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 .
This action is in response to applicant’s 9/22/2025 amendment.
Claims 3, 8, and 9 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7, and 10-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “a temporary interface formed thereby preventing mix of the air inside of the vehicle and air outside of the vehicle” (lines 16-17) renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear where, how, and under what condition(s) a temporary interface is formed.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation “where the at least one air outlet of the air outlets is located on a side where the door opening or the vehicle trunk opening is detected” (emphasis added) (lines 20-21) renders the claim indefinite as the claim previously set forth “a plurality of air outlets provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle” (emphasis added) (claim 1, lines 2-3). It is unclear where the at least one air outlet(s) are located.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation “adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides” (lines 12-15) renders the claim indefinite since the claim previously set forth “the discharge port is rotated by driving the actuator” (claim 1, lines 2-6). It is unclear if the recited guides are the same or different than the discharge ports.
Regarding claim 16, the recitation “and is configured to adjust a direction or pressure of the air discharged thereby by driving an actuator” (lines 4-5) renders the claim indefinite. it is unclear what claim element is configured to adjust a direction or pressure of the air. For examination purposes it is assumed that the discharge ports are configured to adjust a direction or pressure of the air
Further regarding claim 16, the recitation “adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides” (lines 10-12) renders the claim indefinite since the claim previously set forth “the discharge port is rotated by driving the actuator” (claim 16, lines 2-5). It is unclear if the recited guides are the same or different than the discharge ports.
Claims 2, 4-7, 10-15, and 17 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
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, 2, 4-7, 10, 11, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yoshinori et al. (US 2001/0029162) and Krause (US 2022/0363107).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising:
A plurality of air outlets (Figure 4: Discharge structures defined by 12/14, 13/15, 22/24, and 23/25) provided on a roof of a door side of the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), each of the plurality of air outlets comprises (i.e. define) a discharge port (12, 13, 22, 23) through which the air is discharged (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The air outlets in combination with ducts 1 and 2 define ports that are adjusted by the air discharge units), and where the discharge port is rotated by driving the actuator (Paragraphs 41-42: The air discharge units have elements that are actuated by a servomotor and/or louvers) to discharge the air to the roof or a lower side of the roof (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The discharge port is rotated at least by louvers),
An air supply system (10) provided in the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), where a plurality of ends of the air supply system are connected to the plurality of air outlets (Figure 1 and Paragraph 41, see also Figure 14), and where the air supply system is configured to adjust a supply of the air to each of the plurality of air outlets as a plurality of guides (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 46, see also Figure 14: The plurality of guides are defined by mixing doors 10e and switching doors -not shown-) provided in the air supply system are rotated (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 39), and
A controller (Paragraph 35: A control unit) configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 41-45). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air outlets as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by configuring air to be discharged at a variety of locations within the vehicle.
Further, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the rotation angle of the one or more of the plurality of guides depends on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle to create a temporary interface.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35) configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets depending on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle (Paragraphs 41 and 45), where a temporary interface is formed thereby preventing mix of the air inside of the vehicle and air outside of the vehicle (Figures 5A-5B and Paragraphs 41, 45, 50, and 51: The controller is configured to generate air curtains at doors and a trunk to prevent mixing of air), where -when a door opening or a vehicle trunk opening is detected- the controller is configured to discharge air from at least one air outlet of the air outlets to the lower side of the roof (Figures 5A-5B and Paragraphs 41, 45, 50, and 51), and where the at least one air outlet of the air outlets is located on a side where the door opening or the vehicle trunk opening is detected (Figures 1, 5A, and 5B). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air discharge units as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Regarding claim 2, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the adjustment to the rotation angle of the one or more of the plurality of guides further comprises: adjusting the direction or pressure of the air discharged from the one or more of the air outlets (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: Adjusting the direction or pressure of the air discharged from the one or more of the air discharge units includes adjusting/rotating both the plurality of guides and the one or more of the air discharge units).
Regarding claim 4, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where each discharge port comprises a first discharge port (e.g. 25) through which air is discharged having a first sectional area (Figures 1 and 4), and a second discharge port (e.g. 24) through which the air is discharged having a second sectional area (Figures 1 and 4) that is larger than the first sectional area (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 42 and 52: Each of the discharge ports are independently adjustable to control an amount of air directed to different areas of the vehicle, for example 25 is inherently capable of being closed and 24 is inherently capable of being open, thereby satisfying the claimed sectional areas).
Regarding claim 5, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the air supply system comprises a roof duct (Figures 1 and 4: See duct 1 for example) that is provided in the roof (Figures 1 and 4, see also Figure 14), the roof duct comprising (i.e. defining) a passage through which the air flows (Figures 1 and 4), where a branch duct (Figures 1 and 4: See portion of 1, downstream of 15 and leading to 12 and see portion of 1, downstream of 15 and leading to 13) is provided on each end of the plurality of ends of the roof duct configured to be connected to one of the plurality of air outlets (Figures 1 and 4, see also Figure 14).
Regarding claim 6, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the roof duct is connected to a main duct (Figures 1, 2, and 4, see also Figure 14: See ducting associated with 10) that is provided on a rear side of the vehicle (Figures 1 and 4, see also Figure 14), the roof duct being configured to receive the air from the main duct (Figure 1 and Paragraph 41, see also Figure 14), and where one or more of the branch ducts are provided in a door-side roof of the vehicle or a trunk-side roof of the vehicle (Figures 1 and 4, see also Figure 14).
Regarding claim 7, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where a plurality of guides are provided in the roof duct (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 46, see also Figure 14: The plurality of guides are defined by mixing doors 10e and switching doors -not shown-), the plurality of guides configured to adjust, by rotation, a flow rate of the air supplied to the one or more of the air outlets (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 39).
Regarding claim 10, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the controller is configured to cause an adjustment to the rotation angle of a guide of the plurality of guides (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the rotation angle of the one or more of the plurality of guides depends on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the controller is configured to cause discharge of the air to the one or more of the air outlets on a side where a vehicle door opening or a vehicle trunk opening is detected (Paragraphs 41 and 45). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air outlets as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Regarding claim 11, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the controller is configured to cause a driving of the actuator to increase the pressure of the air discharged from one of the plurality of air outlets (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the rotation angle of the one or more of the plurality of guides depends on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the controller is configured to cause discharge of the air to the one or more of the air outlets on a side where a vehicle door opening or a vehicle trunk opening is detected (Paragraphs 41 and 45). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air outlets as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Regarding claim 13, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the controller is configured to cause: the adjustment to the rotation angle of one of the plurality of guides; and the driving of the actuator, to adjust a direction or pressure of the air discharged from at least one of the air outlets in response to a user request for air conditioning inside the vehicle (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 13, 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller).
Regarding claim 14, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above. However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose control on the basis of occupancy.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the controller is further configured to determine whether there is a passenger for each seat, the controller further configured to cause adjustment to an air discharge direction of one or more of the air outlets depending on a presence or absence of the passenger (Paragraph 37). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air outlets as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Regarding claim 15, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where the controller is further configured to cause adjustment to the rotation angle of one guide of the plurality of guides (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39), and where the adjustment to the rotation angle of the one guide causes an increase to the flow rate of the air discharged from at least one of the plurality of air outlets (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: Rotation of the guides between open and closed positions necessarily changes a flow rate of discharged air). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the rotation angle of the one or more of the plurality of guides depends on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the controller is further configured to cause adjustment in response to a detection that a vehicle door or vehicle trunk is open, the one guide being disposed on a side of the vehicle where the open vehicle door or open vehicle trunk is detected (Paragraphs 41 and 45). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air discharge units as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Regarding claim 16, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising:
A plurality of air outlets (Figure 4: Discharge structures defined by 12/14, 13/15, 22/24, and 23/25) provided on a roof of a door side or a trunk side of the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), where each of the plurality of air outlets comprises (i.e. define) a discharge port (12, 13, 22, 23) through which the air is discharged (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The air discharge units in combination with ducts 1 and 2 define ports that are adjusted by the air discharge units),
An air supply system (10) provided in the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), where a plurality of ends of the air supply system are connected to the plurality of air outlets (Figure 1 and Paragraph 41, see also Figure 14), and where the air supply system is configured to adjust a supply of the air to each of the plurality of air outlets as a plurality of guides (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 46, see also Figure 14: The plurality of guides are defined by mixing doors 10e and switching doors -not shown-) provided in the air supply system are rotated (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 39), and
A controller (Paragraph 35: A control unit) configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 41-45). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air outlets as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by configuring air to be discharged at a variety of locations within the vehicle.
Further, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the rotation angle of the one or more of the plurality of guides depends on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35) configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets depending on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle (Paragraphs 41 and 45). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air discharge units as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Yoshinori et al. further discloses that each discharge port comprises a first discharge port (e.g. 25) through which air is discharged having a first sectional area (Figures 1 and 4), and a second discharge port (e.g. 24) through which the air is discharged having a second sectional area (Figures 1 and 4) that is larger than the first sectional area (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 42 and 52: Each of the discharge ports are independently adjustable to control an amount of air directed to different areas of the vehicle, for example 25 is inherently capable of being closed and 24 is inherently capable of being open, thereby satisfying the claimed sectional areas).
Regarding claim 17, Yoshinori et al. discloses an air-curtain system as discussed above, where each discharge port is configured to be rotated by driving the actuator (Paragraphs 41-42: The air discharge units have elements that are actuated by a servomotor and/or louvers) to discharge the air to the roof or a lower side of the roof (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The discharge port is rotated at least by louvers).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshinori et al. (US 2001/0029162) and Krause (US 2022/0363107), and further in view of Porter et al. (US 2021/0300153).
Regarding claim 12, The combination of Yoshinori et al. and Krause discloses an air-curtain system configured to control the plurality of guides based on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle as discussed above. However, the combination of Yoshinori et al. and Krause does not explicitly teach or disclose that control of the plurality of air outlets is on the basis of humidity.
Porter et al. teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: an air outlet (10) and a controller (110), where the controller is configured to cause an increase to the flow rate of the air of one of the air outlet in response to a user request for dehumidification of a rear glass (Paragraphs 5-6: Control over air curtain is on the basis of at least detected humidity). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air outlets as disclosed by the combination of Yoshinori et al. and Krause to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Porter et al. to improve vehicle occupant comfort and safety by preventing formation of condensate on a vehicle window.
Further, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the one of the plurality of air outlets being disposed on the trunk side of the vehicle.
Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35), where the one of the plurality of air outlets being disposed on the trunk side of the vehicle (Figure 1 and Paragraph 41). As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the plurality of air discharge units as disclosed by Yoshinori et al. to discharge air such that an air curtain is formed when a door is opened as taught by Krause to improve vehicle occupant comfort and improve air conditioning efficiency by preventing conditioned air from leaving the vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the arguments on page 7, lines 12-15
Applicant’s amendment overcomes the claim objections of record.
Regarding the arguments on page 7, lines 16-22:
Applicant’s amendment overcomes the 35 USC 112 rejections of record. However, the amendment appears to introduce new indefiniteness.
Regarding the arguments on page 7, line 23 to page 9, line 20:
Applicant alleges that Yoshinori does not teach or disclose the claimed invention in that Yoshinori does not teach or disclose a plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As noted in the 35 USC 103 rejections as discussed above, Yoshinori discloses a plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side of the vehicle. Krause is relied upon to remedy Yoshinori in that Krause teaches a plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle.
Applicant also alleges that Yoshinori and Krause does not teach or disclose the claimed invention in that Yoshinori and Krause individually do not teach or disclose causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides depending on an open or closed state of a door or a trunk of the vehicle. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In the instant case, and as discussed in the 35 USC rejections as discussed above:
Yoshinori discloses the claimed invention including at least: a plurality of air outlets (Figure 4: Discharge structures defined by 12/14, 13/15, 22/24, and 23/25) provided on a roof of a door side of the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), each of the plurality of air outlets comprises (i.e. define) a discharge port (12, 13, 22, 23) through which the air is discharged (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The air outlets in combination with ducts 1 and 2 define ports that are adjusted by the air discharge units), and where the discharge port is rotated by driving the actuator (Paragraphs 41-42: The air discharge units have elements that are actuated by a servomotor and/or louvers) to discharge the air to the roof or a lower side of the roof (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The discharge port is rotated at least by louvers), where a controller (Paragraph 35: A control unit) is configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle.
It is asserted that Krause remedies Yoshinori in that Krause teaches an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35) configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets depending on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle (Paragraphs 41 and 45).
The claims do not appear to specify what constitutes “adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides”, where merely opening and/or closing a guide can be considered to be “adjustment”.
Applicant also alleges that the cited art does not teach or disclose “a temporary interface”. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejection as necessitated by applicant’s amendment.
However, and as noted in the 35 USC 103 rejections as discussed above, it is assert that Krause remedies Yoshinori in that Krause teaches a temporary interface (Figures 5A-5B and Paragraphs 41, 45, 50, and 51: The controller is configured to generate air curtains at doors and a trunk to prevent mixing of air).
Regarding the arguments on page 9, line 21 to page 11, line 22:
Applicant also alleges that it would not be obvious to modify Yoshinori in view of Krause and that the rejection is based upon hindsight in that none of the elements of Krause would be useful in modifying the mixing doors of Yoshinori. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As noted in the 35 USC 112 rejections as discussed above, the recitation “adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides” (lines 12-15) renders the claim indefinite since the claim previously set forth “the discharge port is rotated by driving the actuator” (claim 1, lines 2-6). It is unclear if the recited guides are the same or different than the discharge ports. Due to this indefiniteness, it is unclear if there are one or more sets of elements that are configured to adjustment to a flow rate of the air.
Further, and in response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). In the instant case, and as discussed in the 35 USC rejections as discussed above:
Yoshinori discloses the claimed invention including at least: a plurality of air outlets (Figure 4: Discharge structures defined by 12/14, 13/15, 22/24, and 23/25) provided on a roof of a door side of the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), each of the plurality of air outlets comprises (i.e. define) a discharge port (12, 13, 22, 23) through which the air is discharged (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The air outlets in combination with ducts 1 and 2 define ports that are adjusted by the air discharge units), and where the discharge port is rotated by driving the actuator (Paragraphs 41-42: The air discharge units have elements that are actuated by a servomotor and/or louvers) to discharge the air to the roof or a lower side of the roof (Figures 1 and 4, see also Paragraphs 41-42: The discharge port is rotated at least by louvers),
An air supply system (10) provided in the vehicle (Figure 1, see also Figure 14), where a plurality of ends of the air supply system are connected to the plurality of air outlets (Figure 1 and Paragraph 41, see also Figure 14), and where the air supply system is configured to adjust a supply of the air to each of the plurality of air outlets as a plurality of guides (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 46, see also Figure 14: The plurality of guides are defined by mixing doors 10e and switching doors -not shown-) provided in the air supply system are rotated (Figures 1-2 and Paragraph 39), and
Where a controller (Paragraph 35: A control unit) is configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets by causing an adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides (Figures 2 and 4, see also Paragraphs 35 and 39: The plurality of guides are rotatably actuated by the controller). However, Yoshinori et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the plurality of air outlets are provided on a roof of a door side and a trunk side of the vehicle.
It is asserted that Krause remedies Yoshinori in that Krause provides an explicit teaching for operating an air-curtain system of a vehicle, comprising at least: a plurality of air outlets (Paragraph 38: Defined by air vents), an air supply system (Paragraph 38: Defined by blowers and associated ducting), and a controller (Paragraph 35) configured to cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets depending on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle (Paragraphs 41 and 45).
Based on the teachings of Krause, any of the elements of Yoshinori (10, 12, 13, 14, and 15) are capable of being configured cause an adjustment to a flow rate of the air discharged from one or more of the air outlets depending on an open or closed state of a door or trunk of the vehicle. The claims do not appear to specify what constitutes “adjustment to a rotation angle of one or more of the plurality of guides”, where merely opening and/or closing a guide can be considered to be “adjustment”. Specifically, when 10e of Yoshinori are closed no air curtain can be formed, when 10e of Yoshinori are open an air curtain is capable of being formed.
Regarding the arguments on page 11, line 23 to page 12, line 14:
Applicant alleges that new claims 16 and 17 are allowable for the same reasons claim 1 is allegedly allowable. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the same reasons as discussed above.
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 JASON N THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6391. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday 8:30 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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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 N THOMPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763