel to rotate and erect the rear panel forward.
Regarding claim 19, none of the prior art of record, either alone or in obvious combination, discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising acquiring weight information of cargo loaded on the cargo platform using a weight detector, wherein controlling deployment of the barrier is based on both the acquired acceleration of the vehicle and a change in the weight measured by the weight detector.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel M Keck whose telephone number is (571)272-5947. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-4:00.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571)270-5985. 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.
/Daniel M. Keck/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614