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 .
Examiner’s Comments
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Column and line (or Paragraph Number) citations have been provided as a convenience for Applicants, but the entirety of each reference should be duly considered. Any recitation of a Figure element, e.g. “Figure 1, element T should be construed as inherently also reciting “and relevant disclosure thereto”.
Claim Interpretation
In the patentability context, claims are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretations. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Moreover, limitations are not to be read into the claims from the specification. Id. With regard to the term “leaf screen”, the examiner is interpreting the limitation as ‘a protective cover structure’ capable of blocking leaves, twigs, or other debris. If applicant has a specific idea of what applicant intends to recite with the limitation applicant should make this clear in the claims, preferably with additional structural limitations, exactly what is intended. Since no definitions are provided in the specification nor in the claim language, examiner is forced to use the broadest reasonable interpretation of such terminology and the plain meaning of the words. Applicant is free to act as their own lexicographer but has not done so in these instances. In the instant rejection, there is no structural distinction between applicant’s ‘leaf screen’ and the structure ‘114’ of WO 635.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 25-30, 32-34, 38-41, and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 635 (WO 2021/204635).
For claim 25, WO 635 discloses a motor vehicle, comprising:
a vehicle static body structure (FIG.2) including a cowl structure (shown but not numbered, FIG.2) and a leaf screen (114) secured at an upper surface of the cowl structure,
wherein the cowl structure and the leaf screen are separate and distinct components of the vehicle static body structure;
a side view mirror assembly mounted to the vehicle static body structure and including a base frame (104), a mirror housing assembly (100), and a mirror neck cover (106) that is positioned over the base frame;
the mirror neck cover (106) interfaces with the leaf screen (114) to establish an accessory mounting platform of the side view mirror assembly, jointly defined by a first portion established by the mirror neck cover and a second portion established by the leaf screen; and
the second portion includes a mounting opening (108, rightmost, FIG.2) positioned to align with a boss (202, rightmost, FIG.2) of the base frame or the cowl structure for receiving a fastener or threaded accessory.
PNG
media_image1.png
523
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
For claim 26, the accessory mounting platform includes
a first fastener (clip, snap, or latch within 108) removably received within the mounting opening (108).
For claim 27, an accessory device (disclosed at page 7, lines 11-13) is mounted to the accessory mounting platform via the first fastener.
For claim 28, the first fastener is received by the boss (202) of the base frame when positioned within the mounting opening.
For claim 29, the first fastener is received by the boss (202) of the cowl structure when positioned within the mounting opening.
For claim 32, the side view mirror assembly is mounted at a joint interface between an A-pillar (112), a hinge pillar (implicit, behind door 110), a fender support (118), and the cowl structure (114) of the vehicle static body structure.
For claim 33, a bracket (FIG.3) of the side view mirror assembly is mounted to the joint interface by one or more fasteners.
For claim 34, the base frame is secured to the bracket by one or more additional fasteners (page 9, lines 20-22).
For claim 38, the side view mirror assembly includes an electrical conduit (302) that is routed through the base frame to a dry area of the motor vehicle.
For claim 39, the mirror neck cover conceals at least a portion (FIGS.4-6) of the electrical conduit (302) that is routed through the base frame.
For claim 40, WO 635 discloses a motor vehicle, comprising:
a vehicle static body structure including a cowl structure (shown, not numbered, FIG.2) and a leaf screen (114) secured at an upper surface of the cowl structure,
wherein the cowl structure and the leaf screen are separate and distinct components of the vehicle static body structure;
a side view mirror assembly mounted to the vehicle static body structure and including a base frame (104), a mirror housing assembly (100), and a mirror neck cover (106) that is positioned over the base frame;
the mirror neck cover (106) and the leaf screen (114) jointly define an accessory mounting platform of the side view mirror assembly;
the mirror neck cover establishes a first portion of the accessory mounting platform, and the leaf screen establishes a second portion of the accessory mounting platform;
the second portion includes a mounting opening (108, rightmost, FIG.2) formed through the leaf screen; and
an accessory (disclosed at page 7, lines 11-13, not shown) including a threaded portion configured to screw directly into the mounting opening (108) of the second portion of the accessory mounting platform,
wherein the mounting opening (108, rightmost, FIG.2) is positioned to align with an internally-threaded boss (202, rightmost, FIG.2) of the base frame (104) or the cowl structure.
For claims 30 and 41, WO 635 provides the accessory can include a radar sensor (implicitly including an antenna therein). The radar sensor is mounted to the accessory mounting platform via a threaded/screw connection (disclosed) in conjunction with the mounting openings (108) provided.
For claim 45, WO 635 discloses a motor vehicle, comprising:
a vehicle static body structure including a cowl structure (shown, not numbered, FIG.2) and a leaf screen (114) secured at an upper surface of the cowl structure, the cowl structure and the leaf screen being separate and distinct components of the vehicle static body structure;
a side view mirror assembly mounted to the vehicle static body structure at a joint interface including at least two of an A-pillar (112), a hinge pillar, a fender support (shown, not numbered, FIG.2), and the cowl structure (shown, not numbered, FIG.2);
the side view mirror assembly secured to the joint interface by a plurality of fasteners (clip, snap, latch, as disclosed; and see page 9, lines 20-22);
the side view mirror assembly includes a base frame (104), a mirror housing assembly (100), a mirror neck cover (106) positioned over the base frame, and an electrical conduit (harness, 302; see FIGS.3-6) routed through the base frame and into a dry area (not numbered, FIG.3) of the vehicle static body structure that is protected from exterior environmental exposure;
the mirror neck cover conceals at least a portion of the electrical conduit as the electrical conduit transitions from the mirror housing assembly toward the dry area;
the mirror neck cover (106) interfaces with the leaf screen (114) establish an accessory mounting platform jointly defined by a first portion established by the mirror neck cover and a second portion established by the leaf screen; and
the second portion includes at least one externally accessible mounting opening (108) positioned to align with a boss (202) of the base frame or the cowl structure for receiving a fastener or threaded accessory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The text of those sections of Title 35, US Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 35-37,42-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 635, as applied above, in view of CN 103448620(CN 620).
WO 635 discloses (bottom of page 11) the mirror head 102 has a rotational attachment at a pivot joint 404 allowing head to rotate in relation to the vehicle 120 and further that the rotation may be achieved manually or with the use of a power-fold actuator.
WO 635, as modified, fails to provide the specifics of the mirror recited.
CN 620 teaches a mirror assembly including a mirror housing assembly with an arm (3) that extends inside of an outer mirror housing (shell 2). The arm supports a motor (13) and a mirror (disclosed, not shown) relative to the outer mirror housing (2). The arm is pivotably connected to the base frame.
PNG
media_image2.png
286
514
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable expectation of success to have provided the mirror assembly of WO 635 with a pivoting arm, motor, and mirror as taught by CN 620 in order to allow for easy adjustment of the mirror for better viewing and vehicle safety.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) as amended have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HILARY L GUTMAN whose telephone number is 571.272.6662. 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, PAUL DICKSON can be reached on 571.272.7742. 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.
/HILARY L GUTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614