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 § 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 20 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.
Claim 20 is not clearly understood because it claims the diameter of the inlet duct segment is smaller than a diameter of the outlet duct segment. The use of diameter implies the cross section of the duct segments is circular; however, this has not been claimed. Does this claim require the inlet duct segment to have a smaller and circular cross section than the outlet duct segment or simply the cross section of the inlet duct segment has to be smaller than the cross section of the outlet duct segment?
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 7-10, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Clark (US 2024/0416716).
Clark, in reference to claim 7, a vehicle (14) comprises a vehicle HVAC system (22) configured to bring air to a desired temperature, as shown in Figure 1. The vehicle has a passenger compartment (86) configured to allow a vehicle passenger therein, as shown in Figure 2 and disclosed in paragraphs [0045] and [0047]. A movable duct (12) has a body defining an interior conduit configured to provide fluid communication from the HVAC system (22) to the vehicle passenger compartment (86), as shown in Figure 2. The body has an inlet duct segment (16) connected to the HVAC system (22) and an outlet duct segment (20) connected to the passenger compartment (86), as shown in Figures 1-6B. The outlet duct segment (20) is movable between an extended configuration, as shown in Figures 2 and 4C, where the outlet duct segment (20) is located in a first location in the vehicle passenger compartment (86) and a retracted configuration where the outlet duct segment (20) is located in a second location in the vehicle passenger compartment (86), as shown in Figures 1 and 4A.
In reference to claim 8, the movement of the movable duct (12) between the extended configuration, as shown in Figures 2 and 4C, and the retracted configuration , as shown in Figures 1 and 4A, is translational movement, as shown in Figures 4A-4C.
In reference to claim 9, the movement of the movable duct (12) between the extended configuration, as shown in Figures 2 and 4C, and the retracted configuration, as shown in Figures 1 and 4A, is telescopic movement such that the inlet duct segment (16) and the outlet duct segment (20) are concentric, as shown in Figures 4A-4C.
In reference to claims 10 and 17, the body of the movable duct (12) further includes an intermediate duct segment (18) concentric with the inlet duct segment (16) and the outlet duct segment (20), as shown in Figures 4A-4C.
In reference to claim 16, a movable duct (12) for a vehicle (14) having a vehicle HVAC system (22) configured to bring air to a desired temperature, as shown in Figure 1. The vehicle has a passenger compartment (86) configured to allow a vehicle passenger therein, as shown in Figure 2 and disclosed in paragraphs [0045] and [0047]. The movable duct (12) has a body defining an interior conduit configured to provide fluid communication from the HVAC system (22) to the vehicle passenger compartment (86), as shown in Figure 2. The body has an inlet duct segment (16) connected to the HVAC system (22) and an outlet duct segment (20) connected to the passenger compartment (86), as shown in Figures 1-6B. The outlet duct (20) is linearly movable between an extended configuration, as shown in Figures 2 and 4C, and a retracted configuration is telescopic movement such that the inlet duct segment (16) and the outlet duct segment (20) are concentric, as shown in Figures 1 and 4A.
In reference to claim 19, there are more than one inlet duct segments (16,18). Duct segment (18) has a retaining protrusion (60) that engages groove (72) of the outlet duct segment (20), as shown in Figure 6B. This is one of the features that is configured to prevent rotational movement between the inlet and outlet duct segments.
In reference to claim 20, the inlet duct segment has a smaller cross section than the cross section of the outlet duct segment.
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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 2024/0416716) in view of Clark (US 2024/0416716).
Clark, in reference to claim 1, discloses a movable duct (12) for a motor vehicle (14), as shown in Figures 1-6B. The movable duct (12) comprises an inlet duct segment (16) and a first telescopic duct segment (18), as shown in Figures 3-4C. The inlet duct segment (16) includes an inlet duct wall extending (28) from a first inlet duct end (30) to an opposite second inlet duct end (32) and the first telescopic duct segment (18) includes a first telescopic duct wall (46) extending from a first telescopic duct end (48) to an opposite second telescopic duct end (50), as shown in Figure 3.
However, Clark does not disclose a guide on the inlet duct segment engaged with a protrusion on the first telescopic duct segment (18).
Clark teaches, in reference to claim 1, the first telescopic duct segment (18) has a protrusion (60) engaged with an elongate guide (72) of an adjacent duct segment (20), as shown in Figures 3, 6A, and 6B. The elongate guide extends between a first end and a second end of the adjacent duct, as shown in Figure 3.
In reference to claim 5, the elongate guide (72) defines a recessed channel formed in the duct wall (70), as shown in Figures 3, 6A, and 6B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an additional protrusion on the first duct segment and a first elongate guide on the inlet duct segment of Clark, as taught by Clark, with a reasonable expectation for success to help guide movement of the duct segments.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Clark (US 2024/0416716), as modified for claim 1, in view of Murphy (5,095,942).
Clark, in reference to claim 4, discloses a leading portion that includes a locating feature to receive and align the protrusion with the first elongate guide. The locating feature is the rectangular leading portion which receives the protrusion and helps alignment, as shown in Figures 6A and 6B.
However, Clark, as modified, does not disclose the tapered leading portion of the second inlet duct end.
Murphy teaches forming a duct segment (40) with a tapered leading portion (43) at an end of a duct segment (40) to help couple the segment with an adjacent component (30), as shown in Figures 4 and 5. The leading portion (43) defines a tapering width of the inlet duct wall, as shown in Figure 5.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a leading portion with a tapering width of the inlet duct wall at the second inlet duct end of Clark, as modified, as taught by Murphy, with a reasonable expectation for success to help connect the inlet duct segment to the outlet duct segment.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of references, as modified for claim 2, in view of Raines et al. (10,076,958).
Clark, as twice modified, does not disclose the bell mouth.
Raines et al. teaches forming duct segment (72) with a receiving duct end having a bell mouth defining a flared width of the receiving duct wall to help receive a leading portion of an adjacent duct segment (70), as shown in Figures 4-7. The bell mouth is adjacent gasket (92), as shown in Figure 6.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the first telescopic duct end of Clark, as twice modified, with a bell mouth, as taught by Raines et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to more easily connect the duct segments together.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Clark (US 2024/0416716), as modified for claim 1.
Clark, as modified, discloses a second telescopic duct segment (20). The first telescopic section has a protrusion (60) in sliding engagement with an elongate guide (72), as shown in Figures 3, 6A, and 6B. The elongate guide (72) extends between ends (80,82), as shown in Figure 3.
However, Clark, as modified, does not disclose the protrusion is on the second telescopic duct segment and the elongate guide is on the first telescopic duct segment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reverse the locations of the protrusion and the elongate guide of Clarke, as modified, with a reasonable expectation for success resulting in the second protrusion being located on the second telescopic duct segment and the second elongate guide being located on the first telescopic duct segment as an obvious reversal of parts that does not alter the function or operation of the movable duct.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 2024/0416716) in view of Clark (US 2024/0416716).
Clark disclose the inlet duct segment includes element (16) and element (18). The inlet duct segment (16,18) includes a protrusion (60) that sliding engages an elongate guide (72) of the outlet duct segment (20), as shown in Figures 3, 6A, and 6B. The protrusion and channel are just part of the structure that prevents rotational movement between the inlet duct segment (16,18) and the outlet duct segment (20), as shown in Figures 3, 6A, and 6B.
However, Clark does not disclose the protrusion is on the second telescopic duct segment and the elongate guide is on the first telescopic duct segment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reverse the locations of the protrusion and the elongate guide of Clarke with a reasonable expectation for success resulting in the second protrusion being located on the second telescopic duct segment and the second elongate guide being located on the first telescopic duct segment as an obvious reversal of parts that does not alter the function or operation of the movable duct.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Clark (US 2024/0416716), as modified for claim 12, in view of Murphy (5,095,942).
Clark, as modified, does not disclose the ramp.
Murphy teaches forming a duct (40) with a ramp leading portion (43) at an end of a duct segment to help couple the segment with an adjacent component (30), as shown in Figures 4 and 5.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a ramp portion at the end of the inlet duct segment of Clark, as modified, as taught by Murphy, with a reasonable expectation for success to help connect the inlet duct segment to the outlet duct segment.
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 2024/0416716) in view of Haba et al. (6,273,495).
Clark does not disclose the duct segments are made from blow molding.
Haba et al. teaches forming a duct (148) by blow molding, as disclosed on lines 15-18 of column 7.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the duct segments of Clark by blow molding, as taught by Haba et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to produce lightweight and inexpensive duct segment.
Claims 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 2024/0416716).
Clark does not disclose a second intermediate duct segment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a second intermediate duct segment concentric with the other duct segments of Clark with a reasonable expectation for success to increase the distance of travel of the duct and the vehicle console when used in larger vehicles with three or more rows of seating.
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 2024/0416716) in view of Heck (US 2006/0258282).
Clark does not disclose the duct segments have a circular cross section.
Heck teaches forming duct segments with circular cross sections, as disclosed in paragraph [0009].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the duct segments of Clark with a circular cross section, as taught by Heck, with a reasonable expectation for success as an obvious design choice that does not alter the function or operation of the device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 January 22, 2026