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 .
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 2-37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-40 of U.S. Patent No.12448063. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 2 of the present application recites a connection device that interconnects a brake line on a truck with a gladhand mounted on a front of a trailer hitched thereto comprising: a robotic manipulator, having an end, that is guided by a controller, from a stowage location to the gladhand, the end carrying a connection tool with a connection member adapted to carry pressurized air from a braking circuit of the truck to a braking circuit of the trailer; a gladhand capture assembly on the connection tool that selectively engages a portion of the gladhand; and a hinge assembly that allows movement of the gladhand capture assembly relative to a base of the connection tool between an unlocked configuration and a locked configuration.
Claim 1 of patent 12448063 discloses a system for interconnecting a brake line on an AV truck with a gladhand mounted on a front of a trailer hitched thereto comprising: a robotic arm, having an end effector, that is guided by a controller, from a stowage location to the gladhand, the end effector removably carrying a connection tool with a connection member adapted to carry pressurized air from a braking circuit of the AV truck to a braking circuit of the trailer; a gladhand capture assembly on the connection tool that selectively engages a portion of the gladhand; and a hinge assembly that allows movement of the gladhand capture assembly relative to a base of the connection tool between an unlocked configuration and a locked configuration.
Though the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because a robotic manipulator is considered a robotic arm, and they perform the same function. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify the robotic manipulator to be interchanged for a robotic arm because they perform the same function.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Smith et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11755013) disclose a system and method for operation of an autonomous vehicle (AV) yard truck is provided. A processor facilitates autonomous movement of the AV yard truck, and connection to and disconnection from trailers. A plurality of sensors are interconnected with the processor that sense terrain/objects and assist in automatically connecting/disconnecting trailers. A server, interconnected, wirelessly with the processor, that tracks movement of the truck around and determines locations for trailer connection and disconnection. A door station unlatches/opens rear doors of the trailer when adjacent thereto, securing them in an opened position via clamps, etc. The system computes a height of the trailer, and/or if landing gear of the trailer is on the ground and interoperates with the fifth wheel to change height, and whether docking is safe, allowing a user to take manual control, and optimum charge time(s). Reversing sensors/safety, automated chocking, and intermodal container organization are also provided.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERTRUDE ARTHUR JEANGLAUDE whose telephone number is (571)272-6954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:30-8:00 EST.
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, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at 571-272-6011. 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.
/GERTRUDE ARTHUR JEANGLAUDE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights