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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-11, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In line 13 of claim 1, the recitation “continuously welded” is not found anywhere in the specification and the drawings, particularly Figure 10, show a weld portion 42 that would indicate a spot weld, rather than a continuous weld. The limitation “continuously welded” is new matter.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 9-10, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20080109183) in view of KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463.
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a vehicle side door 100 for a vehicle, the vehicle side door 100 comprising: an inner panel 200 including a wall extending in a direction intersecting a panel main body extending in a front-rear direction of a vehicle body of the vehicle (see Figure 4; Paragraph 15); a door beam 300 extending in the front-rear direction of the vehicle body and joined to a front portion of the inner panel 200 and a rear portion of the inner panel 200 (see Figures 4-6; Paragraph 15); and a bracket 400 interposed between the inner panel 200 and the door beam 300; an inner peripheral side wall that extends from an edge of the panel main body in the vehicle width direction intersecting the panel main body; and a stepped portion that extends from an end of the inner peripheral side wall in a direction parallel to the panel main body (see Figure 5 and annotated Figure 5 below), wherein the bracket 400 includes: a beam joint welded in surface contact with an end of the door beam 300 (see Figures 4-6; Paragraph 15); and a panel joint welded in surface contact with the wall of the inner panel 200 (see Figure 6; Paragraph 15).
PNG
media_image1.png
237
508
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim fails to disclose that the panel joint is continuously welded in surface contact with both (i) the stepped portion and ii) the wall of the inner panel at the same end of the door beam, the panel joint comprising a first flat portion lying flat against and welded to the stepped portion and a second flat portion lying flat against and welded to the wall, the first and second flat portions being angularly connected to each other by a bent portion that conforms to and abuts a corner formed between the stepped portion and the wall.
KR 19980038539 discloses a door having an inner panel 1 with a wall 8 that extends in a vehicle width direction having a stepped portion 7 and a flange (see Figure 3; Page 3, lines 20-28). A door beam 3 is attached to the wall 8 by a bracket 4 having a beam joint and a panel joint (see Figure 3; Page 3, lines 29-33). The panel joint has a first flat portion 5 lying flat against and welded to the stepped portion 7 and a second flat portion 6 lying flat against and welded to the wall 8, the first and second flat portions 5, 6 being angularly connected to each other by a bent portion that conforms to and abuts a corner formed between the stepped portion 7 and the wall 8 (see Figure 3 and annotated Figure 3 below). The panel joint is welded to the wall 8 and the stepped portion 7 (see Page 3, lines 29-38) in order that the bracket 4 may be firmly fixed regardless of the direction of the external force applied to the mounting bracket 4 in a collision to protect passengers (see Page 4, lines 1-4).
PNG
media_image2.png
266
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
KR 19980015463 discloses a vehicle side door having an inner panel 2, a door beam 3, and a bracket 10 integrally welded between the inner panel 2 and the door beam 3 (see Figure 5; Abstract; Paragraph 4 of “Example”). The integral welding helps the door to resist both horizontal and vertical deformation in the event of a side collision (see Paragraphs 1-2 of “Tech-Solution”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the bracket of Kim to be welded in surface contact with the stepped portion and the wall, such that a first flat portion lies flat against and is welded to the stepped portion and a second flat portion lies flat against and is welded to the wall, the first and second flat portions being angularly connected to each other by a bent portion that conforms to and abuts a corner formed between the stepped portion and the wall, with a reasonable expectation of success, so that the bracket may be firmly fixed regardless of the direction of the external force applied to the mounting bracket in a collision to protect passengers, as taught by KR 19980038539.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the weld of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, a continuous surface weld, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure a sufficient strength of the bond between the bracket and the inner panel in the event of a side collision, as taught by KR 19980015463.
Regarding claim 2, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door 100 according to claim 1, wherein the bracket 400 is interposed between a rear end of the door beam 300 and the rear portion of the inner panel 200 (see Figure 5; Paragraph 15). The bracket 400 is installed at both ends of the door beam 300.
Regarding claim 5, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, further comprising a flange that extends from an end of the wall in a direction parallel to the panel main body (see Figure 5 and annotated Figure 5 below)
PNG
media_image3.png
237
508
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 6, further comprising a flange that extends from an end of the wall in the direction parallel to the panel main body and the stepped portion (see Figure 5 and annotated Figure 5 above).
Regarding claim 9, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, wherein the door beam 300 is disposed along the front-rear direction of the vehicle body from the stepped portion provided on the front portion of the inner panel 200 to the stepped portion provided on the rear portion of the inner panel 200 (see Figure 5 and annotated Figure 5 above; Paragraph 15).
Regarding claim 10, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, wherein a front end of the door beam 300 is joined to the inner panel 200 by welding to the stepped portion (see Figure 5 and annotated Figure 5 above; Paragraph 15).
Regarding claim 11, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, wherein the panel joint is welded in surface contact with the wall of the inner panel on a side of the beam opposite to the panel main body (see Figure 5; Paragraph 15). The panel joint is attached to a side of the door beam 5 that is opposed to, or facing, the panel main body, making the side opposite the panel main body.
Regarding claim 14, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, wherein the beam joint is formed into a shape conforming to a bent shape of a rear end of the door beam 300 (see Figure 6; Paragraph 15).
Regarding claim 15, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, wherein the panel joint is formed into a flat plate shape conforming to a shape of the wall (see Figures 5-6; Paragraph 15).
Regarding claim 16, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1, wherein the beam joint is formed into a shape conforming to a bent shape of a rear end of the door beam, and wherein the panel joint is formed into a flat plate shape conforming to a shape of the wall (see Figures 5-6; Paragraph 15).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20080109183) in view of KR 19980038539 and Bedekar et al. (US PG Pub 2012/0036785).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses a vehicle side door 100 for a vehicle, the vehicle side door 100 comprising: an inner panel 200 including a wall extending in a direction intersecting a panel main body extending in a front-rear direction of a vehicle body of the vehicle (see Figure 4; Paragraph 15); a door beam 300 extending in the front-rear direction of the vehicle body and joined to a front portion of the inner panel 200 and a rear portion of the inner panel 200 (see Figures 4-6; Paragraph 15); a bracket 400 interposed between the inner panel 200 and the door beam 300; an inner peripheral side wall that extends from an edge of the panel main body in the vehicle width direction intersecting the panel main body; and a stepped portion that extends from an end of the inner peripheral side wall in a direction parallel to the panel main body (see Figure 5 and annotated Figure 5 below), wherein the bracket 400 includes: a beam joint welded in surface contact with an end of the door beam 300 (see Figures 4-6; Paragraph 15); a panel joint welded in surface contact with the wall of the inner panel 200 (see Figure 6; Paragraph 15).
PNG
media_image1.png
237
508
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim fails to disclose that the panel joint is welded in surface contact with the stepped portion and the wall of the inner panel and a ratchet mechanism comprising a ratchet engageable with a striker that is provided in a door opening of the vehicle body, the ratchet mechanism being attached to the wall at the rear portion of the inner panel, wherein the protrusion is opposed to the ratchet mechanism in a normal state of the vehicle side door, and wherein the protrusion is configured to deform, in a side collision of the vehicle, to a position where the protrusion interferes with rotation of the ratchet so as to prevent the ratchet from releasing the striker in a side collision of the vehicle.
KR 19980038539 discloses a door having an inner panel 1 with a wall 8 that extends in a vehicle width direction having a stepped portion 7 and a flange (see Figure 3; Page 3, lines 20-28). A door beam 3 is attached to the wall 8 by a bracket 4 having a beam joint and a panel joint (see Figure 3; Page 3, lines 29-33). The panel joint is welded to the wall 8 and the stepped portion 7 (see Page 3, lines 29-38) in order that the bracket 4 may be firmly fixed regardless of the direction of the external force applied to the mounting bracket 4 in a collision to protect passengers (see Page 4, lines 1-4).
Bedekar et al. disclose a vehicle side door 12 having a door beam 62, a bracket 60 having a protrusion 74 (see Figures 3-5; Paragraphs 34 and 53), and a ratchet mechanism 14 comprising a ratchet 36 engageable with a striker 30 that is provided in a door opening of the vehicle body 16 (see Figures 3-5; Paragraphs 43-44), the ratchet mechanism 14 being attached to the wall at the rear portion of the door panel (see Figures 3-5; Paragraph 34), wherein the protrusion 74 is opposed to the ratchet mechanism 14 in a normal state of the vehicle side door (see Figure 4; Paragraphs 36 and 53), and wherein the protrusion 74 is configured to deform, in a side collision of the vehicle, to a position where the protrusion 74 interferes with rotation of the ratchet 36 so as to prevent the ratchet 36 from releasing the striker 30 in a side collision of the vehicle (see Figures 3-5; Paragraphs 53-55). The protrusion 74 is positioned adjacent a second transition part 72, which is a ben that connects an inclined part 70 to the protrusion 74, making it protrude toward the inner panel 22 and meeting the definition of a “protrusion” (see Paragraph 53). The protrusion 74 has an opening 80 which engages the ratchet 36 and because the opening 80 is positioned on the protrusion 74 and a peripheral wall 74a defines at least an upper portion of the opening 80, which means the protrusion 74 engages the ratchet 36 and prevents movement (see Figure 5; Paragraphs 53-55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the bracket of Kim to be welded in surface contact with the stepped portion and the wall, with a reasonable expectation of success, so that the bracket may be firmly fixed regardless of the direction of the external force applied to the mounting bracket in a collision to protect passengers, as taught by KR 19980038539.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the side door of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, having a ratchet mechanism comprising a ratchet engageable with a striker that is provided in a door opening of the vehicle body and being attached to the wall at the rear portion of the inner panel, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Bedekar et al., to secure the door in a closed position when the vehicle body is moving.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the bracket of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and Bedekar et al., opposed to the ratchet mechanism, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Bedekar et al., to provide protection to the passenger in a more central location of the door.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a protrusion on the bracket and opposed to the ratchet mechanism of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and Bedekar et al. twice, such that the protrusion to deforms to a position that interferes with the ratchet in a side collision of the vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure that the door does not inadvertently open in the event of a side collision and cause additional harm to passengers, as taught by Bedekar et al..
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, in view of Bedekar et al..
Regarding claim 4, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 2.
Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, fails to disclose a ratchet mechanism comprising a ratchet engageable with a striker that is provided in a door opening of the vehicle body and being attached to the wall at the rear portion of the inner panel; and the bracket comprises a protrusion opposed to the ratchet mechanism, and the protrusion is configured to deform to a position where the protrusion interferes with the ratchet in a side collision of the vehicle.
Bedekar et al. disclose a vehicle side door 12 having a door beam 62, a bracket 60 having a protrusion 74 (see Figures 3-5; Paragraphs 34 and 53), and a ratchet mechanism 14 comprising a ratchet 36 engageable with a striker 30 that is provided in a door opening of the vehicle body 16 (see Figures 3-5; Paragraphs 43-44), the ratchet mechanism 14 being attached to the wall at the rear portion of the door panel (see Figures 3-5; Paragraph 34), wherein the protrusion 74 is opposed to the ratchet mechanism 14 in a normal state of the vehicle side door (see Figure 4; Paragraphs 36 and 53), and wherein the protrusion 74 is configured to deform, in a side collision of the vehicle, to a position where the protrusion 74 interferes with rotation of the ratchet 36 so as to prevent the ratchet 36 from releasing the striker 30 in a side collision of the vehicle (see Figures 3-5; Paragraphs 53-55). The protrusion 74 is positioned adjacent a second transition part 72, which is a ben that connects an inclined part 70 to the protrusion 74, making it protrude toward the inner panel 22 and meeting the definition of a “protrusion” (see Paragraph 53). The protrusion 74 has an opening 80 which engages the ratchet 36 and because the opening 80 is positioned on the protrusion 74 and a peripheral wall 74a defines at least an upper portion of the opening 80, which means the protrusion 74 engages the ratchet 36 and prevents movement (see Figure 5; Paragraphs 53-55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the side door of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, having a ratchet mechanism comprising a ratchet engageable with a striker that is provided in a door opening of the vehicle body and being attached to the wall at the rear portion of the inner panel, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Bedekar et al., to secure the door in a closed position when the vehicle body is moving.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the bracket of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, KR 19980015463, and Bedekar et al., opposed to the ratchet mechanism, with a reasonable expectation of success, as taught by Bedekar et al., to provide protection to the passenger in a more central location of the door.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a protrusion on the bracket and opposed to the ratchet mechanism of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, KR 19980015463, and Bedekar et al. twice, such that the protrusion to deforms to a position that interferes with the ratchet in a side collision of the vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure that the door does not inadvertently open in the event of a side collision and cause additional harm to passengers, as taught by Bedekar et al..
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, in view of Ishigame et al. (US PG Pub 2014/0246879).
Regarding claim 8, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, disclose the vehicle side door according to claim 1, having a door beam 300.
Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, fails to disclose the door beam includes: a ridge protruding toward the outer panel at a center portion in a width direction; a bead with a U-shape protruding toward the inner panel formed at a suitable position of the ridge; and a flat flange formed on a tip end of the door beam.
Ishigame et al. disclose a side door 1 for a vehicle having a door beam 16, an inner panel 3 and an outer panel 2 (see Figures 1-2; Paragraph 23). The door beam 16 includes: a ridge 16F protruding toward the outer panel 2 at a center portion in a width direction (see Figures 3 and 4B; Paragraphs 28-29); a bead 17 with a U-shape protruding toward the inner panel 3 formed at a suitable position of the ridge 16F (see Figures 3 and 4B; Paragraph 28); and a flat flange 16H formed on a tip end of the door beam 16 (see Figure 3; Paragraphs 32-33). The ridge 16F and bead 17 assist in improving the rigidity and strength of the door beam 16 (see Paragraph 40). The flat flange 16H ensures the collision load of a head-on collision can be properly received (see Paragraph 37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the door beam of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, having a ridge protruding toward the outer panel at a center portion in a width direction and a bead with a U-shape protruding toward the inner panel formed at a suitable position of the ridge, with a reasonable expectation of success, to improve the rigidity and strength of the door beam to brace against impact in a collision, as taught by Ishigame et al..
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the door beam of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, KR 19980015463, and Ishigame et al., with a flat flange formed on a tip end of the door beam, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to ensure the beam is properly secured with a large contact area in the event of a head-on collision, as taught by Ishigame et al..
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as modified by KR 1998038539 and KR 19980015463, in view of Jang et al. (KR 20170091384) and Cohoon et al. (US Pat 8,727,421).
Regarding claim 17, Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, discloses the vehicle side door according to claim 1.
Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, fails to disclose at least one of the following conditions is satisfied: (i) the single-piece bracket is thicker than the inner panel; (ii) a strength of the single-piece bracket is greater than a strength of the inner panel and less than a strength of the door beam.
Jang et al. disclose a vehicle side door having an impact beam 40 made from an aluminum alloy (see Figures 2-3; Paragraphs 13-15 of “Description of Embodiments”) and an inner panel 30 that is formed from a polymer composite material (see Figure 2; Paragraphs 10-11 of “Description of Embodiments”). An aluminum alloy is stronger than a polymer composite.
Cohoon et al. disclose a vehicle side door having a door beam 21 that is attached to the side door by brackets 22-24 (see Figures 1-2; Col. 2, lines 22-41). The brackets 22-24 have a much lower tensile strength than the door beam 21 (see Col. 3, lines 18-20). The configuration of the door beam assembly 20 using lower strength brackets 22-24 improves the overall impact strength and energy absorbing capability of the door beam assembly 20 (see Col. 3, lines 29-35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the single-piece bracket of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539 and KR 19980015463, with a greater strength than the strength of the inner panel, with a reasonable expectation, as taught by Jang et al., to allow the inner panel to deform more easily than the bracket to ensure the bracket remains secured and the impact beam remains in place, thereby protecting passengers from intrusion of the impact beam in the event of a collision.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the single-piece bracket of Kim, as modified by KR 19980038539, KR 19980015463, and Jang et al., with a lower strength than the door beam, with a reasonable expectation of success, to improve the impact strength and energy absorbing capability of the door beam assembly as a whole, as taught by Cohoon et al..
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 16, 2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding arguments pertaining to claim 1, on pages 8-10 of Remarks, filed January 16, 2026, Examiner agrees that the prior art does not disclose that the panel joint is continuously welded and agreement with such an argument is reflected in the new rejection presented above; however, Examiner is not persuaded by arguments presented regarding the visible gap. As noted in the interview, Examiner acknowledges a difference between the structure of KR 19980038539 and Applicant’s invention, given the visible gap between an end of the door beam and the panel joint; however, the recitation of claim 1 does not overcome KR 19980038539 as presented. Additionally, the limitation of “continuously welded” is not supported by the specification and is negated by Figure 10 (see reference numeral 42 denoted “weld portion” on pages 12-13 of specification).
Note the 112 new matter rejection above.
Regarding arguments pertaining to the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 3, on pages 10-11 of Remarks, filed January 16, 2026, Examiner is persuaded and the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view Bedekar et al..
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Snyder et al. (US Pat 12,172,501) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel, a door beam, a ratchet mechanism, and a bracket having a protrusion positioned opposite the ratchet mechanism. Moriya et al. (US Pat 8,955,257) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel, a door beam, a ratchet mechanism, and a bracket having a protrusion positioned opposite the ratchet mechanism. Kovie et al. (US PG Pub 2021/0238895) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel, a ratchet mechanism, and a bracket. Soma et al. (US Pat 11,628,711) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel and an impact beam. Kasuya (US Pat 11,724,577) discloses a vehicle side door having an inner panel, an impact beam, and a bracket. Contreras et al. (US PG Pub 2020/0408004) disclose an inner panel, a ratchet mechanism, an impact bar, and a bracket. Schmitt et al. (US Pat 10,232,688) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel, an impact beam, a ratchet mechanism, and a bracket. Ogawa et al. (US Pat 9,573,445) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel having a wall intersecting a panel main body, a door beam, and a bracket. Fujihara et al. (US Pat 9,266,412) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel having a wall intersecting a panel main body, a door beam, and a bracket. Inamoto (US PG Pub 2015/0367715) discloses a vehicle side door having an inner panel having a wall intersecting a panel main body, a door beam, and a bracket. Wagner et al. (DE 102014207060) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel having a wall with a stepped portion intersecting a panel main body, a door beam, and a bracket. Jeon (US Pat 8,857,891) discloses a vehicle side door having an inner panel having a wall with a stepped portion intersecting a panel main body, a door beam, and a bracket. Shinko et al. (JP 2009144416) disclose a vehicle side door having an inner panel, a ratchet mechanism, and a bracket with a protrusion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERONICA M CONDO whose telephone number is (571)272-9415. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-3pm 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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at (571) 270-5500. 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.
/VERONICA M CONDO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612