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 .
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.
Specification
The use of the term Dzus ®, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
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 8 and 20 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.
Claims 8 and 20 contains the trademark/trade name Dzus ®. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a twist lock style fastener and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-6, 9-11, 13-15, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki (US 2016/0032625).
Regarding Claim 1, Suzuki discloses a door with an interior cover 43 formed in a manner to enclose the internals of the vehicle body and provide structural rigidity to the door assembly; a joint 45 coupled to the interior cover and vehicle body, enabling the interior cover to pivot with respect to the vehicle body; and an outer cover 44 securely mounted to the interior cover using fasteners, wherein the outer cover completes the door assembly (Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 2, the interior cover 43 includes a main component forming the central structure of the interior cover (entire body is a one piece component); an upper bracket 45 coupled to the main component; and a lower bracket 45 coupled to the main component (Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 3, the upper bracket 45 and the lower bracket 45 comprise multiple attachment points for securing the interior cover to the vehicle body.
Regarding Claim 4, the main component 43 comprises predefined mounting points for fastening the joint 45 to facilitate the pivoting of the interior cover and outer cover (Fig. 6).
Regarding Claims 5, 9, 14 and 17, the interior cover is a lightweight resin (paragraph 0063), and the outer is of a durable resin (paragraph 0063).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, the interior cover 43 conforms to the contours of a door opening (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 10, the interior cover 43 includes structural members to enhance strength (Fig. 9).
Regarding Claims 11 and 18, the door further includes an integrated locking member 51.
Regarding Claim 13, Suzuki discloses a method for manufacturing a vehicle door assembly attachable to a vehicle body, comprising: forming an interior cover 43 to enclose the internals of the vehicle body and provide structural rigidity to the door assembly; integrating a joint 45 into the interior cover to enable smooth pivoting of the interior cover with respect to the vehicle body; and attaching an outer cover 44 to the interior cover using fasteners to complete the door assembly.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 13, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Getzschman (US 2020/0079192).
Regarding Claim 1, Getzschman discloses a door with an interior cover 17 formed in a manner to enclose the internals of the vehicle body and provide structural rigidity to the door assembly (Fig. 1; inner door 17 closes off the interior of the body from the outside); a joint coupled to the interior cover and vehicle body, enabling the interior cover to pivot with respect to the vehicle body (hinge posts; Figs. 2 and 3); and an outer cover 40, 43 (Fig. 5) securely mounted to the interior cover using fasteners (paragraph 0199), wherein the outer cover completes the door assembly (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claims 8 and 20, the fasteners of the door may include Dzus ® fasteners (see paragraph 0199, page 15, line 18).
Regarding Claim 13, Getzschman discloses a method for manufacturing a vehicle door assembly attachable to a vehicle body, comprising: forming an interior cover 17 to enclose the internals of the vehicle body and provide structural rigidity to the door assembly; integrating a joint (hinge posts; Figs. 2 and 3) into the interior cover to enable smooth pivoting of the interior cover with respect to the vehicle body; and attaching an outer cover 40, 43 to the interior cover using fasteners (paragraph 0199) to complete the door assembly.
Regarding Claim 19, attaching the cover 40, 43 includes aligning the cover to the inner door and using fasteners.
Claim(s) 1 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okamoto (JP 61-113515).
Regarding Claim 1, Okamoto discloses a door with an interior cover 12 formed in a manner to enclose the internals of the vehicle body and provide structural rigidity to the door assembly; a joint (hinge; not shown) coupled to the interior cover and vehicle body, enabling the interior cover to pivot with respect to the vehicle body; and an outer cover 16 securely mounted to the interior cover using fasteners 24, 26, wherein the outer cover completes the door assembly (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 12, the interior cover 12 comprises one or more interior panels 52 and trim elements to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the vehicle interior (Fig. 2).
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, 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.
Claim(s) 7 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Helms (US 2010/0050524).
Regarding Claims 7 and 16, Suzuki discloses the use of a hinge type connection, but is unclear as to the construction of the hinge. Helms discloses a device for use on a vehicle door, wherein the device uses Heim joints (ball and socket) 20 as connections between parts. Before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the Heim joint (ball and socket) of Helms on the door of Suzuki in order to have not only a smooth operating hinge for the closure, but a known strong and long wearing solution to the hinge for the vehicle door.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art relates to doors for off-road and utility vehicles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON S DANIELS whose telephone number is (571)270-1167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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 S DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612