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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 14 have been examined.
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.
Claims 1, 3 – 4, 8, 10 – 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (JP2008190518), cited by Applicant, in view of Cianflone (2017/0342964) and Yamada et al. (JP2010144614), also cited by Applicant. In regard to claims 1 and 8, Kato discloses a vehicle comprising an outer cover that is exposed to an outer space of the vehicle (Fig. 2, item 1101) and that forms a front opening facing an outer space in front (Fig. 2, item 1201), a passage forming unit that forms a passage for guiding wind that enters from the front opening (Fig. 4, item 301), and a rotor blade for wind power generation that is provided in the passage to be rotatable about a rotation axis directed in a right-left direction of the vehicle (Fig. 4, item 30), wherein the rotor blade includes a front blade surface that is parallel to the rotation axis and that is curved so as to project forward in a rotation direction (Fig. 7, items 261 and 263), and a rear blade surface that is disposed on a back surface side of the front blade surface, that is parallel to the rotation axis and that is curved so as to be recessed toward the front side in the rotation direction (Fig. 7, item 28), the rear blade surface having a smaller curvature depth than the front blade surface (Fig. 7), wherein, in a plan view orthogonal to the rotation axis, an end portion of the front blade surface on a side far from the rotation axis is defined as an outer end portion, and an end portion of the front blade surface on a side close to the rotation axis is defined as an inner end portion (Fig. 7, items EH and EL), and wherein the front blade surface includes a first curved surface that constitutes a section away from the rotation axis and that extends from the outer end portion toward the front side in the rotation direction (Fig. 7, item 261), and a second curved surface that constitutes a section close to the rotation axis, that is connected to the inner end portion from an opposite side, of the first curved surface, from the outer end portion toward a rear side in the rotation direction, and that has a shorter surface length than the first curved surface in the plan view (Fig. 7, item 263).
Kato does not disclose an upper opening for exhausting the wind. In regard to claim 1, Cianflone discloses a vehicle comprising an upper opening (Figs. 1 and 2A, item 125) positioned behind and above a front opening (Figs. 1 and 2, item 130) and facing an outer space above, and a passage for guiding wind that enters from the front opening to the upper opening inside the outer cover (Fig. 1, items 130 and 140).
In regard to claim 4, Cianflone discloses wherein an outlet of the passage forming unit is larger than an inlet of the passage forming unit (Fig. 2A).
In regard to claim 10, Cianflone discloses wherein the outer cover includes a front surface portion that forms a front end surface of the vehicle and forms the front opening, and an upper surface portion that extends rearward from the front surface portion and forms the upper opening, at a position in front of and below a windshield of the vehicle (Figs. 1 and 2A, item 110).
In regard to claim 11, Cianflone discloses wherein the vehicle is a cargo vehicle including a vehicle body forming an occupant compartment and a cargo accommodation compartment connected to a posterior section of the vehicle body, and wherein the outer cover is provided on a ceiling portion of the occupant compartment (Fig. 6).
In regard to claim 13, Cianflone discloses wherein the vehicle is an electric car that does not include an internal combustion engine and runs by an electric motor (paragraph 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the upper opening of Cianflone, to the vehicle of Kato, in order to avoid producing resistance and lower the efficiency of the system (Cianflone, paragraphs 16 and 19).
Kato in view of Cianflone does not disclose the use of a arcuate passage around rotor blade. In regard to claim 1, Yamada discloses a vehicle comprising an outer cover that is exposed to an outer space of the vehicle and that forms a front opening facing an outer space in front, and an upper opening positioned behind and above the front opening and facing an outer space above (Fig. 8, item 13),a passage forming unit that forms a passage for guiding wind that enters from the front opening to the upper opening inside the outer cover (Fig. 8, inner space of item 13 in which item 14 is mounted), and a rotor blade for wind power generation that is provided in the passage to be rotatable about a rotation axis directed in a right-left direction of the vehicle (Fig. 8, item 14), wherein the rotor blade is configured to rotate counterclockwise when viewed from a left surface side of the vehicle (Fig. 8), and wherein the passage forming unit includes an arcuate portion formed in an arcuate shape along a circumference around the rotation axis at an upper side of the rotation axis and at an outer side of the rotor blade when viewed in across-section perpendicular to the rotation axis (Fig. 8).
In regard to claim 3, Yamada discloses wherein a central angle of the arcuate portion is 90 degrees or larger and 180 degrees or smaller (Fig. 8).
In regard to claim 8, Yamada discloses wherein the passage forming unit includes an upward displacement portion of a lower surface of the passage, the upward displacement portion being positioned between an inlet of the passage formation unit and the rotor blade, and having a shape gradually displaced upward toward a rear side (Fig. 8), and a lower surface which is lower than the upward displacement portion at a position between the upward displacement portion and the rotor blade (Fig. 8).
The addition of these features would result in a predictable variation that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize as no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions, which has been held unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), absent evidence that the modifications necessary to effect the combination of elements is uniquely challenging or difficult for one of ordinary skill in the art. Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BAPI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (JP2008190518), cited by Applicant, in view of Cianflone (2017/0342964) and Yamada et al. (JP2010144614) as applied to claims 1, 3 – 4, 8, 10 – 11, and 13 above, and further in view of Jeong (9,370,995). Kato in view of Cianflone and Yamada does not disclose the use of a flow control unit. In regard to claim 9, Jeong discloses a vehicle comprising a flow control unit that switches between a state in which flow of wind from the front opening is permitted and a state in which flow of wind from the front opening is blocked (Figs. 1 and 2, items 45 and 30).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the flow control device of Jeong, to the vehicle of Kato in view of Cianflone and Yamada, in order to increase vehicle aerodynamics at times where power generation is not needed. This would increase vehicle efficiency and extend vehicle range.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (JP2008190518), cited by Applicant, in view of Cianflone (2017/0342964) and Yamada et al. (JP2010144614) as applied to claims 1, 3 – 4, 8, 10 – 11, and 13 above, and further in view of Jacob (2017/0326946). Kato in view of Cianflone and Yamada does not disclose the use of a solar panel. In regard to claim 14, Jacob discloses a vehicle wherein an outer cover has a solar panel at a section between a front and a rear of the outer cover (Fig. 3, item 16).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a solar panel, as taught by Jacob, to the vehicle of Kato in view of Cianflone and Yamada, in order to provide additional power charging capacity. This would extend vehicle range.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is allowed.
Claims 5 – 7 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: Kato (JP2008190518) discloses a vehicle similar to the instant invention; however Kato, either alone or in combination, neither discloses nor suggests a vehicle wherein (in regard to claim 5) a front end of the upper opening is positioned above a rear end of the upper opening, (in regard to claim 6) wherein the outer cover includes a flow direction changing portion that changes a flow direction of wind, flowing along the outer cover from a front side, to an upward direction, in front of the upper opening, and (in regard to claim 12) wherein the outer end portion has a plurality of recesses that penetrate a portion between the first curved surface and the rear blade surface and are formed in a direction in which the outer end portion extends. These limitations, in combination with each and every other independent claim limitation, are not shown in the currently cited prior art.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 26 December 2025 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 JOHN DANIEL WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (PT).
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
/JOHN D WALTERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613