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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 21, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed August 21, 2026, have been fully considered.
Applicant has argued that the previous rejection of claim 31 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been overcome by amendment. Examiner agrees, and has withdrawn the rejection of claim 31.
Regarding the prior art, applicant’s arguments hinge entirely on the language added to the independent claims, i.e. that “the flange extends as far as both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction, of an outer beltline region of the door bodyshell in which the vertically extending parts of the frame structure are arranged, and the reinforcing structure is shorter than the outer door skin in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction.” Applicant argues that the references cited by the examiner do not, alone or in combination, teach this amended language. The central problem with applicant’s arguments is that applicant’s original disclosure does not support the amended claim language. Paragraph 0059 of applicant’s specification states that “the flange 33 extends into both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction X, of the inner beltline region 21,” rather than the outer beltline region, as claimed. Essentially, the specification states that the flange 33 somehow extends from the outer beltline region 8 into the corners of the inner beltline region 21 (see Fig. 1). Examiner is interpreting the claims as if they recite what is stated in Paragraph 0059, i.e. referring to the “inner beltline region” rather than the “outer beltline region.” Examiner agrees that Sugie does not teach the flange extending into the corners of the inner beltline region. Nor would it be considered obvious to modify Sugie to do so. Therefore, the claims no longer stand rejected under any prior art references.
Claim Interpretation
It is noted that the claims are being interpreted as if the phrase “the flange extends as far as both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction, of an outer beltline region of the door bodyshell” actually reads --the flange extends as far as both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction, of an inner
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 11, 13-18, 21-23, 25, 27-29, and 31-36 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 claim(s) 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 inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With regard to claims 11, 14, and 21, each of these claims contains the limitation “the flange extends as far as both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction, of an outer beltline region of the door bodyshell in which the vertically extending parts of the frame structure are arranged” (emphasis supplied). The original disclosure does not support this claim language. Instead, Paragraph 0059 of applicant’s specification states that “the flange 33 extends into both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction X, of the inner beltline region 21.” Therefore, the claims are being interpreted as if they recite “inner beltline region” rather than “outer beltline region.”
However, even when interpreting the claims as if they recite “inner beltline region,” this claim language is also problematic. It is unclear how the flange 33 as shown in Fig. 1 can extend from its general position within the outer beltline region 8, into the corners of the inner beltline region 21. The disclosure does not demonstrate that applicant had possession of this particular feature. It does not appear possible that the flange 33, which is bent around the reinforcement structure 31, can extend across the window well and into the inner beltline region 21 (see annotated Fig. below). Paragraph 0059 states that how this can be achieved “will be described in detail below with reference to Figures 2 to 4.” However, none of Figures 2 to 4 even show the flange. Reference numeral 33 is not present at all in these Figures.
PNG
media_image1.png
430
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 13, 15-18, 22, 23, 25, 27-29, and 31-36 are rejected in view of their dependence upon rejected claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
It is noted that the claims do not stand rejected under prior art. This is due to the interpretation of the claims discussed above in the “Claim Interpretation” section. If the claims state that the “flange extends as far as both outer corners, in the motor vehicle longitudinal direction, of an inner beltline region of the door bodyshell,” then Sugie does not disclose this particular feature. Sugie only teaches the flange being a part of the outer beltline region of the door bodyshell. Nor would it have been obvious to extend the flange into the inner door bodyshell, as the window glass obstructs access across the window well between the inner and outer regions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6300. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM - 5:30PM.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at 571-270-7741. 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.
/ROBERT E FULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights