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 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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ogishima (Patent No. 4,515,405).
Re: claim 1, Ogishima teaches a cowling structure (Fig. 3 – 11) for a straddle-type vehicle (Fig. 2 -1), the cowling structure comprising: a cowling (Fig. 8 – 113 & 112) covering a lamp unit (Fig. 8 – 115), wherein a front surface of the cowling (Annotated Fig. 8 – front surface) has an opening (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening) through which a lens surface (Annotated Fig. 8 – lens surface) of the lamp unit (Fig. 8 – 115) is exposed to a front side (Annotated Fig. 8 – front side), and wherein a lower surface of the cowling (Fig. 8 – 112) has a cutout forming an opening area (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening area) through which a lower surface of the lamp unit (Annotated Fig. 8 – lower surface of lamp unit) is exposed to a lower side (Annotated Fig. 8 – lower side), and wherein the cutout (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening area) reaches the lens surface of the lamp unit (Annotated Fig. 8 – reaches lens unit).
It is noted that the examiner is interpreting that the cutout forming an opening area is defined as reaching the lens surface of the lamp unit in that an imaginary line can be drawn in a vertical direction such that it intersects the lens surface of the lamp unit. The examiner also notes that the specification (Paragraph [0024]) of the present application recites “The opening 72 of the front lower cowling 55 is continuous with the cutout 82”. The examiner interprets this as the opening connects to the cutout forming an opening area and that the opening also reaches the lens surface of the lamp unit.
PNG
media_image1.png
634
663
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
738
810
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re: claim 2, Ogishima teaches wherein an entire lower surface of the lamp unit (Annotated Fig. 8 – lower surface of lamp unit) is exposed through the opening area (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening area), and wherein the entire lower surface of the lamp unit is positioned inside the opening area (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening area) of the cowling (113 & 112).
Re: claim 3, Ogishima teaches wherein the opening (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening) of the cowling (113 & 112) and the opening area (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening area) of the cowling are continuous with each other (See Annotated Fig. 8 – where the lamp unit not being present would provide a continuous path from the opening to the opening area such as in the present application), and wherein the cowling is formed with a crossing portion (Annotated Fig. 8 – crossing portion) crossing the opening (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening) of the cowling (113 & 112) along a lower edge of the lens surface (Annotated Fig. 8 – lens surface) of the lamp unit (115) (See Also Figs. 2 & 3 for a front view).
Re: claim 4, Ogishima teaches wherein both side edges (Annotated Fig. 2 – edge 1 & edge 2), in a vehicle width direction (Annotated Fig. 2 – width), of the opening area (Annotated Fig. 2 – opening area) of the cowling are connected each other via the lamp unit (Annotated Fig. 2 – lamp unit).
PNG
media_image3.png
342
386
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re: claim 5, Ogishima teaches wherein the opening area (Annotated Fig. 2-2 – opening area) of the cowling is formed to be wider from the front side to a rear side (See Annotated Fig. 2-2).
PNG
media_image4.png
336
474
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Re: claim 6, Ogishima teaches wherein a front end (Annotated Fig. 8 – front end of lower surface) of the lower surface of the lamp unit (Annotated Fig. 8 – lower surface of lamp unit) is exposed to the lower side through the opening area (Annotated Fig. 8 – opening area) (See Annotated Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image5.png
738
698
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 8 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re: claim 7, the cited prior art whether in full or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest at the very least wherein, in a side view of the straddle-type vehicle, a portion of a lower surface of the lamp unit is located below a lower edge of the cutout. Ogishima teaches claim 1 but fails to teach at the very least wherein, in a side view of the straddle-type vehicle, a portion of a lower surface of the lamp unit is located below a lower edge of the cutout. One having ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to modify the lower portion of the cowling of Ogishima such that the lower surface of the lamp unit would be located below a lower edge of the cutout. This modification would be building to the specification of the present application.
Re: claim 8, the cited prior art whether in full or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest at the very least a lower surface on the lower stage lower surface is cut out to form a third cutout through which an entire lower surface of the headlamp unit is exposed, wherein an entire lower surface of the headlamp unit is positioned inside the third cutout. Modification of the cited prior art would be building to the specification of the present application and no reasonable motivation can be found to modify the prior art to meet this limitation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Re: claim 1, the applicant argues that the opening area of Ogishima does not reach the lens surface of the lamp unit. The examiner disagrees in that the broadness of the claim limitation allows for interpretation in that an imaginary line can be drawn vertically from the opening area such that it intersects the lens surface of the lamp unit (See Rejection of claim 1 and Annotated Fig. 8).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Valerio et al. (JP 2020066408 A) teaches a saddle-riding type vehicle with a lamp unit being exposed below an opening of a front cowling.
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 C ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights