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 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Re: claim 7, “axial member” should read “axial body” as recited in claim 1. For purposes of examination, the examiner has made the change in “[]” (brackets).
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayashi (JP 2016088252 A).
Re: claim 1, Hayashi teaches a vehicle lid device (Fig. 2) comprising: a box (Fig. 2 – energy supply unit 10) attached to a vehicle-body side surface portion (Fig. 1 – vehicle side 2), and including a storage space (Fig. 2 – recess 8) storing a supply port (Fig. 2 – charging port 12) for supplying energy to a vehicle (Fig. 1 – vehicle 1), a communication hole (Fig. 2 – Not shown, but in support wall (23) for charging port (12) to pass through) through which the storage space (Fig. 2 – recess 8) and a vehicle-body deep side communicate with each other, and an opening (Fig. 2 – opening 20) that allows the supply port (Fig. 2 – charging port 12) to be exposed to a vehicle-body outside (Fig. 1 – vehicle side 2);
a lid (Fig. 2 – lid 14) configured to open/close between a closed position (Fig. 4) where the opening is closed and an opened position (Fig. 2) where the opening is opened; and
an open/close mechanism (Fig. 2 – hinge 34) (Paragraph 0022) interposed between the box (Fig. 2 – energy supply unit 10) and the lid (Fig. 2 – lid 14), and configured to allow the lid to open/close relative to the box about an axis line provided on an upper-periphery side of the opening (Fig. 2 – upper wall 22), wherein
the open/close mechanism includes a hinge arm extending in a plate shape in a direction (Fig. 3 – hinge 34) including an axial direction in which the axis line extends (See Fig. 3), the hinge arm being configured to cover a gap, between the box and the lid, formed above the opening when the lid is opened (See Fig. 2),
the hinge arm (34) includes a lid attachment portion (51) attached to the lid (14), support legs (Annotated Fig. 8 – 34L) fixed to an axial body (Annotated Fig. 3 – 34H) rotating about the axis line (Defined by Annotated Fig. 3 – 34H), and a penetrating plate portion (Annotated Fig. 2 & 3 – 34P) covering the gap from a lower side of the gap (See Fig. 2), the penetrating plate portion being sloped downward from one end side to another end side of the penetrating plate portion in the axial direction or sloped downward from a center of the penetrating plate portion to both end sides of the penetrating plate portion in the axial direction (See Annotated Fig. 2 – 34P for shaping), and
both ends in the axial direction of the hinge arm (Annotated Fig. 3 – end 34’) are respectively located on outer sides in the axial direction relative to periphery ends in the axial direction (See Annotated Fig. 4) of the supply port (Fig. 4 – charging port 12) or the communication hole.
It is noted by the examiner that the figures for the alternate embodiment of Hayashi is used to further clarify elements of the prior art but it is understood that the embodiment being relied upon has the same structure.
PNG
media_image1.png
650
458
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
462
316
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
428
496
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
354
454
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Re: claim 3, Hayashi teaches wherein the open/close mechanism includes a cover member (Fig. 2 – covers 16a, 16b) attached to a back surface side (Fig. 2 – flat plate portion 51) of the lid (Fig. 2 – lid 14), and the cover member is stored on the back surface side of the lid at the closed position of the lid (See Fig. 4), and is expanded so as to cover the opening from the back surface side of the lid in a state in which the lid is opened from the closed position to the opened position (See Fig. 2).
Re: claim 6, Hayashi teaches wherein the penetrating plate portion (Annotated Fig. 2 & 3 – 34P has a plate shape that covers the gap (See Fig. 2) continuously when the lid is opened/closed between the closed position (See Fig. 4) and the opened position (See Fig. 2).
Re: claim 7, Hayashi teaches wherein the axial [body] (Annotated Fig. 3 – 34H) is a shaft (Space for shaft seen in Annotated Fig. 8 at 34L) that extends in the axial direction above the upper-periphery side of the opening (See Fig. 2 and 3), wherein the shaft rotates about the axis line integrally with the hinge arm (See Fig. 2 for open state, Fig. 3 for closing/opening state, and Fig. 4 for closed state).
It is noted by the examiner that the figures for the alternate embodiment of Hayashi is used to further clarify elements of the prior art but it is understood that the embodiment being relied upon has the same structure.
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(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi in view of Nakasone (US 20100313384 A1).
Re: claim 2, Hayashi is silent on the open/close mechanism including a latch mechanism portion configured to retain the lid at a predetermined opening angle between the closed position and the opened position.
However, Nakasone teaches wherein the open/close mechanism includes a latch mechanism portion (Fig. 7 – protrusion 44, pin member 40, groove 26) configured to retain the lid (Fig. 5 – lid 3) at a predetermined opening angle between the closed position and the opened position (See Fig. 5).
Hayashi and Nakasone are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of lid devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Hayashi’s hinge with those of Nakasone’s protrusions and grooves in order to provide for a more efficient and easier to use system (i.e., Not having to hold the lid in an open position allows a user to fuel/charge their vehicle easier and more effectively).
Motivation to combine Hayashi with Nakasone comes from knowledge well known in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 5 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re: claim 4 and 5, the cited prior art whether in full or in combination fails to teach a detection unit configured to perform detection for a fact that the cover member is not in a stored state, when the lid closes from the opened position toward the closed position; and a processing execution unit configured to execute processing of stopping closing operation of the lid when the detection unit has detected the fact.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 10/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Re: claim 1, the applicant argues that the cited prior art fails to teach the amended claim 1. However, the examiner disagrees and has cited these limitations in view of the current prior art of Hayashi. “The hinge arm (34) includes a lid attachment portion (51) attached to the lid (14), support legs (Annotated Fig. 8 – 34L) fixed to an axial body (Annotated Fig. 3 – 34H) rotating about the axis line (Defined by Annotated Fig. 3 – 34H), and a penetrating plate portion (Annotated Fig. 2 & 3 – 34P) covering the gap from a lower side of the gap (See Fig. 2), the penetrating plate portion being sloped downward from one end side to another end side of the penetrating plate portion in the axial direction or sloped downward from a center of the penetrating plate portion to both end sides of the penetrating plate portion in the axial direction (See Annotated Fig. 2 – 34P for shaping).”
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 PHILIP C ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-3421. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30 - 4:00 CT.
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 R Weisberg can be reached at 5712705500. 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.
/PHILIP CHARLES ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612