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 Objections
Claims 8, 9 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On the last line of claim 8, it is thought that –mechanism—should be inserted after “actuation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 and 14 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
It is not clear whether the “air deflector portion” on the third to last line is the same as or different from the “air deflector portion” set forth on line 3
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 (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 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.
Claims 6, 7, 12, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holka et al. US 4,131,308.
Regarding claim 6, Holka et al. disclose:
An air deflector device (15; Figs. 1-3; disclosed as a “chin spoiler” in col 2, lines 47-48) for a vehicle, the air deflector device (15; Figs. 1-3) comprising:
an air deflector portion (17; Figs. 2 and 3; disclosed as an “airfoil” in col. 2, line 55) configured to deflect an air flow occurring due to a movement of the vehicle (as described in col. 2, lines 8-14), whereby the air deflector portion (17; Figs. 2 and 3) is further configured to be moved between a closed position (the position shown in Fig. 3) and an opened position (the position shown in Fig. 2);
a mounting mechanism (28; Figs. 2, 3, 5 and 6; disclosed as a “biasing device” in col. 3, lines 16) comprising a force element (34; Figs. 5 and 6; disclosed as a “cylindrical elastomeric torsion element” in col. 3, lines 19-20) configured to apply a force pushing the air deflector portion (17; Figs. 2 and 3) from its opened position in its closed position (described in col. 3, lines 11-12, as “the airfoil 17 is normally biased upwardly”, i.e., toward its closed position which is shown in Fig. 3 and described in col. 28-42);
an actuation mechanism (39; Figs. 2 and 3; disclosed as a “downwardly extending lip” in col. 3, lines 28-29) configured to push the air deflector portion (17; Figs. 2 and 3) from its closed position (the position shown in Fig. 3) in its opened position (the position shown in Fig. 2) based on an air flow (as described in col. 3, lines 28-33) occurring during a movement of the vehicle (at 40 miles per hour as disclosed in col. 3, line 33), whereby the actuation mechanism (39; Figs. 2 and 3) comprises an air deflector portion (the shaded portion in annotated Fig. 3 below) and at least one impact surface (as pointed out in annotated Fig. 3 below) for an air flow occurring due to the movement of the vehicle that impacts the at least one impact surface (col. 3, lines 28-30) after first passing over the air deflector portion.
PNG
media_image1.png
786
813
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Holka et al. disclose:
The air deflector device according to claim 6, as explained above, whereby the actuation mechanism (39; Figs. 2 and 3) is configured to move the air deflector portion (17; Figs. 2 and 3) from its closed position (the position shown in Fig. 3) into its opened position (shown in Fig. 2; in that the downwardly extending lip 39 of the actuation mechanism catches a portion of the airstream passing underneath the vehicle (col. 3, lines 28-30) and at 40 miles per hour the deployed or open position is obtained as disclosed in col. 3, lines 33-35 and shown in Fig. 2) if the movement speed of the vehicle is higher than a predetermined value of 70 km/h or 50 km/h (in col. 3, line 33, 64.37 kilometers per hour is disclosed as the speed at which movement to the open position occurs.
Regarding claim 12, Holka et al. disclose:
The air deflector device according to claim 6, as explained above, whereby the air deflector device (15; Figs. 1-3) is configured to be mounted under (see col. 3, line 30) the vehicle (11; Figs. 1-3; see col. 2, line 42), preferably in a front (see col. 1, lines 58-60).
Regarding claim 13, Holka et al. disclose:
The air deflector device according to claim 6, as explained above, whereby the force element (34; Figs. 5 and 6) is configured as a spring element (in the form of a “cylindrical elastomeric torsion element”; see col. 3, lines 19-20) to provide the force (the biasing force mentioned in col, 3, line 12).
Regarding claim 15, Holka et al. disclose:
A vehicle (11; Figs. 1-3; see col. 2, line 42) comprising the air deflector device according to claim 6, as explained above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 and 14 are allowed.
Claims 8, 9 and 11 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The recitation in claims 1 and 8 of an air deflector device having a portion configured to be moved between a closed position and an opened position, whereby the air flow occurring due to a movement of the vehicle is pushing the air deflector portion from its opened position in its closed position; and a locking mechanism configured to be moved between an unlocked position and a locked position, whereby in its locked position, the locking mechanism is configured to lock the air deflector portion in its opened position is not taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art if record. The purpose of self-deploying, i.e., by air flow when the vehicle is moving, air deflectors of the prior art is a low tech way to both extend and retract the air deflector without the need of another means such as an actuator or a mechanical locking mechanism. Thus, the combination of a self- deploying air deflector and a lock to maintain the air deflector in an open, i.e., an extended position, is not found in the prior art of record
Froling et al. US 9,517,802 (equivalent to DE 102016115981) discloses an air deflector device (20; Fig. 2C) including a static panel (22; Figs. 2A-2C) and a dynamic panel (24; Figs. 2A-2C) which is movable by way of an actuator (30; Figs. 2A-2C). Froling et al. do not disclose that the dynamic panel is moveable by air flow occurring due to a movement of the vehicle between opened and closed positions as recited in claim 1.
DE 3630645 discloses an air deflector device (front apron 12; Figs. 1 and 2) that is constructed with a cavity (20; Fig. 1) that is filled at a certain speeds of the vehicle to deploy the air deflector 12 and at lower speed a return spring (24; Fig. 1) which automatically pulls the air deflector into a rest position (Fig. 2) against the underside of the vehicle when the force from a stream of air (16; Fig. 1) flowing into the cavity can be overcome by the force of the return spring. DE 3630645 does not disclose a locking mechanism configured to be moved between an unlocked position and a locked position, whereby in its locked position, the locking mechanism is configured to lock the air deflector portion in its opened position, as recited in claim 1.
Claims 2-5 and 14 are considered to contain allowable subject matter at least due to their dependence upon allowable claim 1.
Also, claims 9 and 11 are considered to contain allowable subject matter at least due to their dependence upon allowable claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Joseph D. Pape whose telephone number is (571)272-6664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 AM-3:30 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, 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.
/Joseph D. Pape/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612