DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This communication is a first office action, non-final rejection on the merits. Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are currently pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
Claim 8 is 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.
In claim 8, the recitation, “curved inward so that ends injection-molded toward surfaces of the roof side part…” renders it indefinite, it is ambiguous. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-2, 4, 9,12-13, 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Citti ( USP 2022/0073153).
As Per Claim 1, Citti teaches, a vehicle body (Fig.2) connection joint for a vehicle (via Fig.4),
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the vehicle body connection joint ( in Figure 4) comprising: a support body ( via 13, Fig.2) comprising a roof side part ( via No.1, in Fig.4) extending along a roof side (via No.2, in Fig.4), a pillar part ( vai No.3) extending along a pillar (7, 21), and a roof cross part ( vai No.4) extending along a roof cross (via No.5); and a body part ( via 13 in Fig.2)) configured to surround the roof side part ( 1), the pillar part (3), and the roof cross part, ( No.4) wherein two opposite ends of the roof side part ( Nos.1 and 6) are configured to be connected to roof side members (2) of a vehicle body ( Fig.4), a lower end of the pillar part ( no.3) is configured to be connected to a pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body (Fig.4), and an end of the roof cross part (No.4) is configured to be connected to a roof cross member (No.5) of the vehicle body.(Fig.4) ( Abstract, [0006-0008], [0073], Figs.4 and 28).
As per Claim 2, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti further teaches, wherein the roof side part, the pillar part, and the roof cross part of the support body are disposed to be orthogonal to one another, and an end of the pillar part and an end of the roof cross part are in surface contact with one surface of the roof side part (Citti : [0008], [0069-0071], Ref. Claim 3).
As per Claim 4, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti further teaches, wherein the roof side part (1) and the pillar part ( 3) are respectively connected to the roof side member ( 2) of the vehicle body and the pillar member (7, 21) of the vehicle body in a state in which the roof side part ( 1) and the pillar part (3) are respectively fitted with the roof side member (2) of the vehicle body and the pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body (Citti : See Fig.4).
As per Claim 9, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti teaches, wherein the body part comprises a plurality of reinforcement ribs, ( See Below Fig. 4A)
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein each of the reinforcement ribs having a plurality of through-holes formed at predetermined intervals to define an internal pattern. ( Figs. 19, 22 and 23).
As per Claim 12, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti teaches, wherein the vehicle body connection joint is provided as a plurality of vehicle body connection joints, and each of the connection joints is disposed along the roof side of the vehicle and connected to the roof side member, the pillar member, and the roof cross member of the vehicle body ( Citti : See Fig.4).
As per Claim 13, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 12. However, Citti teaches, an outer panel provided outside the roof side member, the pillar member, and the roof cross member of the vehicle body and configured to cover an outer side of the vehicle body ( Citti :[0042-0043], [0045], Figs. 2, 4).
As per Claim 15, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 13. However, Citti teaches, wherein the outer panel (a cell or containing structure 13) has a fixing part protruding inward, and the fixing part is fitted with one side of the pillar member of the vehicle body so that the outer panel is fixed to the pillar member.( Citti :[0042-0043], [0045], Figs. 2, 4).
As per Claim 19, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti teaches, a vehicle comprising the vehicle body connection joint of claim 1 (Figs. 2 and Fig. 4 (above) ).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
7. Claims 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citti (USP 2022/0073153) in view of Benoit et al. (USP 6,389,697 B1).
As per Claim 3, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti further teaches, wherein the two opposite ends of the roof side part (1, 6), the lower end of the pillar part, (3) and the end of the roof cross part (4) protrude outward from ends toward surfaces of the roof side part,(1, 6) (See Fig.4) the pillar part (3), and the roof cross part (4) of the body part. (See Fig.4).
However, Citti does not explicitly teach ends being injection-molded toward surfaces.
In a related field of Art, Benoit teaches, a method for fabricating an automotive spaceframe using Electromagnetic Pulse Forming (EMF) or Magnetic Pulse Welding (MPW) techniques, wherein, ends being injection-molded toward surfaces ( via
“assembling aluminum members to nodes made of injection molded high performance composite plastic material “, page 2, lines 59-63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti and Benoit before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the automotive spaceframe fabrication teachings ( injection molded nodes) of Benoit and configure with the system of Citti in order to fasten the roof side, the pillar and the roof cross by assembling the roof side, pillar and roof cross by using nodes of injection molded high performance composite plastic material for joining the parts. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to reducing cost and weight and eliminating concerns of galvanic corrosion (i.e., cost saving, light weight vehicle more fuel efficiency).
Claim 16 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 3.
8. Claims 5, 7, 14, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citti (USP 2022/0073153) in view of Czigner et al. ( USP 2017/0050677).
As per Claim 5, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti further teaches, wherein an agent is applied at points at which the roof side part ( 1) and the pillar part (3) are respectively fitted with the roof side member (2) of the vehicle body and the pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body (Fig.4).
However, Citti does not explicitly teach, wherein a bonding agent is applied at points at which the roof side part and the pillar part are respectively fitted with roof side member and the pillar member.
In a related field of Art, Czinger et al. ( Czinger) teaches, wherein a bonding agent is applied at points at which the roof side part and the pillar part are respectively fitted with roof side member and the pillar member ( via “the tubes and nodes may be pre-attached (e.g., with aid of adhesives) and then connected together using one or more fasteners, such as screws, bolts, nuts, or rivets. For instance, a tube may be pre-attached (e.g., pre-glued) to a component (or a portion) of a node, which may be fastened to another node component, which may or may not have its own pre-attached tube”, [0065], [0068])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti, Benoit and Czinger before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the vehicle fabrication teachings (using adhesive between nodes and tubes) of Czinger and configure with the system of Citti in order to using adhesive between nodes and tube and then connecting together using one or more fasteners, such as screws, bolts, nuts, or rivets. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve movement restraint and strengthening of structural joint ( i.e., higher rigidity and enhanced safety).
As per Claim 7, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti further teach, wherein the two opposite ends of the roof side part (1, 6) and the end of the roof cross part( 4) are respectively fixed to the roof side member (2) and the roof cross member (5) of the vehicle body ( Fig.4) and the lower end of the pillar part (3)
is fixed to the pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body. (Citti : Fig.4).
However, Citti does not explicitly teach, fixing member by bolting in an upward/downward direction, and by bolting in a width direction of the vehicle body.
In a related field of Art, Czinger et al. ( Czinger) teaches, wherein fixing member by bolting in a direction, and by bolting in another direction of the vehicle body ( via “the tubes and nodes may be pre-attached (e.g., with aid of adhesives) and then connected together using one or more fasteners, such as screws, bolts, nuts, or rivets. For instance, a tube may be pre-attached (e.g., pre-glued) to a component (or a portion) of a node, which may be fastened to another node component, which may or may not have its own pre-attached tube”, [0065], [0068]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti, Benoit and Czinger before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the vehicle fabrication teachings (nuts and bolts along with adhesive between nodes and tubes) of Czinger and configure with the system of Citti in order to using nuts and bolts between nodes and tubes in order to restrain movement of the mating parts. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve movement restraint and strengthening of structural joint (i.e., higher rigidity and enhanced safety)
However, Czinger does not explicitly teach, bolting in an upward/downward direction, and by bolting in a width direction of the vehicle body.
It would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to recognize that when bolting between 1, 2, and between 2 and 6 and between 4 and 5 it would be upward/downward direction, and when bolting between 3 and 7 , it would be in width direction in order to achieve restrain of movement of parts in that direction.
Claim 14 is being rejected using the same rationale as claim 5.
As Per Claim 17, Citti teaches, a vehicle body ( Via 13 in Fig.2) connection joint for a vehicle (via Fig.4), the vehicle body connection joint ( Via Fig.4) comprising:
PNG
media_image3.png
200
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a support body (via 13, Fig.2) comprising a roof side part ( via No.1, in Fig.4) extending along a roof side (via No.2, in Fig.4),, a pillar part ( vai No.3) extending along a pillar ( vai 7,21) , and a roof cross part ( vai No.4) extending along a roof cross ( vai NO.5); and a body part ( 13 in Fig2)
configured to surround the roof side part (1,6), the pillar part (3), and the roof cross part (4), wherein two opposite ends of the roof side part (1,6) are configured to be fitted with roof side members (2)of a vehicle body, a lower end of the pillar part (3) is configured to be fitted with a pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body, and an end of the roof cross part (4) is configured to be connected to a roof cross member (5) of the vehicle body,
wherein the roof side part (1,6) and the pillar part (3) are respectively fitted with the roof side member (2) of the vehicle body and the pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body, and wherein the two opposite ends of the roof side part (1,6) and the end of the roof cross part ( 4) are respectively fixed to the roof side member (2) and the roof cross member (5) of the vehicle body and the lower end of the pillar (3) part is fixed to the pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body .( See Fig.4). ( Abstract, [0006-0008], [0073], Figs.4 and 28).
However, Citti does not explicitly teach, wherein a bonding agent is applied at points at which the roof side part and the pillar part are respectively fitted with the roof side member of the vehicle body and the pillar member of the vehicle body.
In a related field of Art, Czinger et al. ( Czinger) teaches, wherein a bonding agent is applied at points at which the roof side part and the pillar part are respectively fitted with the roof side member of the vehicle body and the pillar member of the vehicle body ( via “the tubes and nodes may be pre-attached (e.g., with aid of adhesives) and then connected together using one or more fasteners, such as screws, bolts, nuts, or rivets. For instance, a tube may be pre-attached (e.g., pre-glued) to a component (or a portion) of a node, which may be fastened to another node component, which may or may not have its own pre-attached tube”, [0065], [0068]); wherein the two opposite ends of the roof side part and the end of the roof cross part are respectively fixed to the roof side member and the roof cross member of the vehicle body by bolting in a direction, and the lower end of the pillar (3) part is fixed to the pillar member (7,21) of the vehicle body by bolting in another direction of the vehicle body. ( then connected together using one or more fasteners, such as screws, bolts, nuts, or rivets. For instance, a tube may be pre-attached (e.g., pre-glued) to a component (or a portion) of a node, which may be fastened to another node component, which may or may not have its own pre-attached tube”, [0065], [0068]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti and Czinger before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the vehicle fabrication teachings (nuts and bolts along with adhesive between nodes and tubes) of Czinger and configure with the system of Citti in order to using nuts and bolts between nodes and tubes. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve parts’ movement restraint and strengthening of structural joint (i.e., higher rigidity and enhanced safety).
However, Czinger does not explicitly teach, bolting in an upward/downward direction, and by bolting in a width direction of the vehicle body.
It would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to recognize that when bolting between 1, 2, and between 2 and 6 and between 4 and 5 it would be upward/downward direction, and when bolting between 3 and 7, it would be in width direction in order to achieve restrain of movement of parts in that direction.
As per Claim 20, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 17. However, Citti teaches, a vehicle comprising the vehicle body connection joint of claim 17. (Figs. 2 and Fig.4 (above)).
9. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citti (USP 2022/0073153) in view of Czigner et al. ( USP 2017/0050677) in view of Dorman et al. (USP 2019/0301520).
As per Claim 6, Citti as modified by Czinger teaches the limitation of Claim 5. However, Citti in view of Czinger does not explicitly teach, wherein the bonding agent comprises epoxy or urethane.
In a related field of art, Dorman et al. (Dorman) teaches, applying bonding agent such as urethane adhesive between vehicle roof rails.( using epoxies adhesive 72 between two mating parts of the vehicle, Page 3, right column, lines 8-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti, Czinger and Dorman before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the vehicle teachings (using epoxies adhesive) of Dorman and configure with the system of Citti in order to using epoxies adhesive between mating parts of the vehicle structure for achieving strong bonding between mating parts restraint in any direction. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve restraint of movement and strengthening of structural joint ( i.e., higher rigidity and enhanced safety).
10. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citti (USP 2022/0073153) in view of Kim et al. (USP 2024/0199123).
As per Claim 11, Citti teaches the limitation of Claim 1. However, Citti teaches, the body part is fixed to the surface of the support body in the state in which the body part surrounds the support body ( Citti :[0042-0043], [0045], Figs. 2, 4).
However, Citti does not explicitly teach, wherein a surface of the support body is subjected to laser texturing.
In a related field of Art, Kim et al. ( Kim) teaches, wherein, laser texturing of the wherein a surface of the support body is subjected to laser texturing ( via the surface treatment may be performed by laser texturing including at least one of laser patterning and laser structuring, [0014], Ref. claim 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti and Jiang before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the teachings ( laser texturing) of Kim and apply on the body parts of the body structure of Citti , in order to increase surface roughness and paint adhesive force on the structure. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve added strengthening of structural (i.e., higher rigidity , high durability).
11. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citti (USP 2022/0073153) in view of Czigner et al. ( USP 2017/0050677) in view of Benoit et al. (USP 6,389,697 B1).
As per Claim 18, Citti as modified by Czinger teaches the limitation of Claim 17. However, Citti in view of Czinger not explicitly teach the vehicle body connection joint is injection-molded.
In a related field of Art, Benoit teaches, a method for fabricating an automotive spaceframe using Electromagnetic Pulse Forming (EMF) or Magnetic Pulse Welding (MPW) techniques, wherein, the vehicle body connection joint is injection-molded (via “assembling aluminum members to nodes made of injection molded high performance composite plastic material “, page 2, lines 59-63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Citti and Benoit before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the systems of Citti, to include the automotive spaceframe fabrication teachings ( injection molded joint (nodes)) of Benoit and configure with the system of Citti in order to fasten the roof side, the pillar and the roof cross by assembling the roof side part, pillar part and roof cross part by using nodes of injection molded high performance composite plastic material for joining the parts. Motivation to combine the two teachings is, to achieve added strengthening of structural ( i.e., higher rigidity, high durability).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 8 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable when 112 (b) rejection of claim 8 is overcome, and claims are rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD SHAFI whose telephone number is (571)270-5741. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Scott Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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.
/MUHAMMAD SHAFI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666C