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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (Patent No. 8,622,161).
Re: claim 1, Hara teaches a vehicle charger attachment structure (Fig. 1), comprising: a rear floor panel (5) provided at a vehicle rear part (Col. 5 – lines 31-33) and having a concave part (6) recessed toward a vehicle lower side (Col. 5 – lines 31-37); a first bracket (Fig. 3 - 10) fixed to the rear floor panel (5), and that has a first attachment part (Fig. 4 – 13 – These bolt holes are present in both brackets) to which a charger (Fig. 1 - 1) is attachable (See Fig. 7); and a second bracket (Fig. 3 - 9) that is formed with a hat-shaped cross section (Fig. 4 & Fig. 7) and fixed to a bottom part (6a) of the concave part (6) (See Fig. 7), and that has a second attachment part (Fig. 4 – 13 – These bolt holes are present in both brackets) to which a charger (Fig. 1 - 1) is attachable (See Fig. 7), wherein the first bracket (10) comprises: a first convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – first bead) continuously formed from a first end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – first end part) of the first bracket to a second end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – second end part) of the first bracket along an outer edge on a vehicle rear side (See Fig. 8 for alternate orientation) of the first bracket, a concave portion (Annotated Fig. 4 – concave part) of the first convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – first bead) being joined to the rear floor panel (5), a second convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – second bead) continuously formed from the first end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – first end part) of the first bracket to the second end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – second end part) of the first bracket along an outer edge on a vehicle forward side (See Fig. 8 for alternate orientation) of the first bracket, a concave portion (Annotated Fig. 4 – concave part (same for the second bead)) of the second convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – second bead) being joined to the rear floor panel (5), and a third convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – third bead) formed between the first convex bead and the second convex bead (See Annotated Fig. 4), the third convex bead being continuously formed from the first end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – first end part) of the first bracket to the second end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – second end part) of the first bracket along a central portion of the first bracket (See Annotated Fig. 4) in a vehicle width direction (See Fig. 8 for alternate orientation).
Hara fails to teach a first bracket that is curved along a peripheral part of the concave part in the rear floor panel; the first convex bead is in a concavo-convex shape and the second convex bead is in a concavo-convex shape.
The change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (see MPEP § 2144.04). In view of the present application, the shape of the first bracket can be formed to be curved along a peripheral part of the concave part in the rear floor panel without hindering the charger from being mounted, as the charger has extensions from which are mounted to the bracket. The applicant also places no criticality on the shaping of the first bracket. In view of the present application, the shaping of the first and second bead can be formed to be concavo-convex without hindering the charger from being mounted, as the third bead is raised from the first and second bead for the charger to be mounted on.
PNG
media_image1.png
292
544
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
481
454
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re: claim 5, Hara further teaches wherein the first bracket (10) extends in a vehicle width direction (Annotated Fig. 3 – Width direction) and the second bracket (9) extends in the vehicle front-rear direction (Annotated Fig. 3 – Front-rear direction).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (Patent No. 8,622,161) in view of Harugaichi et al. (JP 2022085507 A).
Re: claim 3, Hara further teaches wherein: the second bracket (9) comprises a pair of side wall parts (Annotated Fig. 4-2 – side walls), and an upper wall part (9b) connecting respective upper end parts of the side wall parts (See Annotated Fig. 4-2), the second attachment part (130 is provided at the upper wall part (9b). Hara fails to teach wherein each of the pair of side wall parts is formed with a plurality of vertically extending convex beads so as to have a corrugated shape.
However, Harugaichi et al. teaches side wall parts formed with a plurality of vertically extending convex beads so as to have a corrugated shape (Fig. 10 – ribs 64L).
Hara and Harugaichi et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same field of charger mounts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Hara’s side walls with those of Harugaichi et al.’s ribs for the advantage of having more reinforced side walls that increase the durability and longevity of the part when under stress/use for long periods of time.
PNG
media_image3.png
294
396
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Re: Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 103 toward claim 1, the applicant argues that Hara does not disclose a first bracket with three distinct convex beads arranged in a particular manner, where each bead is continuously formed, and the concave portions of the first and second beads are joined to the rear floor panel. The examiner disagrees and refers to the cited rejection for the amended limitations, “a first convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – first bead) continuously formed from a first end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – first end part) of the first bracket to a second end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – second end part) of the first bracket along an outer edge on a vehicle rear side (See Fig. 8 for alternate orientation) of the first bracket, a concave portion (Annotated Fig. 4 – concave part) of the first convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – first bead) being joined to the rear floor panel (5), a second convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – second bead) continuously formed from the first end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – first end part) of the first bracket to the second end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – second end part) of the first bracket along an outer edge on a vehicle forward side (See Fig. 8 for alternate orientation) of the first bracket, a concave portion (Annotated Fig. 4 – concave part (same for the second bead)) of the second convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – second bead) being joined to the rear floor panel (5), and a third convex bead (Annotated Fig. 4 – third bead) formed between the first convex bead and the second convex bead (See Annotated Fig. 4), the third convex bead being continuously formed from the first end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – first end part) of the first bracket to the second end part (Annotated Fig. 3 – second end part) of the first bracket along a central portion of the first bracket (See Annotated Fig. 4) in a vehicle width direction (See Fig. 8 for alternate orientation).” The examiner acknowledges that the first and second bead are not formed in a concavo-convex shape, however, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP C ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-3421. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30 - 4:00 CT.
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 R Weisberg can be reached at 5712705500. 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.
/PHILIP C ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612