Automobile Collision Simulation Test Bogie and Automobile Collision Simulation Test Device
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/12/2023, 10/23/2023 and 05/06/2024 are being considered by the examiner.
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 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crossman (US 20080148878; “Crossman”).
Regarding claim 1, Crossman discloses, in figures 1-6, an automobile collision simulation test bogie (120) comprising: a bogie body (120) that is movable on a rail (110); and a liquid tank (130) that is provided on the bogie body (120), includes a housing portion (¶ 0029, see fig. 1-2, examiner notes Crossman’s housing portion includes the structure area supporting the footrest plane, hinge translational force block piston cylinders, valves, connecting fluid lines and the dash panel) housing a test body (112) placed on the bogie body (120), and is capable of holding liquid (¶ 0022, Crossman’s fluid tank holds oil or water) in the housing portion (see previous comment) in a state where the test body (112) is housed (see previous comment).
Regarding claim 2, Crossman discloses, in figures 1-6, a liquid supply unit (140, 150) that supplies the liquid (¶ 0022, Crossman’s valves supply oil or water to the lines and piston-cylinders) to the housing portion (see fig. 1-2, examiner notes Crossman’s housing portion includes the structure area supporting the footrest plane, hinge translational force block piston cylinders, valves, connecting fluid lines and the dash panel) of the liquid tank (130).
Regarding claim 3, Crossman discloses, in figures 1-6, the liquid tank (130) is installed at a housing position (¶ 0022, examiner notes Crossman’s fluid tank provides rotational and translational motion during the HYGE impact sled testing therefore the tank within the sled housing) where the housing portion (see fig. 1-2, examiner notes Crossman’s housing portion includes the structure area supporting the footrest plane, hinge translational force block piston cylinders, valves, connecting fluid lines and the dash panel) houses the test body (112).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crossman (US 20080148878; “Crossman”).
Regarding claim 4, Crossman fails to disclose a discharge part.
However, the examiner takes official notice that pressure relief valves are well-known in the art.
The examiner interprets Crossman’s discharge part to be a pressure relief part. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a well-known pressure relief part the Crossman’s liquid tank to discharge liquid held in the tank that exceeds a predetermined liquid level. Doing so increases safety by preventing over pressurization and catastrophic failure of the tank.
Regarding claim 6, Crossman fails to disclose a bogie body mounting hole.
However, the examiner takes official notice that non-penetrating mounting holes are well-known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a well-known non-penetrating mounting hole in Crossman’s slide plane body to mount the footrest plane hinge. Doing so provides a reliable way to mount the hinge and footrest plane.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 7-11 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.
Regarding claim 5, the examiner notes a search has not revealed prior art teaching or suggesting, at least, the subject matter of claim 1 including the liquid tank includes a seal portion that is provided on a bottom portion to be placed on the bogie body and suppresses an outflow of the liquid. Examiner concludes prior existence of the combination, or a suggestion to combine all cited references, is improbable.
Regarding claim 7, the examiner notes a search has not revealed prior art teaching or suggesting, at least, the subject matter of claim 1 including wherein the liquid tank is movable between a housing position where the liquid tank houses the test body of the bogie body and a standby position where the liquid tank does not house the test body, and the bogie body further includes a drive unit that moves the liquid tank. Examiner concludes prior existence of the combination, or a suggestion to combine all cited references, is improbable. Dependent claims 8-9 would be allowable for at least the same reasons as above.
Regarding claim 10, the examiner notes a search has not revealed prior art teaching or suggesting, at least, the subject matter of claim 1 including a rail that extends in one direction; an automobile collision simulation test bogie according to claim 1 that is movable on the rail; a launching device that launches the automobile collision simulation test bogie in the one direction; and a control device that controls a liquid supply unit such that the liquid is supplied to the liquid tank of the automobile collision simulation test bogie. Examiner concludes prior existence of the combination, or a suggestion to combine all cited references, is improbable. Dependent claim 11 would be allowable for at least the same reasons as above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY P GRAVES whose telephone number is (469)295-9072. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/TIMOTHY P GRAVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855