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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: It recites “from rear” and should recite “from the rear”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: It recites “from front” and should recite “from the front”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
Claims 1-9, 14, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watanabe (US PG PUB NO 2008/0274397).
[CLAIM 1] Regarding claim 1, Watanabe discloses an electric passenger transport vehicle (10), comprising: a car body (Watanabe, FIG 1) including a floor (Watanabe, paragraph [0009] discloses “Although the mountability of the battery module above the floor panel and beneath the seat is favorable”); a first seat (11) located at a distance above the floor; a second seat (12) located at a distance behind the first seat (11); and batteries (100B) aligned in a single line between the first seat (11) and the floor in a vehicle-width direction, all the batteries at least partially overlapping one another when viewed from a side along the vehicle-width direction (Watanabe, FIG 1).
[CLAIM 2] Regarding claim 2, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein surfaces of the batteries facing the second seat (12) are aligned at a same position in a forward and backward direction (Watanabe, FIG 1 illustrates each of the front seat batteries 100B aligned in the width direction such that the rear walls face the rear seats in alignment).
[CLAIM 3] Regarding claim 3, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first seat (11) includes a seat portion (Watanabe, FIG 1) and a back rest portion (Watanabe, FIG 1), and the batteries are located more forward than a back end of the seat portion (Watanabe, FIG 8 below illustrates a rearward position where the batteries are more forward than a back end of the seat portion).
[CLAIM 4] Regarding claim 4, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first seat (11) includes a seat and a back rest portion (Watanabe, annotated FIG 8), and the electric passenger transport vehicle further comprises rear columns (Watanabe, annotated FIG 8 illustrates a seat support and battery surround with front and rear columns/walls) supporting a rear portion of the seat portion at positions at a distance above the floor (Watanabe, annotated FIG 8), wherein the rear columns are positioned between the floor and the seat portion (The columns/walls of Watanabe are positioned from the floor to the seat back), and the batteries are located more forward than the rear columns (Watanabe, FIG 8, batteries 100B are beneath the front seat, within the enclosure having walls and columnar shaped plate ).
PNG
media_image1.png
771
879
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 5] Regarding claim 5, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 4, further comprising a rear cover covering the batteries and the rear columns from rear (The body panels and doors of Watanabe envelop the columns/walls of the seat and battery support from the front, sides and rear).
[CLAIM 6] Regarding claim 6, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 5, wherein the rear cover is flat-plate-shaped or has a curved plate shape protruding toward the second seat (Body panels are curved for aesthetics, aerodynamics and structure requirements. See Watanabe annotated FIG 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
772
745
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 7] Regarding claim 7, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first seat (11) includes a seat portion and a back rest portion (Watanabe, FIG 1), the electric passenger transport vehicle further comprises front columns supporting a front portion of the seat portion at positions at a distance above the floor (Watanabe, annotated FIG 1), and the batteries are located more backward than the front columns (Watanabe FIG 6 shows the battery rearward of the front support).
PNG
media_image2.png
772
745
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
704
585
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 8] Regarding claim 8, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 7, further comprising a front cover covering the batteries and the front columns from front (The body panels and doors of Watanabe envelop the columns/walls of the seat and battery support from the front, sides and rear).
PNG
media_image4.png
716
620
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 9] Regarding claim 9, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein each of the batteries has a shape of a rectangle enclosed by a pair of long sides with a first dimension (Watanabe, FIG 2 shows the elongate housing of the batteries) and a pair of short sides with a second dimension smaller than the first dimension in a plan view (Watanabe, FIG 2, shows the short sides adjacent the rockers), and the batteries are aligned in the vehicle-width direction in attitudes in which a direction of the short sides is along the vehicle-width direction (Watanabe, FIG 2).
[CLAIM 14] Regarding claim 14, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first seat (11) includes a seat portion (Watanabe, FIGS 1-8), the electric passenger transport vehicle further comprises a support frame (Watanabe, annotated FIG 8 above) supporting the seat portion at a position at a distance above the floor (Watanabe, annotated FIG 1), and the support frame supports battery holding components that restrict upward movement of the batteries (Watanabe, FIG 6 illustrates the structural enclosure of the battery module 130 limiting movement).
PNG
media_image5.png
708
610
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 17] Regarding claim 17, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, further comprising a front wheel and rear wheels, wherein an imaginary plane passing through a center of the front wheel and the rear wheels in a forward and backward direction crosses all the batteries (Watanabe, annotated FIG 1 illustrates the plane passing through the front-width batteries 100B at about a center of the vehicle wheels).
PNG
media_image6.png
773
800
media_image6.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 19] Regarding claim 19, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the batteries are positioned in front of the leg space of a passenger seated (Watanabe, FIG 8 illustrates a passenger behind the batteries 100B) on the second seat (12).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
1. Claims 11, 13, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US PG PUB NO 2008/0274397).
[CLAIM 11] Regarding claim 11, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein each of the batteries is a lead-acid battery (Watanabe, paragraph [0046] discloses battery types including lead. With respect to lead-acid, each element including chemicals are components used to obtain desired charging for a vehicle battery. Regarding placement of a known battery element/chemical in the vehicle see In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe to employ lead-acid with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide desired charging).
[CLAIM 13] Regarding claim 13, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1.
-However, it fails to disclose further comprising a front wheel and rear wheels, wherein a front end of the second seat is located more backward than a front end of the rear wheels.
-Nevertheless, seats can be positioned relative to desired wheel base length and passenger comfort. Regarding rearrangement of parts, see (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe to have a back seat rearward of the front of the wheel with a reasonable expectation of success in order to alter wheel base and/or increase leg room comfort).
[CLAIM 15] Regarding claim 15, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1,
wherein the first seat (11) includes a seat portion (Watanabe, FIG 1), and
the electric passenger transport vehicle further comprises a support frame (Watanabe, annotated FIG 1 above) supporting the seat portion at a position at a distance above the floor (Watanabe, FIG 1),
wherein outer faces located at extreme ends of the batteries (100B) in the vehicle-width direction are located outside right and left ends of the support frame and inside right and left ends of the floor (The outer battery faces can extend outward of the seat support to increase energy capacity and stop inside the floor edges. Regarding a change in size, see In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a desired energy storage based on vehicle application)
wherein the support frame includes front and rear columns (Watanabe annotated FIG 1) and a square frame (Watanabe, FIG 1 illustrates a seat support that is a parallelogram shape but can be a square shape, see In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce fore-aft length and increases leg room for passengers). And wherein the seat portion covers the batteries by placing the seat portion on the square frame (Watanabe FIG 1 as modified mounts the front seats 11 on the frame/support with a square shape).
[CLAIM 16] Regarding claim 16, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, further comprising pillar frames (Watanabe, FIG 1, pillars A-D), wherein outer faces located at extreme ends of the batteries (100 B) in the vehicle-width direction are located outside right and left ends of the pillar frames and inside right and left ends of the floor. The batteries of Watanabe can be sized such that outer faces extend outboard of the pillars and inside the floor ends and is a matter of desired positioning of parts or “rearrangement”. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe with a reasonable expectation of success in order to optimize side impact performance).
PNG
media_image7.png
695
484
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US PG PUB NO 2008/0274397) in view of Miyata (US PG PUB NO 2007/0278991).
[CLAIM 12] Regarding claim 12, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1.
-However, it fails to disclose wherein a passenger entrance is open at outside portions of space between the first seat and the second seat in the vehicle-width direction on a permanent basis.
-Nevertheless, Miyata discloses a dual row vehicle with open sides for ease of access.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe to have an open concept for utility vehicle applications as taught by Miyata with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide ease of access.
PNG
media_image8.png
719
644
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
695
484
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US PG PUB NO 2008/0274397) in view of Smith (US PG PUB NO 2019/0355948).
[CLAIM 21] Regarding claim 21, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the first seat includes a seat portion (Watanabe, FIG 1).
-However, it fails to disclose the floor includes a floor plate supported in a horizontal state, and the batteries are located between the floor plate and the first seat.
-Nevertheless, Smith discloses in FIG 3 a floor plate (58a-58b) supported in a horizontal state, and the batteries (34) are located between the floor plate and the first seat (Smith illustrates the battery array 34 mounted on the plate 58a-58b and floor 46 suitable for placement under a vehicle seat).
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe to have a support plate to reinforce the floor as taught by Smith with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve battery NVH and prevent battery damage from a floor impact.
PNG
media_image9.png
740
594
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Claims 10 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US PG PUB NO 2008/0274397) in view of Fees et al. (US PG PUB NO 2018/0109016).
[CLAIM 10] Regarding claim 10, Watanabe discloses the electric passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1.
-However, it fails to disclose wherein each of the batteries includes a positive terminal and a negative terminal that are aligned along a forward and backward direction, and
the positive terminal and the negative terminal in the adjacent batteries are disposed side by side in the vehicle-width direction.
-Nevertheless, Fess discloses a battery array with connector terminals in alignment in both the length and width directions in FIG 3B.
-Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe to have with aligned and corresponding terminals as taught by Fees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce service and assembly time).
PNG
media_image10.png
679
635
media_image10.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 22] Regarding claim 22, Watanabe discloses the passenger transport vehicle according to claim 1.
-However, it fails to illustrate wherein each of the batteries includes a positive terminal and a negative terminal on a surface facing upward, the positive terminal and the negative terminal are located above the floor and the seat portion covers the positive terminal and the negative terminal from above.
-Nevertheless, Fees discloses a battery array with connector terminals in alignment in both the length and width directions in FIG 3B. Watanabe illustrates the batteries below the seats and above the floor and the terminals of Fees would be therebetween.
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Watanabe to have aligned terminals as taught by Fees with a reasonable expectation of success in order to simplify disconnection and charging.
REPLY TO ARGUMENTS
Applicant’s arguments and new claims 21-22 in the response filed on 4/9/26 are acknowledged. However, new grounds for rejection are set forth above, based on an updated search.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be found on the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to whose telephone number is (571)270-3411. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM PST.
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, Marc Jimenez can be reached on (571)272-.4530. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES J TRIGGS/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights