DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/29/2026 has been entered.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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, 3, 7, 9-10, 12, 18, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami et al. in view of Matsuda US 20130270025 A1 and Tsukada et al. US 20060027407 A1.
Regarding independent claim 1, Fukami et al. discloses a saddle riding vehicle 1 comprising: an engine E disposed between a front wheel 2 and a rear wheel 3,] (Fig. 1; Abstract) [the engine including a cylinder head 13] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0023) [a fuel tank 7 disposed above the engine;] (Fig. 1; As shown in Fig. 1, Fukami et al. illustrates a fuel tank 7 being disposed above then engine E.) [a generator M mounted to a crankshaft 16 of the engine;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0027) and [an inverter 35 that supplies output of the generator to a battery,] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0027) [wherein the inverter is disposed behind a head pipe 5, above a crankcase 15 and below the fuel tank 7.] (Fig. 1; As shown in Fig. 1, Fukami et al. illustrates wherein the inverter is disposed behind a head pipe 5, above a crankcase 15 and below the fuel tank 7.)
Fukami et al. does not disclose wherein the inverter is disposed forward of an axis of the crankshaft in a side view.
Matsuda teaches wherein [the inverter is disposed forward of an axis of the crankshaft in a side view.] (Fig. 2; As shown in Fig. 2, Matsuda illustrates wherein the inverter 18 is disposed in front of the axis of the crankshaft 23 in a side view.) [wherein a front end of the inverter is located forward of a front end of a cylinder of the engine in a side view.] (Fig. 1 of Matsuda; Fig. 1; As shown in Fig. 1, Matsuda illustrates wherein a front end of the inverter is located forward of a front end of a cylinder of the engine in a side view.) [wherein a vehicle body frame 6 includes a first engine support part 20 which supports a front portion of a cylinder of the engine 21 and a second engine support part 8 which supports a rear portion of the cylinder, and the inverter 18 is supported by the first engine support part and the second engine support part of the vehicle body frame.] (Fig. 1 of Matsuda; Paragraph 0036 of Matsuda; As shown in Fig. 1, Matsuda illustrates a first engine support part 20 supporting a front portion of the body 9 of the motor 21 and second support parts 8 supporting a rear portion of the body 9 of the motor 21. Additionally, Matsuda discloses that the second support parts 8 are fastened to the battery case 15, which is further attached to the inverter case 19. The second support parts are also supported by the first engine support part 20. Therefore, having the first 20 and second supporting parts 8 indirectly supporting the inverter case 19 which accommodates the inverter 18.) [wherein the vehicle body frame 6 includes: a main frame 8 which extends rearward from the head pipe 7] (Fig. 1 of Matsuda; Paragraph 0035 of Matsuda) and [a first frame piece 20 which extends rearward from a part of the head pipe located below the main frame;] (Fig. 1 of Matsuda; Paragraph 0037 of Matsuda) and [in a side view, at least a part of the inverter is disposed below the main frame and above the first frame piece.] (Fig. 1 of Matsuda; As shown in Fig. 1, Matsuda illustrates the inverter 18 being disposed below the main frame 8 and being above the first frame piece 20.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the inverter placement of Matsuda with the vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for a more efficient packaging layout in the vehicle body, thus improving weight distribution and cooling efficiency of the inverter while maintaining accessibility for maintenance.
Fukami et al. as modified above, does not disclose wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in a vehicle widthwise direction, and the entirety of the inverter is disposed outward of the cylinder head of the engine in the vehicle widthwise direction.
Tsukada et al. teaches [wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in the vehicle widthwise direction,] (Fig. 3; Paragraph 0039; As shown Fig. 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates the inverter 30 being disposed outward of a main frame of the vehicle.) [and the entirety of the inverter is disposed outward of the cylinder head of the engine in the vehicle widthwise direction.] (Additionally, as shown in Fig. 1 of Fukami et al., the cylinder head 13 of the engine is positioned within the vehicle body frame. Therefore, positioning the inverter outward of the vehicle body frame, as taught by Tsukada et al., results in the inverter being disposed outward of the cylinder head in the vehicle widthwise direction.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the outward inverter layout of Tsukada et al. with the vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved spatial efficiency and thermal management by positioning the inverter in a region with enhanced airflow, thus improving cooling performance and component reliability.
Regarding claim 3, Fukami et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a seat 8 on which a driver sits, wherein the battery 42 is disposed below the seat and above the crankcase 15 of the engine.] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; As shown in Fig. 1, Fukami et al. illustrates a seat 8, wherein the battery 42 is disposed below the seat and above the crankcase 15 of the engine.)
Regarding claim 7, Fukami et al., as modified above, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the inverter and engine cylinder arrangement recited in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Fukami et al., as modified above, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the first and second engine support parts recited in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, Fukami, as modified, discloses [an inverter 35;] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; Paragraph 0027 of Fukami et al.) [and an exhaust muffler 23 located on an outer side of a vehicle body in a vehicle widthwise direction.] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; Paragraph 0025 of Fukami et al.)
Fukami et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the inverter is disposed on an opposite side to an exhaust muffler, with respect to a center axis of the vehicle body extending in a front-to-rear direction. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of know elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, positioning the inverter on an opposite side to the exhaust muffler, with respect to a center axis of the vehicle body extending in a front-to-rear direction would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art as it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding claim 12, Fukami et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a cowling 17 which covers a front part of a vehicle body from an outer side in a vehicle widthwise direction,] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; Paragraph 0022 of Fukami et al.) [wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in the vehicle widthwise direction.] (Fig. 3 of Tsukada et al. of Tsukada; Paragraph 0039; As shown Fig. 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates the inverter 30 being disposed outward of a main frame of the vehicle.) and [inward of the cowling in the vehicle widthwise direction.] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; Paragraph 0022 of Fukami et al.; Fukami et al. discloses that the cowling extends from a front portion to side portions of the vehicle body to cover the engine E and other components, thus having the inverter 35 be disposed inward of the cowling in the vehicle widthwise direction.)
Regarding claim 18, Fukami et al., as modified, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the main frame configuration recited in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 20, Fukami et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a part of the inverter is disposed to overlap a cylinder head cover of the engine in a side view. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of known elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, arranging the inverter to be at least partially overlapping with the cylinder head cover of the engine would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding independent claim 21, Fukami et al. discloses a saddle riding vehicle 1 comprising: an engine E disposed between a front wheel 2 and a rear wheel 3,] (Fig. 1; Abstract) [the engine including a cylinder head 13] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0023) [a fuel tank 7 disposed above the engine;] (Fig. 1; As shown in Fig. 1, Fukami et al. illustrates a fuel tank 7 being disposed above then engine E.) [a generator M mounted to a crankshaft 16 of the engine;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0027) and [an inverter 35 that supplies output of the generator to a battery,] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0027) [wherein the inverter is disposed behind a head pipe 5, above a crankcase 15 and below the fuel tank 7.] (Fig. 1; As shown in Fig. 1, Fukami et al. illustrates wherein the inverter is disposed behind a head pipe 5, above a crankcase 15 and below the fuel tank 7.)
Fukami et al. does not disclose wherein the inverter is disposed forward of an axis of the crankshaft in a side view.
Matsuda teaches wherein [the inverter is disposed forward of an axis of the crankshaft in a side view.] (Fig. 2; As shown in Fig. 2, Matsuda illustrates wherein the inverter 18 is disposed in front of the axis of the crankshaft 23 in a side view.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the inverter placement of Matsuda with the vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for a more efficient packaging layout in the vehicle body, thus improving weight distribution and cooling efficiency of the inverter while maintaining accessibility for maintenance.
Fukami et al. as modified above, does not disclose wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in a vehicle widthwise direction, and the entirety of the inverter is disposed outward of the cylinder head of the engine in the vehicle widthwise direction.
Tsukada et al. teaches [wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in the vehicle widthwise direction,] (Fig. 3; Paragraph 0039; As shown Fig. 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates the inverter 30 being disposed outward of a main frame of the vehicle.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the outward inverter layout of Tsukada et al. with the vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved spatial efficiency and thermal management by positioning the inverter in a region with enhanced airflow, thus improving cooling performance and component reliability.
Fukami et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the entirety of the inverter is disposed above the cylinder head of the engine. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of known elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, arranging the inverter to be at least entirely above the cylinder head of the engine would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Claim 2 and 13-14 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami et al., Matsuda, Tsukada et al., and in view of Eguchi US 9598132 B2.
Regarding claim 2, Fukami et al., as modified, does not disclose wherein the inverter is disposed outward of the crankcase of the engine in a vehicle widthwise direction.
Eguchi teaches wherein [the inverter is disposed outward of the crankcase of the engine in a vehicle widthwise direction.] (Fig. 4; Col. 7, lines 30-32; As shown in Fig. 4, Eguchi illustrates the inverter 13 being mounted to the left seat rail 11L, while the crankcase 3 is centrally located in the vehicles widthwise direction. Therefore, the inverter is laterally offset from the crankcase and disposed toward the side of the vehicle.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the inverter placement of Eguchi with the saddle riding vehicle of Fukami et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved spatial packaging and thermal management by placing the heat generating inverter in an area with increased air flow and available space, thus optimizing vehicle design and ease of maintenance.
Regarding claim 13, Fukami et al., as modified, further discloses [wherein the cowling includes an exhaust air port 14b in an area which faces the inverter in the vehicle widthwise direction;] (Fig. 2 & 3 of Tsukada et al.; Paragraph 0038 of Tsukada et al.; As shown in Fig. 2 & 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates wherein the cowling 14 includes an exhaust air port 14b in an area which faces the inverter.) [wherein the cowling 14 includes an air intake 14a opening in a front-end portion of the cowling.] (Fig. 2 & 3 of Tsukada et al.; Paragraph 0052 of Tsukada et al.; As shown in Fig. 2 & 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates wherein the cowling 14 includes an air intake 14a opening in a front-end portion of the cowling.)
Fukami et al., as modified, does not disclose wherein the exhaust port faces the inverter in the vehicle widthwise direction.
Eguchi teaches [wherein the exhaust port faces the inverter in the vehicles widthwise direction,] (Annotation of Fig. 1; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 1 below, Eguchi illustrates an exhaust port that faces the inverter in the vehicles widthwise direction.)
PNG
media_image1.png
570
885
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Eguchi
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the exhaust port structure of Eguchi with the vehicle of Fukami with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for efficient heat dissipation by positioning the exhaust outlet and invert in a thermally optimized configuration, thus improving cooling performance and maintaining inverter operating stability.
Regarding claim 14, Fukami et al., as modified above, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the cowling configuration recited in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 19, Fukami et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the whole inverter is located outward from the entirety of the crankcase. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of known elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, arranging the inverter to be located entirely outward from the crank case would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Claims 4-5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami et al., Matsuda, Tsukada et al. and in view of Inoue et al. US 20150239519 A1.
Regarding claim 4, Fukami et al., as modified, further discloses [a cowling 17 which covers a front part of a vehicle body from an outer side in a vehicle widthwise direction and a part of the cowling is located rearward of the inverter 35;] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; Paragraph 0022 of Fukami et al.) and [the inverter has a side extending rearward in an inclined manner from an upper end of the inverter to a lower end of the inverter.] (Fig. 1 of Matsuda; As shown in Fig. 1, Matsuda illustrates wherein the inverter 18 has a side extending rearward in an inclined manner from an upper end of the inverter to a lower end of the inverter.)
Fukami, as modified, does not disclose wherein the cowling constitutes a knee grip part.
Inoue et al. teaches [wherein the cowling constitutes a knee grip part.] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0043)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the knee grip cowling configuration of Inoue et al. with the saddle riding vehicle of Fukami et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow the rider to stabilize their lower body against the vehicle during operation, thus improving rider ergonomics and vehicle handling.
Regarding claim 5, Fukami et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations including [wherein the inverter 35 has a rectangular shape in a side view] (Fig. 1 of Fukami et al.; As shown in Fig. 1, Fukami et al. illustrates wherein the inverter 35 has a rectangular shape in a side view.), including the inclined inverter structure recited in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 11, Fukami et al. does not disclose wherein an outer end of the inverter in a vehicle widthwise direction is disposed, in a plan view, inward of an outer end of a generator cover in the vehicle widthwise direction which covers the generator from an outer side in the vehicle widthwise direction.
Inoue teaches [wherein an outer end of the inverter in a vehicle widthwise direction is disposed, in a plan view, inward of an outer end of a generator cover 44 in the vehicle widthwise direction which covers the generator from an outer side in the vehicle widthwise direction.] (Fig. 3; As shown in Fig. 3, Inoue illustrates wherein the generator cover 44 extends outward in a widthwise direction and the inverter 47 is placed more inward than the outer edge of the generator cover.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the inverter and generator cover arrangement of Inoue with the saddle riding vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved component packaging within the vehicle width envelope, thus minimizing lateral protrusion and enhancing rider safety and aesthetic integration.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami et al., Matsuda, Tsukada et al. in view of Eguchi and further in view of Kuromoto JP H10100966 A.
Regarding claim 15, Fukami et al., as modified, does not disclose wherein a lower opening which communicates with a lower space than the cowling is defined below the exhaust air port.
Kuromoto teaches [wherein a lower opening which communicates with a lower space than the cowling is defined below the exhaust air port.] (Fig. 4; Page 3, lines 30-34; As shown in Fig. 4, Kuromoto illustrates a lower opening 25 below the cowling and the air port.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the lower opening of Kuromoto with the saddle riding vehicle of Fukami et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved airflow continuity and heat dissipation by enabling exhaust ai to exit smoothly downward from the cowling, thus reducing thermal buildup around the inverter and enhancing overall cooling efficiency.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami et al., Matsuda, and Tsukada et al. in view of Eguchi and further in view of Matsuo et al. US 20150328979 A1.
Regarding claim 16, Fukami et al., as modified, further discloses [wherein the cowling includes an air passage toward the inverter inside the cowling.] (Fig. 2 & 3 of Tsukada et al.; Paragraph 0038 of Tsukada et al.; As shown in Fig. 2 & 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates wherein the cowling 14 includes an air passage in an area which faces the inverter.)
Fukami et al., as modified, does not disclose wherein the air passage includes a nozzle part where a passage area is reduced on an upstream side of the inverter.
Matsuo et al. teaches [wherein the air passage includes a nozzle part 55 where a passage area is reduced on an upstream side of the inverter.] (Fig. 4; Paragraph 0054 & 0055)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the nozzle part of Matsuo et al. with the saddle riding vehicle of Fukami et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for increased airflow velocity toward the inverter to enhance cooling efficiency and preventing overheating of the electrical components, thus improving the performance and reliability of the inverter system.
Fukami et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the air passage includes a nozzle part where a passage is reduced, as compared with the passage area on an inlet side. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B) (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)), changes in shape or configuration that do not alter the basic function of a known structure are considered an obvious matter of design choice. In this case, forming the air passage with a nozzle part where a passage is reduced, as compared with the passage area on an inlet side would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art, as it merely modifies the know passage configuration to control airflow without yielding unexpected results.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukami et al. in view of Tsukada et al. and Eguchi US 9598132 B2.
Regarding independent claim 17, Fukami et al. further discloses [a saddle riding vehicle 1 comprising an engine E as a driving power source, [the engine including a cylinder head 13;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0023)] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0023) [a generator M mounted to a crankshaft of the engine;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0027) [an inverter 35 that supplies output of the generator to a battery 42,] and [a cowling 17 which covers a front part of a vehicle body from an outer side in a vehicle widthwise direction,] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0022) [wherein the inverter is disposed inward of the cowling in the vehicle widthwise direction.] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0022; Fukami et al. discloses that the cowling extends from a front portion to side portions of the vehicle body to cover the engine E and other components, thus having the inverter 35 be disposed inward of the cowling in the vehicle widthwise direction.)
Fukami et al. does not disclose wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in the vehicle widthwise direction, and the cowling includes an air intake opening arranged in a front-end portion of the cowling and an exhaust air port arranged in an area which faces the inverter in the vehicle widthwise direction; and the entirety of the inverter is disposed outward of the cylinder head of the engine in the vehicle widthwise direction.
Tsukada et al. teaches [wherein the inverter is disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in the vehicle widthwise direction,] (Fig. 3; Paragraph 0039; As shown Fig. 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates the inverter 30 being disposed outward of a main frame of the vehicle.) and [the cowling includes an air intake opening 14a arranged in a front end portion of the cowling] (Fig. 2 & 3; Paragraph 0052; As shown in Fig. 2 & 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates wherein the cowling 14 includes an air intake 14a opening in a front-end portion of the cowling.) and [an exhaust air port 14b arranged in an area which faces the inverter;] (Fig. 2 & 3; Paragraph 0038; As shown in Fig. 2 & 3, Tsukada et al. illustrates wherein the cowling 14 includes an exhaust air port 14b in an area which faces the inverter.) [and the entirety of the inverter is disposed outward of the cylinder head of the engine in the vehicle widthwise direction.] (Additionally, as shown in Fig. 1 of Fukami et al., the cylinder head 13 of the engine is positioned within the vehicle body frame. Therefore, positioning the inverter outward of the vehicle body frame, as taught by Tsukada et al., results in the inverter being disposed outward of the cylinder head in the vehicle widthwise direction.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the inverter and cowling configuration of Tsukada et al. with the saddle riding vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved thermal management and airflow efficiency around the inverter by directing cooling air through a defined intake and exhaust path, thus enhancing inverter reliability and overall vehicle performance.
Fukami et al., as modified, does not disclose wherein the exhaust port faces the inverter in the vehicle widthwise direction, the exhaust air port opens outward in the vehicle widthwise direction, and at least a part of the inverter overlaps with the exhaust air port in a side view.
Eguchi teaches [wherein the exhaust port faces the inverter in the vehicles widthwise direction,] (Annotation of Fig. 1; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 1 above, Eguchi illustrates an exhaust port that faces the inverter in the vehicles widthwise direction.) [the exhaust air port opens outward in the vehicle widthwise direction, and at least a part of the inverter overlaps with the exhaust air port in a side view.] (Annotation of Fig. 1; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 1 above, Eguchi illustrates an exhaust air port formed by the side cover 7 and the side frames 12 that opens outward in the vehicle widthwise direction, and at least a part of the inverter 13 overlaps with the exhaust port in a side view.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the exhaust port structure of Eguchi with the vehicle of Fukami et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for efficient heat dissipation by positioning the exhaust outlet and invert in a thermally optimized configuration, thus improving cooling performance and maintaining inverter operating stability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments see Remarks, filed 01/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Applicant argues (Page 4, lines 1-5 of Remarks) that Fukami et al., alone or in combination with Matsuda and Tsukada, fails to disclose or suggest “that the entirety of the inverter is disposed outward of the cylinder head of the engine in the vehicle widthwise direction,” and further argues that Matsuda, Tsukada, and Eguchi do not cure this deficiency because they do not disclose an engine including a cylinder head. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed in the rejection above, Fukami et al. discloses an engine E including a cylinder head 13, wherein the cylinder head is positioned within the vehicle body frame. While Fukami et al. does not explicitly disclose the inverter being entirely disposed outward of the cylinder head, Tsukada et al. is relied upon for teaching an inverter disposed outward of a vehicle body frame in a vehicle widthwise direction (Fig. 3; Paragraph 0039). Because the cylinder head of Fukami et al. is located within the vehicle body frame, positioning the inverter outward of the vehicle body frame, as taught by Tsukada et al. results in the inverter being disposed outward of the cylinder head in the vehicle widthwise direction.
Applicant’s argument (Page 5, lines 8-12 of Remarks) that Tsukada does not disclose a cylinder head is not persuasive, as Tsukada is relied upon for its teaching of lateral inverter placement relative to the vehicle structure, not for the specific engine configuration. The combination of Fukami et al. and Tsukada et al. reasonably suggest the claimed spatial relationship between the inverter and the cylinder head.
Regarding claim 21, Applicant argues (Page 7, lines 1-10 of Remarks) that the prior art fails to disclose or suggest “that the entirety of the inverter is disposed above the cylinder head of the engine.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. enhanced airflow, thus improving cooling performance and component reliability. Fukami et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the entirety of the inverter is disposed above the cylinder head of the engine. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C) (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)), the rearrangement of known elements does not confer patentability when such a modification does not alter the function or operation of the system. In this case, arranging the inverter to be at least entirely above the cylinder head of the engine would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art is it merely reconfigures the known system without yielding an unexpected result.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hasumi et al. US 6619415 B1 – comprises an air introducing opening that is made at the front of an upper cowling, and side radiators and front forks are exposed to left and right sides behind the air introducing opening when viewed from the front side. Air guide walls overhanging the air introducing opening from the left and right sides of a nose portion and covering the front portion of the front forks are integrally formed with the cowling to guide running air to the side radiators.
Shigeta et al. US 20070056790 A1 – comprises a front cowling covering an engine unit and an exhaust device from lower and side portions, and a rear cowling partially covering a rider`s seat. The front cowling is formed with an air-exhaust opening at a bottom surface of a rear end positioned to a front lower surface of an exhaust expansion chamber. The front cowling has a cutout portion at a rear portion to expose the bottom surface and a lower half of a side surface of the exhaust expansion chamber, where the cutout portion is flushed with an exterior of the exhaust expansion chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohamed Medani whose telephone number is (703)756-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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.
/Mohamed M Medani/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU, Ph.D./Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights