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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/25/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1, 6-8, 10, 12, 13, 16 17, 19, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (KR 10-2022-0079228) in view of Kwon (KR 20030016093) and Salter et al. (US 2022/0324309).
With respect to claim 1, Cha et al. disclose the claimed front trunk system except that they are silent on the inclusion of an actuator coupled to the front trunk door for closing the front trunk door, except for a user interface generating an input signal for closing the front trunk door, except for the controller preventing the actuator from closing the front trunk door, and Cha et al. is silent on whether the sensor comprises and emitter on a first side of the front truck and a receiver disposed on an opposite side of the front trunk said emitter and receiver being disposed in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path. Cha et al. disclose a front trunk system 10 for an automotive vehicle having a front trunk door 300 having front a front trunk closed path (for example, the rectangular path at the top of door 300 as shown in the below figure taken from Fig. 6 of Cha et al.:
[AltContent: textbox (a front trunk closed path)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
143
254
media_image1.png
Greyscale
comprising:
a sensor 200/21 generating an obstacle signal corresponding to an obstacle A across the front trunk closed path (as shown in Fig. 11 of Cha et al.), the sensor 200/21 comprising an emitter 200 disposed on a first side of the front trunk and a receiver 21; and
a controller 30 coupled to the sensor 200/21, the controller controlling an indicator (“warning through at least one of a visual, auditory, and tactile notifications means,” Cha et al., machine translation, bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8) when the obstacle A is in the front trunk closed path (Cha et al., Fig. 10).
Kwon teaches a similar sensing system including a trunk lid 2 having a closed path (for example, the generally rectangular shape formed by the top plane of the trunk lid 2), a sensor 22/22/24/30/32/34 generating an obstacle signal corresponding to an obstacle 3 across a trunk closed path (Kwon, paragraph [0023]), the sensor comprising an emitter 20/22/24 disposed on a first side of the front trunk and a receiver 30/32/34 disposed on an opposite side of the front trunk (as shown in Fig. 1 of Kwon), said emitter 20/22/24 and receiver 30/32/34 disposed in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path (i.e., below the top plane of lid 2 as can be seen in Fig. 1 of Kwon).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Kwon with the front trunk system disclosed by Cha et al. for the advantage of a reduction of parts. The sensor system disclosed by Cha et al. is achieved in one of two ways, 1) wherein a beam of light travels in a direct line between an emitter and a receiver located on opposite sides of a space, or 2) wherein a beam of light is emitted on a first side of a space, reflected off of a second opposite side and then received at the first side of the space. The system disclosed by Kwon has the advantage that it does not require mirrors or reflectors for the sensing system thus requiring less parts.
Salter et al. teach a similar front trunk system including an actuator 24 coupled to a front trunk door 14 (Salter et al., end of paragraph [0056]) for closing the front trunk door 14 (Slater et al, paragraph [0099]);
a user interface 58 generating an input signal for closing the front trunk door ("user input," Salter et al., paragraphs [0065] and [0137]), and
Salter et al. further teaches a controller 92 preventing an actuator 24 from closing the front trunk door 14 when receiving an input signal and when an obstacle signal indicates an obstacle is across the front trunk door path ("The controller 92 may control operation of the second closure panel 14 by prompting the actuator 24 to halt movement of the second closure panel 14," Salter et al., paragraph [0079]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Salter et al. with the front trunk system disclosed by Cha et al. for the advantage of reducing the manual burden of the user by automating the closure of the front trunk door.
With respect to claim 6, Cha et al. disclose that the emitter comprises a plurality of emitters 210,220 and the receiver comprises a plurality of receivers (“It may include a plurality of light-receiving sensors,” see top of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al.), said plurality of emitters and the plurality of receivers are disposed in the lateral projection zone (the receiver must inherently be located in a lateral projection zone if the detecting unit 20 determines that there is an obstacle when the light is not received by at least one of the plurality of light-receiving sensors as shown in Fig. 10 of Cha et al.).
With respect to claim 7, Cha et al. disclose that the indicator comprises a visual indicator or an audible indicator (“warning through at least one of a visual, auditory, and tactile notifications means,” Cha et al., machine translation, bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8).
With respect to claim 8, Cha et al. disclose that the indicator comprises a visual indicator and an audible indicator (“warning through at least one of a visual, auditory, and tactile notifications means,” Cha et al., machine translation, bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8).
With respect to claim 10, Cha et al. disclose that the sensor 21 comprises an ultrasonic sensor (see bottom of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al.).
With respect to claim 12, Cha et al. disclose the claimed method of controlling a front trunk system except for the steps of generating an input signal at a user interface for closing the front trunk door, except for preventing an actuator from closing the front trunk door when receiving the obstacle signal, and Cha et al. is silent on a receiver being disposed on a first side and an emitter being disposed on an opposite side of the front trunk said emitter and receiver being disposed in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path. Cha et al. disclose a method of controlling a front trunk system for an automotive vehicle having a front trunk door 300 having front trunk closed path, said method comprising:
generating an obstacle signal corresponding to an obstacle across the front trunk closed path (signal sent by notification unit 30) controlling an indicator (“The notification unit 30 notifies a warning,” see bottom of pg. 7 of the machine translation of Cha et al.) when the obstacle 300 is the front trunk closed path (see bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al.).
Kwon teaches a similar controlling method including a trunk lid 2 having a closed path (for example, the generally rectangular shape formed by the top plane of the trunk lid 2) generating the obstacle signal from a receiver 30/32/34 disposed on a first side of a trunk (as shown in Fig. 1 of Kwon) and not receiving a signal from an emitter 20/22/24 disposed on an opposite side of the trunk (as shown in Figs. 1 and 2 of Kwon), generating an obstacle signal corresponding to an obstacle 3 across a trunk closed path (Kwon, paragraph [0023]), said emitter 20/22/24 and receiver 30/32/34 disposed in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path (Fig. 1 of Kwon shows emitters 20/22/24 and receivers 30/32/34 located inside the trunk at a location below the top plane of the trunk lid 2).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Kwon with the method disclosed by Cha et al. for the advantage of a reduction of parts. The sensor system disclosed by Cha et al. is achieved in one of two ways, 1) wherein a beam of light travels in a direct line between an emitter and a receiver located on opposite sides of a space, or 2) wherein a beam of light is emitted on a first side of a space, reflected off of a second opposite side and then received at the first side of the space. The system disclosed by Kwon has the advantage that it does not require mirrors or reflectors for the sensing system thus requiring less parts.
With respect to claim 13, Cha et al. disclose that generating the obstacle signal comprises generating the obstacle signal from an optical receiver (“When the light is not received by at least one of the plurality of light-receiving sensor, the storage amount detecting unit 20 may determine that the object to be accommodated exceeds a reference value,” see bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al.).
Salter et al. teach a similar method including generating an input signal (“user input,” Salter et al., paragraphs [0065] and [0137]) at a user interface 58 for closing a trunk door 14 (Salter et al., end of paragraph [0056]); and preventing an actuator 24 from closing the trunk door 14 when receiving the input signal and when the obstacle signal indicates the obstacle is across the trunk closed path (“The controller 92 may control operation of the second closure panel 14 by prompting the actuator 24 to halt movement of the second closure panel 14,” Salter et al., paragraph [0079]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Salter et al. with the method disclosed by Cha et al. for the advantage of reducing the manual burden of the user by automating the closure of the front trunk door.
With respect to claim 16, Cha et al. disclose that generating the obstacle signal comprises generating an optical signal from a plurality of optical receivers 21 (“It may include a plurality of light-receiving sensors,” see top of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al.) based on not receiving the optical signal from at least one of a plurality of optical emitters 210,220, said plurality of optical emitters 210,220 and the plurality of optical receivers 21 are disposed in the lateral projection zone (the receiver must inherently be located in a lateral projection zone if the detecting unit 20 determines that there is an obstacle when the light is not received by at least one of the plurality of light-receiving sensors as shown in Fig. 10 of Cha et al.).
With respect to claim 17, Cha et al. disclose that controlling the indicator comprises controlling a visual indicator (see bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al., and Fig. 17 of Cha et al.).
With respect to claim 19, Cha et al. disclose that the indicator comprises an audible indicator, a visual indicator or both (“warning through at least one of a visual, auditory, and tactile notifications means,” Cha et al., machine translation, bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8).
With respect to claim 21, Salter et al. teach that the user interface 58 comprises an electronic button (touchscreen 64, Salter et al., paragraph [0134]).
With respect to claim 22 Salter et al. teach that the actuator 24 comprises a motor (Salter et al., paragraph [0057]).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha et al. (KR 10-2022-0079228) in view of Kwon (KR 20030016093) and Salter et al. (US 2022/0324309), as applied to claims 8 or 12 above, and further in view of Ladha (US 2023/0212904).
With respect to claim 9, Cha et al., as modified, disclose the claimed system except that they are silent on whether the visual indicator is disposed within the trunk. However, Ladha teaches that the visual indicator 112 is disposed within the front trunk (“red lights disposed about the circumference of the front trunk space,” Ladha, paragraph [0046]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Ladha with the system disclosed by Cha et al., as modified, for the advantage of giving a user a visual representation warning, while loading the frunk, of whether the frunk has been overloaded.
With respect to claim 18, Cha et al., as modified, disclose the claimed method except that they are silent on whether the visual indicator is disposed within the trunk. Cha et al. disclose that controlling the indicator comprises controlling a visual indicator (see bottom of pg. 7 and top of pg. 8 of the machine translation of Cha et al., and Fig. 17 of Cha et al.)
Ladha teaches that a similar visual indicator 112 is disposed within the front trunk (“red lights disposed about the circumference of the front trunk space,” Ladha, paragraph [0046]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Ladha with the method disclosed by Cha et al., as modified, for the advantage of giving a user a visual representation warning, while loading the frunk, of whether the frunk has been overloaded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive of any error in the above rejection.
As outlined above, Kwon has been added to the rejection in order to teach that it is known to place a light emitter and a light receiver on opposite sides of a storage volume to detect whether there is an obstacle in the closing of a cover.
Applicant argues that Cha does not disclose sensors positioned in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path. While, the exact location of the lateral projection zone in Cha cannot be determined, Kwon teaches that, the emitter and receiver are disposed in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path. Note, “outside” is being interpreted as anywhere not directly on the front trunk closed path. In Kwon, the closed path of the trunk door may be defined as the generally rectangular shape in the top plane of the lid 2 (shown in an opened state in Fig. 1 of Kwon). Also shown in Fig. 1 are the emitter 20/22/24 and the receiver 30/32/34 shown inside the trunk just below where the top plane of the lid 2 would be located in the closed position. Thus, in the combination, Kwon teaches that the emitter and the receiver are disposed in a lateral projection zone outside of the front trunk closed path.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J COLILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-2157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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.
/Daniel J Colilla/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights