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
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 13, “the plurality of units” has no clear antecedent basis in the claims.
Previously, in lines 6-7, Applicant has recited, “units. . .arranged in an aligned relationship in a predetermined first direction” and “units . . . arranged in plurality in an aligned relationship pin a second direction.” It is not clear if “the plurality of units” refers to the units aligned in a first direction, a second direction or both the first and second directions.” For the purpose of expediting examination, the term will be interpreted in the broadest reasonable manner as the plurality of units in the first direction or the plurality of units in the second direction.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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 1-5, 7-8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshida et al. (WO 2020/145200).
With respect to claim 1, Yoshida et al. disclose an automobile panel, comprising:
an outer panel 2,
an inner panel 3, and a joint 4 that joins the inner panel 3 and the outer panel 2; wherein:
the inner panel 3 includes units 7 which (as shown in Fig. 2 of Yoshida et al.), as viewed in a sheet thickness direction of the outer panel, are arranged in plurality in an aligned relationship in a predetermined first direction (units arranged in oval 22 as shown below) and are arranged in plurality in an aligned relationship in a second direction that intersects the first direction as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 19 of Yoshida et al.):
[AltContent: textbox (joint)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (additional joint)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (first direction)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (second direction)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
403
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (additional-join-equipped unit)]
each of the units 7 includes a flange 11 which is arranged adjacent to the outer panel 2, an inclined wall 12 that extends from the flange 11 so as to separate from the outer panel 1, and a bottom portion 13 that is continuous with the inclined wall 12 and is separated from the flange 11 (as shown in Fig. 14 of Yoshida et al.);
the plurality of units 7 include a plurality of joint-equipped units 7 in which the joint 4 is provided at the flange 11 as shown in the above image;
a predetermined first form or second form is provided (Yoshida et al. discloses providing the second form);
in the first form, in some of the joint-equipped units the joints are arranged in an arrangement including a predetermined pattern, and in a remainder of the joint-equipped units the joints are arranged in an arrangement including a part of the predetermined pattern; and
in the second form, in each of the joint-equipped units 7, a plurality of the joints 4 are arranged in an arrangement including the predetermined pattern (joints 4 are arranged on side portions 10b, 10d, 10e, and 10f, as shown in Figs. 5 and 19 of Yoshida et al.);
an additional-joint-equipped unit (as indicated in the above image) having an additional joint, the additional joint being arranged at a place (at side portion 10a as shown in the above image) that deviates from a layout of the joints in the predetermined pattern (i.e., side portions 10b, 10d, 10e, and 10f).
With respect to claim 2, Yoshida et al. disclose that the plurality of units 7 include a plurality of units including the flanges 11 which have an identical or similar shape to each other (as shown in Figs. 11 and 13-14 of Yoshida et al.) .
With respect to claim 3, Yoshida et al. disclose that the predetermined pattern is set to a same size in each of a plurality of the joint-equipped units (as shown in Figs. 11 and 13-14 of Yoshida et al.).
With respect to claim 4, Yoshida et al. disclose that in the first form, at least one of a part of the predetermined pattern and the predetermined pattern is arranged in an aligned relationship in a rectilinear direction; and in the second form, the predetermined pattern is arranged in an aligned relationship in the rectilinear direction (as shown in the above image the first and second directions are arranged at 90º to one another).
With respect to claim 5, Yoshida et al. disclose that the rectilinear direction is at least one of the first direction or the second direction (as shown in the above image) and a third direction that intersects with both of the first direction and the second direction.
With respect to claim 7, Yoshida et al. disclose that the predetermined pattern may be a dotted pattern having three or more dots (Yoshida et al, paragraph [0071]; Fig. 19).
With respect to claim 8, Yoshida et al. discloses that the predetermined pattern is a linear pattern having three or more lines (i.e., adhesive on side portions at 10b, 10d, 10e, and 10f as shown in Fig. 19 of Yoshida et al.).
With respect to claim 12, Yoshida et al. disclose that the outer panel 2 is an aluminum sheet having a sheet thickness of 0.75 mm or less (“more preferably 0.64 mm or less,” see paragraph [0038] of the machine translation of Yoshida et al.), and the inner panel 3 is an aluminum sheet having a sheet thickness of 0.75 mm or less (“0.4 to 1.3 mm,” see paragraph [0041] of the machine translation of Yoshida et al.).
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (WO 2020/145200).
With respect to claim 9, Yoshida et al. discloses the claimed automobile panel except that they are silent on whether 15 or more of the predetermined patterns are provided. Fig. 19 of Yoshida et al. shows 12 of the predetermined patterns. However, it has been held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see MPEP§ 2144.04, part VI, B). In this instance, there has been no unexpected result disclosed. Providing additional units 7 and corresponding additional predetermined patterns of joints would simply allow for a larger automobile panel. That is, each additional unit 7, and predetermined pattern of joints would obviously allow a user to make a larger panel.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (WO 2020/145200), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dan et al. (CN 108179823).
With respect to claim 10, Yoshida et al. disclose the claimed automobile panel except that they are silent on the distance between centers as viewed in the sheet thickness direction of two of the annular units with joints that are adjacent to each other. Yoshida et al. disclose that the joint-equipped units 7 include an annular unit 7 with joints 4 in which the joint is provided at the flange 11 which is formed in an annular shape as viewed in the sheet thickness direction (as shown in Figs. 11 and 14 of Yoshida et al.);
the annular unit 7 with joints 4 is provided in plurality (as shown in Fig. 11 of Yoshida et al.).
Dan et al. teach a similar panel including hexagonal annular units in which the side length of the hexagon is 10 mm-100 mm (see bottom of pg. 4 of the machine translation of Dan et al.). A regular hexagon with a side length of 10 mm-100 mm would have a distance between centers as viewed in the sheet thickness direction of two of the annular units with joints that are adjacent to each other that would be 17.3 mm to 173.2 mm which is 200 mm or less.
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Dan et al. with the automobile panel disclosed by Yoshida et al. because it is known to fabricate honeycomb structures with these dimensions. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to determine the optimal dimensions through ordinary, routine experimentation.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (WO 2020/145200), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Otsuka et al. (US 2018/0001368).
With respect to claim 11, Yoshida et al. disclose the claimed automobile panel except that they are silent on the ultimate yield stress of the outer panel steel sheet. Yoshida et al. disclose that the outer panel 2 is a steel sheet having a sheet thickness of 0.60 mm or less (see paragraph [0036] of the machine translation of Yoshida et al.), and the inner panel 3 is a steel sheet having a sheet thickness of 0.50 mm or less (“0.3 mm,” see paragraph [0040] of the machine translation of Yoshida et al.).
Otsuka et al. teach a similar automobile panel including a steel sheet with an ultimate yield stress of 400 MPa or more (Otsuka et al., paragraph [0165]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Otsuka et al. with the automobile panel disclosed by Yoshida et al. for the high yield and tensile strengths taught by Otsuka et al. (Otsuka, paragraph [0165]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 7-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
As mentioned in the above rejection, Yoshida et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1 including “an additional-joint -quipped unit having an additional joint, the additional joint being arranged at a place that deviates from a layout of the joints in the predetermined pattern.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) 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 DANIEL J COLILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-2157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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.
/Daniel J Colilla/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights