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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 10-13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP-S5889407 (JP’407).
Re: claims 1 and 10. JP’407 shows in the figure a vehicle comprising: an air spring 9 configured to pneumatically bias a sprung mass relative to an unsprung mass; an air compressor 13 in fluid communication with the air spring; and an air conditioning unit 31 comprising: a housing shown at the end of the lead line of 31 defining an interior, an entrance opening on the left of the housing configured to allow air to enter the interior, and an exit opening on the right of the housing configured to allow the air to exit the interior and pass into a passenger compartment; and an evaporator 32 disposed within the interior of the housing and configured to separate the interior into an entrance section and an exit section, with the air configured to flow into the entrance section from the entrance opening and across the evaporator 32 from the entrance section to the exit section, with the evaporator configured to remove heat and humidity from the air, wherein the housing has a port connected at the left side of element 30 in fluid communication with the exit section of the interior and the air compressor 13, with the air compressor 13 configured to transmit at least a portion of the air from the exit section of the interior and inflate the air spring via lines 14, 16, 23, and 25 as shown. With regard to claim 10, JP’407 shows an air line 30 coupled with the air compressor.
Re: claims 2, 3, 11, and 12. JP’407 shows in the figure the vehicle further comprising a linear actuator 1, 3 configured to be coupled to the sprung mass and the unsprung mass with the linear actuator configured to extend and contract to move the spring mass relative to the unsprung mass.
Re: claim 16. JP’407 shows in the figure an air inflation system comprising: a bladder 11 configured to be inflated; a pump 13 in fluid communication with the bladder; and an air line 30 coupled with the pump and configured to fluidly communicate with an air conditioning unit 31 that removes heat and humidity from air, wherein the pump 32 is configured to draw the air through the air line from the air conditioning unit and transmit the air to the bladder 11 to inflate the bladder 11.
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’407 in view of US Patent Application 2018/105013 to Sakakibara et al.
JP’407 is silent with regard to a drain opening being located below the evaporator.
Sakakibara et al. teach in figure 1 the use of a drain opening 127a being located below an evaporator 16.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the area below the evaporator of JP’407 to have included a drain opening, in view of the teachings of Sakakibara et al., in order to provide a means of facilitating (with the assistance of gravity) the disposal of condensation water output from the evaporator.
Examiner notes that the combination would result in satisfying the limitation set forth in claim 5 as the port shown connected to the left side of element 30 is located above the drain opening, as modified, and the downward wall adjacent the port would direct condensation downward toward the drain opening leaving air to pass through the port, as broadly recited and best understood.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’407 in view of KR-20210071620 (KR’620).
JP’407 is silent with regard to an air filter.
KR’620 teaches in figure 3 the use of an air filter 23 in fluid communication with an entrance section of an interior of a housing and configured to receive air before an evaporator 21.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the evaporator of JP’407 to have included an air filter disposed before it in the entrance section, in view of the teachings of KR’620, in order to provide a means of filtering out debris and unwanted particles before entering the evaporator and passing on to the air spring or the passenger compartment.
Claim(s) 7, 13, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’407 in view of BY-7970 (BY’970).
JP’407 is silent with regard to the vehicle comprising a suppressor.
BY’970 teaches in the figure the use of a suppressor 4 disposed between and in fluid communication with a housing 1 and an air compressor 36.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the vehicle of JP’407 to have included a suppressor as recited, in view of the teachings of BY’970, in order to provide a means of preventing component noise from entering the passenger cabin.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 14, 15, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’407 in view of US Patent 6074462 to Quinn et al.
JP’407 is silent with regard to a dryer with the dryer comprising a desiccant.
Quinn et al. teach in claim 7 the use of a compressed air system in which a compressor comprises a dryer comprising a desiccant.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the vehicle of JP’407 to have included a compressor including a dryer including a desiccant as recited, in view of the teachings of Quinn et al., in order to provide a means of removing moisture from the air circulating through the system to help reduce the possibility of corrosion, freezing, or contamination.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’407 in view of CN-115182871 (CN’871).
JP’407 is silent with regard to the pump further comprising a filter.
CN’871 teaches in figure 1 the use of a pump 1, 2, 3 including a filter 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the pump of JP’407 to have included a filter, in view of the teachings of CN’871, in order to provide a means of removing unwanted debris from the system to improve the quality of the circulated air and prevent contaminants from reaching other components within the system.
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.
Claim 5 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.
The phrase “the port is…configured to direct the condensation through the drain opening” is indefinite. It is unclear what is meant by the port being configured to direct condensation through the drain opening. It is unclear to the Examiner whether Applicant intends to refer to the area or slope around the port because the port appears to direct whatever is in it through the port in the direction of the air spring.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2012/0153581 to Li, DE-102011120873, and WO-2010138867 teach the use of similar air spring assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY M BURCH whose telephone number is (571)272-7114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30AM-3PM, generally.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
mmb
August 15, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights