CTFR 18/232,277 CTFR 96559 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 8 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 8 is dependent on claim 2, which has been cancelled. When applying prior art, Examiner interprets this claim to be dependent on claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 5-8, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Chou et al. (US Pat 5,755,484) . Regarding claim 1, Chou et al. disclose a rigidity-improved vehicle panel door comprising: an external panel 30 positioned in the door of a vehicle toward an outside of the vehicle (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 42-52); an internal panel 32 positioned in the door 12 of the vehicle toward an interior of the vehicle, wherein an external edge portion of the internal panel is joined to the external panel (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 42-52); and a structure 14 including a plurality of support members 16, 18 and a plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24, wherein the plurality of support members 16, 18 are disposed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and coupled to the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 to form a shape of a quadrangle (see Figure 2; Col. 2, lines 31-41; Col. 2, line 64-Col. 3, line 13), the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 being provided on a front end portion of the door and a rear end portion of the door (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 53-63), wherein the support members 16, 18 include a stabilizer 16 and an impact beam 18 that are disposed in a height direction of the vehicle in the door to be spaced from each other, wherein the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figure 2), wherein the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door further includes a connection member 20 connecting the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 to each other, and wherein the connection member 20 is installed at a section where the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figures 2-3; Col. 3, lines 14-57). Regarding claim 5, Chou et al. disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 are provided on the front end portion 34 of the door and on the rear end portion 35 of the door, to form a shape of a quadrangle together with the external panel 30 and the internal panel 32 (see Figures 1 and 5-7; Col. 2, lines 42-63). Regarding claim 6, Chou et al. disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 are coupled to the internal panel 32 (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 58-63). Regarding claim 7, Chou et al. disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein a seating groove on which an end portion of the support members 16, 18 is accommodated is formed in each of the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 (see Figure 2; Col. 3, lines 8-13). Regarding claim 8, as understood, Chou et al. disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are formed so that lengths thereof correspond to a length of the door (see Figures 1-2; Col. 2, lines 53-63). Regarding claim 12, Chou et al. disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein an upper end portion 40 and a lower end portion 42 of the connection member 20 are formed to surround outsides of the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18, respectively (see Figures 2-3 and 5-7; Col. 3, lines 19-30). Regarding claim 15, Chou et al. disclose a vehicle 10 including the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1 (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 31-41) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. in view of Djavairian et al. (US Pat 5,325,632) . Regarding claims 13, Chou et al. disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1. Chou et al. fail to disclose one of the external panel and the internal panel is made of plastic material, and another thereof is made of metal material. Djavairian et al. disclose a vehicle door 10 having an inner panel 12 and an outer panel 14 (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 58-64). The outer panel 14 is made of a plastic material and the inner panel 12 is made of steel, a metal (see Col. 2, lines 58-64). The door structure reduces the overall weight of the door and increases fuel efficiency (see Col. 2, lines 5-8). 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 external panel of Chou et al. from plastic material and the internal panel of metal material, with a reasonable expectation of success, to reduce the weight of the door structure and increase fuel efficiency, as taught by Djavarian et al.. Regarding claim 14, Chou et al., as modified by Djavairian et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 13, wherein the external panel is made of plastic material, and the internal panel is made of metal material (see claim 13 above) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3-6, 8, 12, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valentage et al. (US PG Pub 2007/0222256) in view of Chou et al .. Regarding claim 1, Valentage et al. disclose a rigidity-improved vehicle panel door comprising: an external panel 310 positioned in the door of a vehicle toward an outside of the vehicle (see Figure 3; Paragraph 34); an internal panel 330 positioned in the door of the vehicle toward an interior of the vehicle (see Figures 3 and 11B; Paragraph 34), wherein an external edge portion 320 of the internal panel 330 is joined to the external panel 310 (see Figures 3 and 11B; Paragraphs 36 and 55); and a structure 340 including a plurality of support members 348A, 348B and a plurality of reinforcement members 348C, 348D, wherein the plurality of support members 348A, 348B are disposed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and coupled to the plurality of reinforcement members 348C, 348D to form a shape of a quadrangle, the plurality of reinforcement members 348C, 348D being provided on a front end portion of the door and a rear end portion of the door (see Figure 9; Paragraphs 50-52), wherein the support members 348A, 348B include a stabilizer 348A and an impact beam 348B that are disposed in a height direction of the vehicle in the door to be spaced from each other (see Figure 9; Paragraph 52), wherein the stabilizer 348A and the impact beam 348B are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figure 9; Paragraph 52). Valentage et al. fail to disclose the rigidity improved door panel further includes a connection member connecting the stabilizer and the impact beam to each other. Chou et al. disclose a rigidity-improved vehicle panel door comprising: an external panel 30 positioned in the door of a vehicle toward an outside of the vehicle (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 42-52); an internal panel 32 positioned in the door 12 of the vehicle toward an interior of the vehicle, wherein an external edge portion of the internal panel is joined to the external panel (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 42-52); and a structure 14 including a plurality of support members 16, 18 and a plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24, wherein the plurality of support members 16, 18 are disposed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and coupled to the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 to form a shape of a quadrangle (see Figure 2; Col. 2, lines 31-41; Col. 2, line 64-Col. 3, line 13), the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 being provided on a front end portion of the door and a rear end portion of the door (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 53-63), wherein the support members 16, 18 include a stabilizer 16 and an impact beam 18 that are disposed in a height direction of the vehicle in the door to be spaced from each other, wherein the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figure 2), wherein the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door further includes a connection member 20 connecting the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 to each other, and wherein the connection member 20 is installed at a section where the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figures 2-3; Col. 3, lines 14-57). The connection member 20 enhances the ability of the structure 14 to absorb energy as a unit and enables the structure 14 to sustain higher loads (see Col. 3, lines 30-57). 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 structure of Valentage et al. with a connection member connecting the stabilizer and impact beam to each other where the stabilizer and impact beam are parallel to each other, with a reasonable expectation of success, to enhance the ability of the structure to absorb energy and sustain higher impact loads, as taught by Chou et al.. Regarding claim 3, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reinforcement members include: a hinge upper reinforcer 355 to which an upper hinge connecting the door to a body of the vehicle is fastened and to which a front end portion of the stabilizer 348A is coupled; a hinge reinforcer 355 which is positioned on a lower portion of the hinge upper reinforcer, to which a lower hinge connecting the door to the body of the vehicle is fastened under the upper hinge, and to which a front end portion of the impact beam 348B is coupled; a latch reinforcer 350 on which a latch is provided in the rear end portion of the door and to which a rear end portion of the stabilizer 348A is coupled; and a latch lower reinforcer 355 to which a rear end portion of the impact beam 348B is coupled under the latch reinforcer (see Figures 9, 11A and annotated Figure 9 below; Paragraphs 46-47, 50 and 52). PNG media_image1.png 322 523 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 4, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 3, wherein the hinge upper reinforcer 355 and the hinge reinforcer 355 are connected to each other in the height direction of the vehicle in the front end portion of the door in the door, wherein the latch reinforcer 350 and the latch lower reinforcer 355 are connected to each other in the height direction of the vehicle in the rear end portion of the door, wherein the stabilizer 348A connects the hinge upper reinforcer 355 and the latch reinforcer 350 to each other in a belt line in the door, and wherein the impact beam 348B connects the hinge reinforcer 355 and the latch lower reinforcer 355 to each other under the stabilizer 348A (see Figures 9, 11A, and annotated Figure 9 above; Paragraphs 50-52). The hinge upper reinforcer and hinge reinforcer are connected in the height direction by the reinforcement member 348C (see annotated Figure 9 above). The latch reinforcer and the latch lower reinforcer are connected in the height direction by the reinforcement member 348D (see annotated Figure 9 above). Regarding claim 5, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reinforcement members 355 are provided on the front end portion of the door and on the rear end portion of the door, to form a shape of a quadrangle together with the external panel 310 and the internal panel 330 (see Figures 3, 9 and 11A; Paragraph 55). Regarding claim 6, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reinforcement members 350, 355 are coupled to the internal panel 330 (see Figure 11A; Paragraph 55). Regarding claim 8, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 2, wherein the stabilizer 348A and the impact beam 348B are formed so that lengths thereof correspond to a length of the door (see Figure 11A; Paragraph 50). Regarding claim 12, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1. Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., fail to disclose an upper end portion and a lower end portion of the connection member are formed to surround outsides of the stabilizer and the impact beam, respectively. Chou et al. disclose a rigidity-improved vehicle panel door comprising: an external panel 30 positioned in the door of a vehicle toward an outside of the vehicle (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 42-52); an internal panel 32 positioned in the door 12 of the vehicle toward an interior of the vehicle, wherein an external edge portion of the internal panel is joined to the external panel (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 42-52); and a structure 14 including a plurality of support members 16, 18 and a plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24, wherein the plurality of support members 16, 18 are disposed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and coupled to the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 to form a shape of a quadrangle (see Figure 2; Col. 2, lines 31-41; Col. 2, line 64-Col. 3, line 13), the plurality of reinforcement members 22, 24 being provided on a front end portion of the door and a rear end portion of the door (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 53-63), wherein the support members 16, 18 include a stabilizer 16 and an impact beam 18 that are disposed in a height direction of the vehicle in the door to be spaced from each other, wherein the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figure 2), wherein the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door further includes a connection member 20 connecting the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 to each other, and wherein the connection member 20 is installed at a section where the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18 are disposed to be parallel with each other (see Figures 2-3; Col. 3, lines 14-57). An upper end portion 40 and a lower end portion 42 of the connection member 20 are formed to surround outsides of the stabilizer 16 and the impact beam 18, respectively (see Figures 2-3 and 5-7; Col. 3, lines 19-30). The upper and lower portions 40, 42 of connection member 20 substantially surround, or greater than 270 degree wrap, to constrain relative vertical and lateral deflection of the support members 16, 18 and improve energy absorption (see Col. 3, lines 21-57). 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 connection member of Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., such that an upper end portion and a lower end portion of the connection member are formed to surround outsides of the stabilizer and the impact beam, respectively, with a reasonable expectation of success, to constrain relative vertical and lateral deflection of the support members and improve energy absorption, as taught by Chou et al.. Regarding claim 15, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1. Chou et al. disclose a vehicle 10 including the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 1 (see Figure 1; Col. 2, lines 31-41). The panel door 12 has a structure 14 to protect an occupant from a side impact (see Col. 3, lines It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door in a vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success, to effectively protect occupants of the vehicle from a side impact, as taught by Chou et al.. Regarding claim 16, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al. twice, disclose the vehicle of claim 15, wherein the plurality of reinforcement members include: a hinge upper reinforcer 355 to which an upper hinge connecting the door to a body of the vehicle is fastened and to which a front end portion of the stabilizer 348A is coupled; a hinge reinforcer 355 which is positioned on a lower portion of the hinge upper reinforcer, to which a lower hinge connecting the door to the body of the vehicle is fastened under the upper hinge, and to which a front end portion of the impact beam 348B is coupled; a latch reinforcer 350 on which a latch is provided in the rear end portion of the door and to which a rear end portion of the stabilizer 348A is coupled; and a latch lower reinforcer 355 to which a rear end portion of the impact beam 348B is coupled under the latch reinforcer (see Figures 9, 11A and annotated Figure 9 above; Paragraphs 46-47, 50 and 52). Regarding claim 17, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al. twice, disclose the vehicle of claim 16, wherein the hinge upper reinforcer 355 and the hinge reinforcer 355 are connected to each other in the height direction of the vehicle in the front end portion of the door in the door, wherein the latch reinforcer 350 and the latch lower reinforcer 355 are connected to each other in the height direction of the vehicle in the rear end portion of the door, wherein the stabilizer 348A connects the hinge upper reinforcer 355 and the latch reinforcer 350 to each other in a belt line in the door, and wherein the impact beam 348B connects the hinge reinforcer 355 and the latch lower reinforcer 355 to each other under the stabilizer 348A (see Figures 9, 11A, and annotated Figure 9 above; Paragraphs 50-52). The hinge upper reinforcer and hinge reinforcer are connected in the height direction by the reinforcement member 348C (see annotated Figure 9 above). The latch reinforcer and the latch lower reinforcer are connected in the height direction by the reinforcement member 348D (see annotated Figure 9 above) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., in view of Kawabe et al. (US Pat 9,902,240) . Regarding claim 9, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 3. Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., fail to disclose the hinge upper reinforcer and the latch reinforcer extend over a predetermined distance upwards from a belt line in the door. Kawabe et al. disclose a vehicle door 10 having a stabilizer 26 positioned near a belt line of the vehicle door 10 (see Figure 2). The stabilizer 26 is positioned in the door by reinforcement members 34, 36 (see Figure 2). The front reinforcement member 34 is a hinge upper reinforcer and reinforces the upper hinge 40 (see Figure 2; Col. 6, lines 50-56). The rear reinforcement member 36 is a latch reinforcer and reinforces the latch 42 (see Figure 2; Col. 6, lines 42-48). The hinge upper reinforcer 34 and the latch reinforcer 36 extend over a predetermined distance 38F, 38R upwards from the belt line in the door 10 (see Figure 2; Col. 6, line 57-Col. 7, line 3; Col. 8, line 60-Col. 9, line 8). The rigidity of the door 10 is improved by positioning the hinge upper reinforcer 34 and latch reinforcer 36 at a distance above the belt line while also controlling the weight of the door 10 (see Col. 9, lines 9-20). 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 hinge upper reinforcer and the latch reinforcer to extend over a predetermined distance upwards from a belt line in the door of Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, to improve the rigidity of the door while also controlling the weight of the door, as taught by Kawabe et al .. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al. twice, in view of Kawabe et al .. Regarding claim 18, Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al. twice, disclose the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door of claim 17. Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al. twice, fail to disclose the hinge upper reinforcer and the latch reinforcer extend over a predetermined distance upwards from a belt line in the door. Kawabe et al. disclose a vehicle door 10 having a stabilizer 26 positioned near a belt line of the vehicle door 10 (see Figure 2). The stabilizer 26 is positioned in the door by reinforcement members 34, 36 (see Figure 2). The front reinforcement member 34 is a hinge upper reinforcer and reinforces the upper hinge 40 (see Figure 2; Col. 6, lines 50-56). The rear reinforcement member 36 is a latch reinforcer and reinforces the latch 42 (see Figure 2; Col. 6, lines 42-48). The hinge upper reinforcer 34 and the latch reinforcer 36 extend over a predetermined distance 38F, 38R upwards from the belt line in the door 10 (see Figure 2; Col. 6, line 57-Col. 7, line 3; Col. 8, line 60-Col. 9, line 8). The rigidity of the door 10 is improved by positioning the hinge upper reinforcer 34 and latch reinforcer 36 at a distance above the belt line while also controlling the weight of the door 10 (see Col. 9, lines 9-20). 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 hinge upper reinforcer and the latch reinforcer to extend over a predetermined distance upwards from a belt line in the door of Valentage et al., as modified by Chou et al. twice, with a reasonable expectation of success, to improve the rigidity of the door while also controlling the weight of the door, as taught by Kawabe et al .. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 19 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 19 recites a vehicle comprising a rigidity-improved vehicle panel door comprising: an external panel positioned in the door of a vehicle toward an outside of the vehicle; an internal panel positioned in the door of the vehicle toward an interior of the vehicle, wherein an external edge portion of the internal panel is joined to the external panel; and a structure including a plurality of support members and a plurality of reinforcement members, wherein the plurality of support members are disposed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and coupled to the plurality of reinforcement members to form a shape of a quadrangle, the plurality of reinforcement members being provided on a front end portion of the door and a rear end portion of the door, wherein the support members include a stabilizer and an impact beam that are disposed in a height direction of the vehicle in the door to be spaced from each other, wherein the stabilizer and the impact beam are disposed to be parallel with each other, wherein the rigidity-improved vehicle panel door further includes a connection member connecting the stabilizer and the impact beam to each other, and wherein the connection member is installed at a section where the stabilizer and the impact beam are disposed to be parallel with each other. The plurality of reinforcement members include: a hinge upper reinforcer to which an upper hinge connecting the door to a body of the vehicle is fastened and to which a front end portion of the stabilizer is coupled; a hinge reinforcer which is positioned on a lower portion of the hinge upper reinforcer, to which a lower hinge connecting the door to the body of the vehicle is fastened under the upper hinge, and to which a front end portion of the impact beam is coupled; a latch reinforcer on which a latch is provided in the rear end portion of the door and to which a rear end portion of the stabilizer is coupled; and a latch lower reinforcer to which a rear end portion of the impact beam is coupled under the latch reinforcer. A seating groove on which an end portion of the plurality of support members is accommodated is formed in each of the plurality of reinforcement members. Chou et al. disclose a vehicle having a door with an external panel, an internal panel, a structure having a plurality of reinforcement members and a plurality of support members, a connection member, and a seating groove formed in the reinforcement members to accommodate the support members; however, Chou et al. fail to disclose a hinge upper reinforcer, a hinge reinforcer, a latch reinforcer and a latch lower reinforcer. Valentage et al. disclose a vehicle door having an external panel, an internal panel, a structure having a plurality of reinforcement members and a plurality of support members, a connection member, a hinge upper reinforcer, a hinge reinforcer, a latch reinforcer, and a latch lower reinforcer; however, Valentage et al. fail to disclose a seating groove formed in the reinforcement members to accommodate the support members. Armbruster et al. (US Pat 7,156,448) disclose a vehicle having a vehicle door having an external panel, an internal panel, a structure having a plurality of reinforcement members and a plurality of support members, a connection member, a hinge upper reinforcer, a hinge reinforcer, a latch reinforcer, and a latch lower reinforcer; however, Armbruster et al. fail to disclose a seating groove or that the stabilizer and the impact beam are disposed parallel with each other. Ando (US PG Pub 2018/0264919) discloses a vehicle door having an external panel, an internal panel, a structure having a plurality of reinforcement members and a plurality of support members, and a seating groove formed in the reinforcement members to accommodate the support members; however, Ando fails to disclose the impact beam and the stabilizer are disposed parallel with each other and form a quadrangle with the plurality of reinforcement members. Omori et al. (US PG Pub 2005/0001448) disclose a vehicle door having an external panel, an internal panel, a structure having a plurality of reinforcement members and a plurality of support members, a hinge upper reinforcer, a hinge reinforcer, and a latch reinforcer; however, Omori et al. fail to disclose a latch lower reinforcer, a connection member, or that the stabilizer and the impact beam are disposed parallel with each other. Patel et al. (US Pat 11,052,733) disclose a vehicle door having an external panel, an internal panel, a structure having a plurality of reinforcement members and a plurality of support members, a connection member, a hinge upper reinforcer, a hinge reinforcer, and a latch reinforcer; however, Patel et al. fail to disclose a latch lower reinforcer or a connection member. The prior art does not properly teach or suggest the recited configuration, making claim 19 allowable . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-9, and 12-19 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 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 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 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 2 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 3 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 4 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 5 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 6 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 7 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 8 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 9 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 10 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 11 Art Unit: 3612 Application/Control Number: 18/232,277 Page 12 Art Unit: 3612
Prosecution Insights