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 .
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 95.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(h)(5) because Figures 1, 9, and 10 show(s) modified forms of construction in the same view.
The drawings are objected to because:
The lead line for reference numeral 50 in figure 3B points to the door 20 not the door frame 50.
Figure 9 shows cable C1 actuating lever 116 to move door striker 62, per paragraph [0071] lever 116 is actuated by cables C3 or C4 for the swing handle 120 not cables C1 and C2 for the sliding handle.
Figure 10 is described in paragraph [0075] as showing the hinge catcher coupled to and uncoupled from the door frame 50. As shown in figure 10 the hinge catcher 122 either extends out of or is retracted into the door frame 50 so it is unclear how it is ever uncoupled from the door frame.
Figure 11 and 13 are cross sections taken along line C-C of figure 5 and show pins 89 and 86 in holes 79 and 88 respectively. However, it appears that the pins are not engaged with the holes in figure 5, i.e. the pin is to the left of the cut-through line C-C and the view is to the right.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0067] describes sliding rails 92 and 94 as being provided as a pair of sliding rails 96 and 98. This contradicts what is shown in the figures as rails 92 and 94 are the upper pair of rails forming sliding rail 90 while rails 96 and 98 are the lower rails forming sliding rail 93. It appears the paragraph should say sliding rail 90 may be provided as a pair of sliding rails 92 and 94.
The same issue occurs in paragraph [0077].
A similar issue occurs in paragraph [0083] with the description of rails 96 and 98 being provided as a pair of rails 96 and 98. Similar to paragraph [0067} it is assumed the recitation should be the sliding rail 93 may be provided as a pair of rails 96 and 98.
Paragraph [0068] describes the rails as being internal rail 92 inside the vehicle and external rail 94 outside the vehicle. This is contradicted by figures 6, 8, and 11 showing both rail inside the vehicle. It appears that applicant is trying to describe the position of the rails relative to each other, i.e. the internal rail is towards the interior of the vehicle relative to the external rail.
A similar issue occurs in the claim language paragraph [0008].
Paragraphs [0074] and [0075] describes the hinge catcher 122 as being decoupled from the door frame 50 by the swing handle 120. As noted with the above drawing objections the hinge catcher 122 retracts into but does not appear to decouple from the door frame 50. It is unclear from both figures and disclosure what the hinge catcher 122 engages in the extended position.
Paragraph [0077] describes the door arm as having a rolling rail 71, however, it appears from figure 11 and the description that the rail is actually a roller (described as including a roller). As rail and roller are not synonymous if 71 is a roller it should be described as such, not as a rail.
Paragraph [0077] also includes a typo of rolling rail (roller) 77 instead of 71.
The same issue with the rolling rail occurs in paragraph [[0083] with respect to lower rolling rail 77.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 lines 4-5 recite “a pair of sliding rails provided on at least one of upper and lower portions of the chassis cab”. It is unclear whether the pair of sliding rails refers to the sliding rails 90 and 93 as 90 is formed on the upper portion and 93 on the lower or whether the pair of rails refers to 92/94 and 96/98 where pair 92 and 94 is formed on the upper and pair 96/98 is formed on the lower portion. As detailed above the description of the pairs in the specification is unclear and as such does not provide clarity to the claim limitation. For purposes of examination the pair will be assumed to be upper sliding pair 92/94 and lower sliding pair 96/98 based on claim 2 (defines the pair as being internal and external).
Claim 2 lines 2-3 recite “an internal rail provided inside the vehicle, and an external rail provided outside the vehicle”. As noted in the above specification objection the external rail is not located outside the vehicle but instead is located inside the vehicle but towards the exterior of the vehicle relative to the internal rail.
Claim 16 lines 4-5 recite “sliding rails provided on at least one of upper and lower portions of the chassis cab”. As noted above there is some confusion as to the scope of sliding rails and pair of rails. As claim 16 recites only sliding rails (i.e. not a pair of sliding rails as in claim 1) and the disclosure describes the sliding rails as the upper 90 and lower 93 sliding rails, for purposes of examination the sliding rails of claim 16 will be interpreted as at least one upper rail and at least one lower rail.
Examiner notes claim 16 line 5 ends the clause describing the sliding rails but has no punctuation mark (i.e. just “cab”). It appears that the recitation should be “cab,”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-7, 12, 14, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US patent 6161336 to Ziv-Av (hereinafter Ziv-Av) in view of US patent 8984810 to Bortoluzzi (hereinafter Bort).
Regarding claim 1, the sliding door apparatus is shown in Ziv-Av in figures 4-6D with
a sliding door apparatus, which is provided at a lateral side (figures 6A-6D) of a chassis cab (van body column 6 lines 17--22) of a vehicle to slide (figures 6A-6C) in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and configured to open (figures 6C and 6D) or close (figure 6A) an opening formed in the chassis cab, the sliding door apparatus comprising:
sliding rails (figure 5 rails with tracks 30 and 32) provided on at least one of upper (rail with track 30) and lower (rail with track 32) portions of the chassis cab, extending in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, and each being curved rearward (figures 6A-6D) toward a cab frame (frame 12 defining opening for door) provided at a lateral side of the chassis cab; and
a door (14) configured to be slidable along the sliding rails (rails with tracks 30 and 32) and positioned so that upper-end surfaces thereof are positioned without a level difference from an upper-end surface of the chassis cab in a state in which the doors are not slid (figure 6A, door flush with cab) , and so that the upper- end surfaces thereof protrude outwardly from the upper-end surface of the chassis cab in a state in which the doors are slid (figure 6C, door to exterior of cab).
However, Ziv-Av does not teach the rails being a pair of rails or the door being plural doors.
Plural doors on pairs of rails are shown in Bort in figures 1-8 where two doors (2a and 2b) move on a pair of rails (11 and 20). When provided to Ziv-Av having upper and lower rails there would be a pair of upper rails and a pair of lower rails to evenly support the movement of both doors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av with the plural doors and pair of rails of Bort because plural or pairs of doors provided the known benefit of allowing for access to different portions of the cab and thereby more of the cab than a single door and the pairs of rails provided the known benefit of supporting a pair of doors for flush closing movement (similar to the flush closing movement of Ziv-Av but for two doors).
Regarding claim 2, the pair of rails includes an internal rail (20) and an external rail (11) located more towards the exterior than the internal rail (20) in Bort.
Regarding claim 3, the internal rail (20) is curved and includes a larger curvature than the exterior rail (11) in Bort.
Regarding claim 4, the door (14) includes a door arm sliding assembly (arm with 40 in figure 4) provided on the lower portion and configured to be coupled to or decoupled from (arm connects to hinge 20, hinge 20 disconnects to allow pivoting movement figure 6D or connects for sliding movement figure 6C, further taught column 8 lines 16-62) the door (14) in Ziv-Av.
Regarding claim 5, the arm sliding assembly (arm with 40 in figure 4) including a door arm (portion with 40) and a door arm bracket (horizontal portion figure 4 connecting to 18 and 20) configured to be fixed or released (hinge 20 disconnects to allow pivoting movement figure 6D or connects for sliding movement figure 6C, further taught column 8 lines 16-62) from the door (14) in Ziv-Av.
Regarding claim 6, a door roller (40) is provided on the lower surface of the door arm and contacts with and rolls along the sliding rail (rail with track 32) in Ziv-Av.
Regarding claim 7, the door (14) include a handle that operates the door (14) to slide or not slide (column 8 line 63-column 9 line 14) in Ziv-Av.
Regarding claim 12, the doors (2a and 2b) include first (2a) and second (2b) doors wherein the first door (2a) slides to overlap (figures 7-8) the second door (2b) in Bort.
Regarding claim 14, the door (14) includes a protrusion (annotated figures 6A-6D below) engaging a hole (not shown, protrusion pin-like so engages hole) on a door frame (portion engaged by the protrusion) on the cab frame and the protrusions are selectively inserted (figures 6A-C) in Ziv-Av.
PNG
media_image1.png
430
706
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, the sliding door apparatus is shown in Ziv-Av in figures 4-6D with
a sliding door apparatus, which is provided at a lateral side (figures 6A-6D) of a chassis cab (van body column 6 lines 17--22) of a vehicle to slide (figures 6A-6C) in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle and configured to open (figures 6C and 6D) or close (figure 6A) an opening formed in the chassis cab, the sliding door apparatus comprising:
sliding rails (figure 5 rails with tracks 30 and 32) provided on at least one of upper (rail with track 30) and lower (rail with track 32) portions of the chassis cab, and
a door (14) connected to be slidable in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle along the sliding rails (rails with tracks 30 and 32), and
wherein a free end (lower end figure 6C) of the door has an inclined shape,
wherein the door (14) is positioned so that upper-end surfaces thereof are positioned without a level difference from an upper-end surface of the chassis cab in a state in which the doors are not slid (figure 6A, door flush with cab) , and so that the upper- end surfaces thereof protrude outwardly from the upper-end surface of the chassis cab in a state in which the doors are slid (figure 6C, door to exterior of cab).
However, Ziv-Av does not teach the door being first and second doors.
First and second doors are shown in Bort in figures 1-8 where first door (2a) and second door (2b) slid along rails (11 and 20) such that the doors overlap (figures 7-8) and have end portions that face each other (right end 2a and left end 2b in figure 7). When provided to Ziv-Av having the inclined free end (i.e. sliding end away from the door opening, similar to right end of 2a in Bort) both door ends would be inclined.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av with the first and second doors of Bort because pairs of doors provided the known benefit of allowing for access to different portions of the cab and thereby more of the cab than a single door.
Regarding claim 20, the door (14) includes a protrusion (annotated figures 6A-6D above) engaging a hole (not shown, protrusion pin-like so engages hole) on a door frame (portion engaged by the protrusion) on the cab frame and the protrusions are selectively inserted (figures 6A-C) in Ziv-Av.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziv-Av and Bort as applied to claim 7 (as well as claims 1-6, 12, 14, 16, and 20) above, and further in view of US patent 5370428 to Dreifert (hereinafter Dreifert).
Regarding claim 8, Zi-Av includes a mechanism for releasing the door (14) from the slide arm actuatable by a handle (mechanisms for locking sliding or swinging movement only taught in column 8 line 16-column 9 line 14), however, Ziv-Av does not go into details of the mechanisms.
A sliding bar connection mechanism is shown in Dreifert in figures 1-14 where sliding bar (21) that can fix (pin 80 engages hole, solid lines figure 14) or release (pin 80 out of hole, dashed lines figure 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av, having the plural doors and pair of rails of Bort, with the sliding bar connection mechanism of Dreifert because sliding bar connectors were known connectors in the wing art and provided the benefit of easy connection and disconnection as well as multiple connection points for secure connection.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziv-Av, Bort, and Dreifert as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 9, Ziv-Av is silent as to the connection between the handle and the connection mechanisms.
Examiner takes Official Notice that cable handle connections were old and well known.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av, having the plural doors and pair of rails of Bort and the sliding bar connection mechanism of Dreifert, with the cable handle connection because cable handle connections were well-known, readily available, and easy to use as well as allowing to connection of the handle to a variety of mechanisms making for an adaptable connection useable in multiple situations/configurations.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, the bar (21) includes a pin (80) inserted into a pinhole (figure 14) in Dreifert.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziv-Av and Bort as applied to claim 12 (as well as claims 1-7, 14, 16, and 20) above, and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 13, when provided with the two doors of Bort, doors arm assemblies (arm with roller 40 in figure 4) would be provided on both doors (similar to arms 3 in Bort) in Ziv-Av. However, Ziv-Av is silent as to a stopper on the door arm.
Examiner takes Official Notice that stoppers were old and well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av, having the plural doors and pair of rails of Bort, with the known stoppers because stoppers provided the known benefit of limiting movement of doors and thereby preventing the doors from bumping into things at the end positions of movement that could cause damage to the door or thing bumped into (for example the second door in Bort).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziv-Av, Bort, Dreifert, and Official Notice as applied to claim 11 (as well as claims 9 and 10) above, and further in view of CN 115434592 to Lee (hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 15, Ziv-Av shows only one door and thus does not show a B-pillar between the doors.
A B-pillar is shown in Lee in figures 3-4 where vehicle has a vertically extending B-pillar (230) between first (210) and second (220) doors. While the edges of the B-pillar are shown as stepped, when provided to Ziv-Av having a partially inclined door edge (lower edge figure 6B includes flat portion and inclined portion) the B-pillar would include a mating incline, similar to the mating step shapes in Lee.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av, having the plural doors and pair of rails of Bort, with the B-pillar of Lee because B-pillars provided the known benefit of supporting the central free ends (i.e. ends away from the sides of the door opening) as well as providing a seal for the central region to prevent ingress of liquids or debris from the exterior to the interior of the cab.
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziv-Av and Bort as applied to claim 16 (as well as claims 1-7, 12, 14, and 20) above, and further in view of Lee.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Ziv-Av shows only one door and thus does not show a B-pillar between the doors.
A B-pillar is shown in Lee in figures 3-4 where vehicle has a vertically extending B-pillar (230) between first (210) and second (220) doors. While the edges of the B-pillar are shown as stepped, when provided to Ziv-Av having a partially inclined door edge (lower edge figure 6B includes flat portion and inclined portion) the B-pillar would include a mating incline, similar to the mating step shapes in Lee.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sliding door system of Ziv-Av, having the pair of doors of Bort, with the B-pillar of Lee because B-pillars provided the known benefit of supporting the central free ends (i.e. ends away from the sides of the door opening) as well as providing a seal for the central region to prevent ingress of liquids or debris from the exterior to the interior of the cab.
Regarding claim 19, seals (S) are between first door (210), second door (220), and the B-pillar (230) in Lee.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A KELLY whose telephone number is (571)270-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/CATHERINE A KELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619