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.
Claims 12-14 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.
Claim 12 is not clearly understood and believed to be incorrect because it requires the radiator to be disposed in the front bumper beam. Figure 1 shows the radiator located behind the front bumper beam.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori (US 2015/0251613) in view of Riviere et al. (US 2009/0026806).
Mori, in respect to claim 1, discloses a front end module frame of a vehicle comprising a front bumper beam (33) extending in the vehicle width direction and an upper member (56) extending above the front bumper beam (33), as shown in Figure 1. The front bumper beam (33) has opposite ends respectively connected to front ends of front side members (11) of the vehicle, as shown in Figure 1.
In reference to claim 2, a lower member (34,36) is disposed at a lower portion of a front side of the vehicle, as shown in Figure 1. The lower member (34,36) extends in the vehicle width direction, as shown in Figure 1. The lower member (34,36) has opposite ends respectively connected to front ends of a front subframe (12,14), as shown in Figure 1. The front bumper beam (33) is connected to the lower member in a height direction of the vehicle by vertical posts (15), as shown in Figures 1-5.
In reference to claim 3, each connection part (30) of the front bumper beam (33) is connected to a corresponding one of the front ends of the front side members (11) so as to face each other, as shown in Figure 1. This enables the front bumper beam (33) and the front side members (11) to form a front load path.
In reference to claim 6, the upper member (56) is a metal closed-cross section member.
However, Mori does not disclose the upper member includes a plastic structure covering a steel closed cross-section member.
Riviere et al. teaches forming an upper member (4) that includes a plastic structure (6) covering a steel closed cross-section member (4), as shown in Figures 1-3.
In reference to claim 6, the plastic structure (6) is molded on the closed cross section member (4), as disclosed in paragraph [0074]. The limitation of injection molding is given little patentable weight because it does not result in a structural limitation. However, the plastic structure (6), as shown in Figures 2 and 3, is inherently made by injection molding based on the intersecting ribs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cover the upper member of Mori with a plastic structure, as taught by Riviere et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to provide an attachment structure for various components that is lightweight, inexpensive, and rust resistant.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Mori (US 2015/0251613) and Riviere et al. (US 2009/0026806), as applied to claim 1, in view of Anzai (US 2022/0204086).
Mori, as modified, does not disclose the specifics of the upper member.
Anzai teaches forming an upper member with opposite ends bent toward the vehicle side to connect to the fender apron members, as shown in Figure 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
476
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 upper member of Mori, as modified, with opposite ends bent toward the vehicle side and connected to the fender apron members, as taught by Anzai, with a reasonable expectation for success to improve the impact energy absorption characteristics of the front end module to improve passenger safety.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Mori (US 2015/0251613) and Riviere et al. (US 2009/0026806), as applied to claim 1, in view of Yoshimitsu et al. (US 2010/0078149).
Mori, as modified, discloses the radiator (60) is connected to each of the lower member (34,36) and the upper member (56), as shown in Figure 1. Radiators dissipate heat generated by the vehicle. The radiator is disposed behind the front bumper beam (33), as shown in Figure 1.
However, Mori, as modified, does not disclose the insulator.
Yoshimitsu et al. teaches providing rubber insulators (7) as part of the connection between a radiator (2) and upper and lower members (1a,1b) of a front end module (1), as shown in Figures 1 and 2 and disclosed in paragraph [0118].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide insulators as part of the connection between the radiator and upper and lower members of Mori, as modified, as taught by Yoshimitsu et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to reduce vibration and heat transfer to prolong the life of the assembly.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of references, as applied to claim 12, in view of Naughton et al. (US 2007/0277926).
Mori, as twice modified, does not disclose the plastic structure has an integral insert nut.
Naughton et al. teaches forming a nut integral with an upper member, as disclosed in paragraph [0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to integrally form a nut on a side portion of the upper member of Mori, as twice modified, as taught by Naughton et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to support the radiator and reduce the number of parts in the assembly.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of references, as applied to claim 12, in view of in view of Naughton et al. (US 2007/0277926).
Mori, as twice modified, does not disclose the hood latch and the insert nut.
Naughton et al. teaches providing a hood latch on a central portion of a plastic structure, as disclosed in paragraph [0042]. The hood latch is received in opening (34). Naughton et al. teaches forming a nut integral with an upper member, as disclosed in paragraph [0023].
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 radiator latch to the central portion of the plastic structure of Mori, as twice modified, as taught by Naughton et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to prevent the hood from accidentally opening while driving; and,
integrally form a nut on a central portion of the upper member of Mori, as twice modified, as taught by Naughton et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to support the hood latch and reduce the number of parts in the assembly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 7-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 February 20, 2026