DETAILED ACTION
NOTE: This action is NON-FINAL.
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 11-20 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.
In claim 11, the phrase “positioned with a passenger compartment” is indefinite. It is unclear if the phrase is claiming the metal beam is inside the passenger compartment or not.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6, 8-11, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticpated by Debnar et al. (DE 102020131396A1).
Re claim 1, Debnar et al. discloses a vehicle comprising a vehicle body including a passenger compartment (see the machine translation, second paragraph of the Description which discloses the device is used in a cockpit of the vehicle) ; and a cross-vehicle beam (101-1, figure 1) extending in a transverse direction inside the passenger compartment, the cross-vehicle beam having an open profile (as shown in figure 1, the beam is C-shaped), wherein an opening of the open profile faces forward in the vehicle (see the machine translation, paragraph 110, “in particular a front side 119-4 of the U-shaped profile body is open), the cross-vehicle beam including a first metal plate (132, figure 1), wherein a shape of a part of a periphery of the first metal plate corresponds to a shape of the open profile, and wherein the first metal plate is mounted in the open profile substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the cross-vehicle beam (as shown in figure 1).
Re claim 6, the first metal plate is attached to the open profile by at least one weld (see paragraph 115, “How from the 1 shows that the fastening area 131 is connected, in particular welded, in particular to the rear side 119-1, the upper side 119-2, and/or the underside 119-3 of the profile body wall 119 of the profile body”).
Re claim 8, the cross-vehicle beam further includes a second metal plate (the other 132 shown in figure 1 as there are two), wherein a shape of a part of a periphery of the second metal plate corresponds to the shape of the open profile, and wherein the second metal plate is mounted in the open profile substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the cross- vehicle beam (as shown in figure 1).
Re claim 9, a steering column is mounted to the cross-vehicle beam (by support 137, see the machine translation, paragraph 119 of the Description).
Re claim 10, the first metal plate (132) is positioned adjacent to the steering column along the cross-vehicle beam (132 is adjacent to the steering column support 137).
Re claim 11, Debnar discloses a vehicle structure comprising a metal beam (101-1, see the machine translation, paragraph 100 of the Description, aluminum or steel), having an open profile (as shown in figure 1, the beam is C-shaped) and positioned with a passenger compartment of a vehicle body (see the machine translation, second paragraph of the Description which discloses the device is used in a cockpit of the vehicle); and a first metal plate (132, figure 1), wherein a shape of a part of a periphery of the first metal plate corresponds to a shape of the open profile, and wherein the first metal plate is mounted in the open profile substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the metal beam. (as shown in figure 1)
Re claim 16, the first metal plate is attached to the open profile by at least one weld joint (see paragraph 115, “How from the 1 shows that the fastening area 131 is connected, in particular welded, in particular to the rear side 119-1, the upper side 119-2, and/or the underside 119-3 of the profile body wall 119 of the profile body”).
Re claim 18, a second metal plate is provided (the other 132 shown in figure 1 as there are two), wherein a shape of a part of a periphery of the second metal plate corresponds to the shape of the open profile, and wherein the second metal plate is mounted in the open profile substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the metal beam (as shown by figure 1).
Re claim 19, the vehicle structure is a cross-vehicle beam (see the machine translation, paragraph 96 of the Description, “The cross member arrangement 100, in particular the instrument panel support”).
Re claim 20, the metal beam is positioned to support a vehicle instrument panel (see the machine translation, paragraph 96 of the Description, “The cross member arrangement 100, in particular the instrument panel support”).
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 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Debnar et al. (DE 102020131396A1) in view of Palisse (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0158151).
Debnar et al. discloses all the limitations of the claims, as applied above, except for the first metal plate including a tab at the part of the periphery, wherein the open profile has a slot and wherein the tab extends in to the slot when the first metal plate is mounted in the open profile.
Palisse teaches a metal plate having a tab (3, figure 1b) at a part of the periphery wherein the tab extends into a slot (2, figure 1b) when the first metal plat is mounted to another plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
496
601
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a vehicle, such as that disclosed by Debnar et al., to have the first metal plate include a tab at the part of the periphery, wherein the open profile has a slot and wherein the tab extends in to the slot when the first metal plate is mounted in the open profile, as taught by Palisse, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a stronger joint and to better align the joint in the correct position prior to final welding.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 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.
Claims 12-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in claims 2-5 and 12-15 is the inclusion in the claim of the limitations directed to an overmolding of a plastic material on the cross-vehicle beam, wherein the first metal plate is attached to the open profile by the overmolding. Such limitations, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claims, are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record. Debnar et al. does not teach the use of plastics to make such attachments and there is no suggestion or motivation in the prior art of record to make such a modification other than impermissible hindsight reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 6-11, 16, and 18-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason S Morrow whose telephone number is (571)272-6663. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m..
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at (571) 272-5109. 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.
/JASON S MORROW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
June 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights