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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 3, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed August 3, 2026, have been fully considered.
Applicant has argued that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 has been overcome by amendment. Examiner agrees, and has withdrawn the 112 rejection.
Regarding the prior art, applicant has argued that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 based on Cogswell in view of Batten has been overcome by amendment. While examiner agrees that the Batten reference is rendered moot due to the removal of the claim language related to a “single cable,” examiner has set forth new grounds of rejection with Cogswell as the base reference and a new teaching reference being provided for the new limitation “at least one heating unit.” See full rejection text below for additional information.
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) 1-3, and 7-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cogswell et al. (US 2023/0076313, hereinafter Cogswell) in view of Winter et al. (US 2005/0115943, hereinafter Winter).
With regard to claim 1, Cogswell discloses a vehicle body panel (i.e. the vehicle front bumper shown in Fig. 1) comprising:
a support structure (12+34; “the structural carrier 34, which is one piece formed with the molded panel 12,” paragraph 0022); and
at least one design element (essentially any part of support structure 12+34 can be considered a “design element,” since every part of the structure has aesthetic characteristics—However, it is noted that Cogswell teaches “decorative lighting, texture, badges and finishes such as tints, paint or plating are incorporated” in paragraph 0025);
a plurality of components (38, 40, 41, etc.) fixedly attached to the support structure, the plurality of components comprising at least one illumination unit (44, 46, 48) providing surface illumination, at least one camera unit (74, 76, “the sensor 74 and sensor 76 can be any type of sensor and include, but are not limited to radar, lidar, ultrasonic sensors, and cameras”, paragraph 0028), at least one sensor unit (sensor 74 can be considered a camera and sensor 76 can be considered a radar or lidar per the list in paragraph 0028), (note that examiner will only address the minimum number of components that are required by the claim. Components that are not identified with a reference numeral are not necessarily absent from Cogswell):
at least one navigation unit,
at least one communication unit,
at least one antenna unit,
at least one lighting unit,
at least one signalling light unit,
at least one cleaning unit,
at least one lighting cover lens,
at least one sensor cover lens,
at least one sensor housing,
at least one radome,
at least one safety unit (33, 33’—note that these are “safety units” because they secure the panel to the vehicle, which provides some form of safety),
at least one parking system unit,
at least one emblem unit, and
wherein the at least one sensor unit includes at least one radar sensor unit, at least one lidar unit, at least one ultrasonic sensor unit, and/or at least one parking sensor unit (paragraph 0028),
wherein the support structure is a molded structure (element 12+34 is at least partially a molded structure because panel 12 is molded. Furthermore, Cogswell teaches that “the structural carrier 34, which is one piece formed with the molded panel 12,” paragraph 0022. In any case, applicant’s own specification states that “the support structure may thus comprise a mold material, such as plastic or another appropriate mold material” in paragraph 0019. In other words, applicant’s specification implies that additional materials can be used besides the molded material).
Cogswell fails to disclose a heating unit.
Winter teaches a vehicle bumper with an integrated radar (2), and a heating unit (3) incorporated into the radar.
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified Cogswell by including the heating unit of Winter in the bumper-integrated radar unit of Cogswell, so that the radar “may be kept free from snow and ice even in winterish surroundings, whereby functional impairment of the radar sensor is avoided” (Winter, paragraph 0020).
With regard to claim 2, Cogswell teaches that the plurality of components are at least partly integrated in the support structure (the mere connection of the components to the bumper is considered to meet the phrase “at least partly integrated”).
With regard to claim 3, Cogswell teaches that the support structure and the plurality of components are integrally formed as a single part (paragraph 0002, “a one-piece integrated front vision panel for a vehicle, that integrates several functional aspects of the vehicle into a single one piece seamless surface without visible joints or individual parts”).
With regard to claim 7, Cogswell teaches that the vehicle body panel is mounted on a front, a rear, a side, or a top of a vehicle (paragraph 0021, “all forward surfaces” or “other locations such as, but not limited to panels on the side, rear and roof of the vehicle”).
With regard to claim 8, Cogswell discloses a vehicle comprising the vehicle body panel of claim 1 (see Figs. 2 and 4).
With regard to claim 9, Cogswell teaches that the vehicle body panel is mounted on a front or a rear or a side or a top of the vehicle (paragraph 0021, “all forward surfaces” or “other locations such as, but not limited to panels on the side, rear and roof of the vehicle”).
With regard to claim 10, Cogswell teaches a method for manufacturing the vehicle body panel of claim 1, the method comprising:
molding the support structure in a molding process to fixedly attach the plurality of components to the support structure (at least paragraph 0032 describes certain component panels being molded into the support structure, e.g. “the back side 32 of the molded panel 12 further includes an upper panel 81 that is a [sic] formed of multi-shot polycarbonate molding that includes the clear decorative zone 56 and the clear functional zones 58, 58’ as well as the sensor zone 62B with sensor 76 and decorative film zone 78.” Paragraph 0033 states “the outermost layer 66 of the molded panel 12 covers the entire exterior surface 16 of the front vision panel 10 facing an exterior of a vehicle and creates a seamless surface on the exterior surface. The outermost layer 66 is formed of a thermoplastic urethane that is overmolded to the upper panel 81, middle lower panel 82, 82′, and bridge panel 84, which is then connected to the structural carrier 34 to create the integrated front vision panel 10 that is a one piece panel connected to the frame of the vehicle.” Finally, paragraph 0023 states that the carrier 34 is “one piece formed with the molded panel 12.”).
With regard to claim 11, Cogswell teaches that the components are at least partially covered by a mold material during the molding process (component panels being “overmolded” as discussed in paragraphs 0032 and 0033 requires that these components will be contacted by mold material during the molding process).
With regard to claim 12, Cogswell discloses a method for manufacturing a vehicle, the method comprising the steps of:
mounting the vehicle body panel of claim 1 to a vehicle (see vehicle in Figs. 2 and 4 with body panel attached).
With regard to claim 13, Cogswell teaches that the molding process is at least one of an inmolding process, an overmolding process, a 2K molding process, and more than 2K molding process (paragraph 0031: “all of which are panels formed by using multi-shot thermoplastics,” paragraph 0032: “the molded panel 12 further includes an upper panel 81 that is a [sic] formed of multi-shot polycarbonate molding,” i.e. at least 2K or two-shot molding).
With regard to claim 14, Cogswell teaches that the vehicle body panel is mounted on the vehicle as a single part (paragraph 0002, “a one-piece integrated front vision panel for a vehicle, that integrates several functional aspects of the vehicle into a single one piece seamless surface without visible joints or individual parts.” Also, paragraph 0023 states that the carrier 34 is “one piece formed with the molded panel 12.”).
With regard to claim 15, Cogswell teaches that each component of the plurality of components is at least partially coated by the molded structure (Cogswell teaches, in paragraph 0033, that the molded panel 12 has an outermost layer 66 which “covers the entire surface 16 of the front vision panel 10 facing an exterior of a vehicle and creates a seamless surface on the exterior surface”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6300. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM - 5:30PM.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at 571-270-7741. 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.
/ROBERT E FULLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights