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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species B in the reply filed on 8/27/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 8-11, 18, and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species A, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mooney et al (US 2006/0191206 A1) in view of Gerardo (US 2014/0268855 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Mooney et al disclose a body panel apparatus for mounting a lighting assembly onto a vehicle in place of an existing panel mounted on existing mounts of the vehicle (a modular vehicle element satisfies this limitation—there’s no requirement for an after-market part) having a light, the body panel apparatus comprising:
a panel body having an exterior surface and an opposing interior surface;
PNG
media_image1.png
429
581
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of panel mounts on the panel body arranged to mount the panel body on said existing mounts of the vehicle such that said exterior surface forms a portion of an exterior body surface of the vehicle. (Figure 2; see at least [0029] onward)
Mooney et al fails to disclose a light protrusion with mounting elements.
Gerardo teaches a lighting assembly includes a housing having a lens (106) at a forward end of the housing and a mounting flange with fastener apertures therein about the lens at the forward end of the housing comprising:
a light protrusion (136) formed on the panel body to protrude outwardly from the exterior surface towards an end surface at a distal end of the light protrusion;
a light aperture (aperture) formed in the end surface of the light protrusion;
a plurality of light mounting posts (mount posts) integrally formed on the interior surface of the panel body to protrude inwardly from the interior surface at spaced positions about the light aperture;
a light adapter plate (102) mounted onto the light mounting posts at a location spaced inwardly from the light aperture in the end surface of the light protrusion; and
PNG
media_image2.png
438
606
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a plurality of adapter posts (adapter posts) mounted on the light adapter plate to extend outwardly towards distal ends in proximity to the end surface of the light protrusion such that the adapter posts are arranged to support mounting flange (104) of the lighting assembly thereon using fasteners (134) coupled to the adapter posts through the fastener apertures in the mounting flange when the lens of the lighting assembly is adjacent to and aligned with the light aperture. (Annotated Figure 4; see at least [0024] onward)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the light of Mooney et al with that of Gerardo in order to provide for a modular vehicle component with a robust light source.
In regard to claim 2, Gerardo further teaches the light adapter plate is oriented parallel to the end surface of the light protrusion locating the light aperture therein. (This is broad, which extension are we talking about.)
In regard to claim 3, the combination of Mooney et al and Gerardo fail to disclose that the light mounting posts have different lengths between the interior surface of the panel body and the light adapter plate. However, a flat orientation is disclosed—having different lengths for the mounting posts would allow for angular configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to form the mounting posts such that they are of different lengths in order to allow for an angled disposition.
In regard to claim 4, Gerardo further teaches the end surface of the light protrusion locating the light aperture therein is parallel to a forward rolling direction of the vehicle. (This is broad, which extension are we talking about.)
In regard to claim 5, Gerardo further teaches the light aperture is sized and shaped relative to the lens such that a peripheral rim on the panel body about the light aperture is arranged to fully conceal the housing of the lighting assembly. (The housing is fully concealed, so it can be said the aperture is sized appropriately.)
PNG
media_image3.png
391
480
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 6, Gerardo further teaches a perimeter shape of the light aperture defines four lobes (lobe) evenly spaced apart from one another in a circumferential direction about the light aperture. (See annotated Figure 2—there are four ‘lobes’ evenly spaced around the circumference of the aperture.)
In regard to claim 7, Gerardo further teaches the light adapter plate includes a rear aperture formed therein arranged to receive a portion of the housing of the lighting assembly protruding therethrough in a mounted position of the lighting assembly on the light adapter plate. (Annotated Figure 4)
PNG
media_image4.png
376
607
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-17 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.
Claim 20 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art taken as a whole does not show nor suggest a body panel apparatus for mounting an electrical outlet onto a vehicle in place of an existing panel mounted on existing mounts of the vehicle wherein the electrical outlet includes a housing having an electrical connection at a forward end of the housing and mounting apertures in the housing at a location rearwardly of the electrical connection, the body panel apparatus comprising a panel body having an exterior surface and an opposing interior surface, the panel body including a breakout section defined by a line of weakness formed on the interior surface to extend about a boundary of the breakout section, a plurality of panel mounts on the panel body arranged to mount the panel body on said existing mounts of the vehicle such that said exterior surface forms a portion of an exterior body surface of the vehicle, a plurality of outlet mounting posts integrally formed on the interior surface of the panel body to protrude inwardly from the interior surface in proximity to the breakout section, and an outlet adapter plate having a first flange mounted onto the outlet mounting posts and a second flange protruding inwardly from the interior surface of the panel body, the second flange including a plurality of mounting apertures therein arranged for alignment with the mounting apertures in the housing of the electrical outlet such that the second flange is arranged to support the housing of the electrical outlet fastened thereon when the electrical connection at the forward end of the housing is adjacent to and aligned with the breakout section as specifically called for the claimed combinations.
The closest prior art, the combination of Mooney et al (US 2006/0191206 A1) and Andrieu et al (US 2002/0197909 A1), does not include the panel body including a breakout section defined by a line of weakness formed on the interior surface to extend about a boundary of the breakout section, a plurality of outlet mounting posts integrally formed on the interior surface of the panel body to protrude inwardly from the interior surface in proximity to the breakout section, a plurality of mounting apertures therein arranged for alignment with the mounting apertures in the housing of the electrical outlet such that the second flange is arranged to support the housing of the electrical outlet fastened thereon when the electrical connection at the forward end of the housing is adjacent to and aligned with the breakout section as required by the claim and there is no motivation absent the applicant’s own disclosure, to modify the combination reference in the manner required by the claims.
In terms of the identified allowable subject matter, the Examiner believes the missing elements of the mounting posts and apertures could easily be combined in an obviousness type rejection. However, the underlined portion, mainly, a weakened section of the panel which is an optional breakout, was not readily provided for in the prior art. This is the specific identified allowable subject matter of both claim 12 and 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Cosgriff et al (US 2024/0397637 A1) disclose electronics housing.
Hager et al (US 2024/0302013 A1) disclose a vehicle component.
Flores Becerril et al (US 2023/0387638 A1) disclose a vehicle AC outlet.
Vander Sluis et al (US 2023/0331149 A1) disclose a lens assembly.
Bove (US 10,688,946 B1) disclose a switch system.
Maskiw (US 10,400,977 B2) disclose a headlight assembly.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E DUNAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1222. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am - 6:00 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, James (Jong-Suk) Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E DUNAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875