DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A response to the first office action and amendment were received on 02 July 2026.
Receipt of a new IDS is acknowledged, and has been considered.
Claims 1-7 are still pending; Claims 8-20 have been cancelled; Claims 1-7 have been amended.
Arguments directed to the rejection of Claims 1-7 have been received and acknowledged below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the underside panel fitted to the underside of the land vehicle must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 has been amended to include the new limitation of, “underside panel configured to be fitted to an underside of the land vehicle and which is attached to the leading edge of the air diffuser”. The specification does not include any mention of an underside panel, how it is attached to the vehicle, or its interaction with the leading edge of the air diffuser in any form. The closest structure that would appear to be similar is the use of the “underside” of the vehicle represented by numeral 625 in the figures. There is no indication in the specification of how the diffuser interacts with the “underside” 625 though. As the new limitation is not described sufficiently in the specification, it is not being considered with respect to the prior art rejections. The clause, “the aerodynamic system further including an underside panel configured to be fitted to an underside of the land vehicle and which is attached to the leading edge of the air diffuser such that the underside panel extends in a forward direction from the leading edge of the air diffuser” has been stricken from the language for the rejections due to insufficient description.
Claims 2-7 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suk (US 2020/0398908).
Regarding Claim 1, Suk discloses an aerodynamic system comprised of an air diffuser configured for use at the lower rear of a land vehicle (paragraph 0069; airfoil may be located at the lower rearward edge of the vehicle), the air diffuser comprising: an airfoil that, when located at the lower rear of a land vehicle, is oriented to redirect air passing under the land vehicle upward behind the land vehicle when the land vehicle is traveling in a forward direction; wherein the airfoil has a leading edge 110, a trailing edge 112, an upper side, and a lower side (Figs. 1 and 2), the airfoil cross-sectional shape including: a base portion 122 (Fig. 3) including a first surface 102 associated with the upper side and a second surface 104 associated with the lower side; an overhang portion 120 that extends under some of the base portion; and an elliptic portion 152 (Fig. 5) connecting the base portion and the overhang portion adjacent the leading edge.
Regarding Claim 2, the overhang portion 120 is curved toward the second surface 104 of the base portion.
Regarding Claim 3, the overhang portion 120 comprises a first arc portion having a first radius of curvature 210 (Fig. 4) on the lower side and the base portion 122 having a trailing portion comprising a second arc portion having a second radius of curvature 204 (Fig. 4) on the lower side that is different from the first radius of curvature.
Regarding Claim 4, the first radius of curvature 210 is smaller than the second radius of curvature 204 (Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 5, the first radius of curvature 210 is approximately two thirds the length of the second radius of curvature 204 (0.75 VS. 1.175; paragraph 0048-0049).
Regarding Claim 6, a free end of the overhang portion 120 is separated from the base portion by a gap 195 (Fig. 3), and wherein the gap is substantially greater than a local thickness of the overhang portion.
Regarding Claim 7, the gap 195 (paragraph 0041) is at least twice as large as the local thickness of the overhang portion.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues only that the newly added limitations overcome the previous rejections of record. As stated above, the new limitations have not been considered due to lack of compliance with the written description requirement under 35 USC 112(a). As such, the arguments are moot.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON S DANIELS whose telephone number is (571)270-1167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/JASON S DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights