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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-13 are pending herein.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Species A (Fig.1-6) in the reply filed on 9/29/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 5 (Figure 4: “rounded” in elected embodiment), 8, 9, 12, and 13, are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/29/2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “upper chamber and the lower chamber” (Claim 1/10), “opposite end parts” (Claim 2/4) must all be shown and labeled or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-4, 6, 7, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), and 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. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitations: “according to” (Claim 1/10) which are unclear and therefore render the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) , and 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. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitations: “configured to be disposed” (Claim 1, line 3) which are unclear and therefore render the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required
Claims 2 and 3 is 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. Regarding claim 2, the claim recites the limitations: “relatively larger than” which is unclear and therefore renders the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 10 and 11 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. Regarding claim 10, the claim recites the limitations: “disposed along” (line 3) which are indefinite and therefore render the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 10 and 11 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. Regarding claim 10, the claim recites the limitations: “an outside the inner pipe” (line 4) which is indefinite and therefore render the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shibata et al. (US 9,428,040 B2).
[Claim 1] Regarding Claim 1, Shibata discloses: A motor mount device (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 71) for an electric vehicle (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 1), the device comprising:
an inner pipe (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 94) configured to be disposed along a front-rear direction of the vehicle (See, e.g. Fig.1-9);
an outer pipe (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 91) disposed coaxially with the inner pipe and around an outside of the inner pipe (See, e.g. Fig.1-9);
a main damper (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 93) with a bridge (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 93) defining an upper chamber and a lower chamber (See, e.g. Fig.1-9) between the inner pipe and the outer pipe along the front-rear direction (See, e.g. Fig.1-9) and being elastically deformable according to a load transmitted through the inner pipe (See, e.g. Fig.1-9); and
a middle plate (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, unlabeled) disposed between the main damper and the outer pipe and provided to support a load in the front-rear direction transmitted through the inner pipe by compressing the bridge (See, e.g. Fig.1-9).
[Claim 2] Regarding Claim 1, Shibata discloses: wherein the inner pipe has a central part (See, e.g. Fig.1-9, 94) with an outer diameter that is relatively larger than an outer diameter of each of opposite end parts of the inner pipe, the central part disposed inside of the outer pipe (See, e.g. Fig.1-9).
[Claim 3] Regarding Claim 1, Shibata discloses: wherein the bridge is inclined toward the central part of the inner pipe along the front-rear direction of the main damper (See, e.g. Fig.1-9).
[Claim 4] Regarding Claim 1, Shibata discloses: wherein the middle plate has a cylindrical shape (See, e.g. Fig.1-9) and includes a pair of through holes having a size and shape corresponding to the upper chamber and the lower chamber (See, e.g. Fig.1-9) and has opposite end parts in the front-rear direction surrounding the main damper, respectively, wherein each of the opposite end parts is rounded (See, e.g. Fig.1-9).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 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.
Claims 10 and 11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record when taken alone or in combination with another does not teach or fairly suggest at this time at least, among other limitations: A motor mount device for an electric vehicle, the device comprising: an inner pipe disposed along a front-rear direction of the vehicle; an outer pipe disposed coaxially with the inner pipe and around an outside the inner pipe; a main damper with a bridge defining an upper chamber and a lower chamber between the inner pipe and the outer pipe along the front-rear direction, the main damper being elastically deformable according to a load transmitted through the inner pipe; a middle plate disposed between the main damper and the outer pipe and configured to support a load in the front-rear direction transmitted through the inner pipe by compressing the bridge; and air flow guides provided in the main damper and configured to allow air to flow inside of the outer pipe as an up-down direction load is applied to the inner pipe, as claimed in Claim 10 and similarly claimed in Claim 6 (emphasis added to allowable limitations not suggested or taught by the prior art).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and can be found on the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M DOLAK whose telephone number is (571)270-7757. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-530 EST Monday-Friday.
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, J ALLEN SHRIVER can be reached on 303-297-4337. 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.
/JAMES M DOLAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618