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 Objections
Claim 11 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11, line 1, “air cooling device” should say “air-cooling device”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grando (FR 3090559 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Grando discloses an air-cooling device (closure device 14, figs.1-5b) for cooling motor vehicle components of a motor vehicle by travel-induced airflow, said air cooling device comprising: a frame (bodywork part 10, figs.1-5b) delimiting a cooling opening (orifice 11, figs.1-5b), a cover (closure element 15, figs.1-5b), which is configured to be inserted into the cooling opening via a separating gap (separation gap between the closure element 15 and bodywork part 10 as seen in figure 4b) and which is at a distance from the frame for closing a majority of the cooling opening in a closed position of the cover (figs.1-5b), and at least one connecting element (hinge element 16, figs.1-5b) which is connected to the frame and to the cover for bridging the separating gap (fig.4b), wherein the cover is configured to be moved between the closed position and an open position (figs.1-5b), wherein, in the open position, the cover is at least partially moved out from an opening plane (fig.3c-d and 4c) of the cooling opening delimited by the frame via an elastic deformation of the connecting element (hinge element 16 is elastic deformed as seen in figure 4c).
Regarding claim 2, Grando discloses wherein the cover extends relative to the frame such that, in the open position, travel-induced airflow can be guided along the cover and into the cooling opening (airflow flows along the closure element 15 into the orifice 11, figs.1-5b).
Regarding claim 3, Grando discloses wherein the cover is elastically deformed into the open position from a substantially unstressed starting plane (cover 15 goes into the open position when connecting member 16 deforms from starting plane, figs.1-5b).
Regarding claim 4, Grando discloses wherein the cover is elastically deformed in response to elastic deformation forces imparted on the connecting element (cover 15 goes into the open position when connecting member 16 deforms from starting plane, figs.1-5b).
Regarding claim 7, Grando discloses wherein at least a majority of the connecting element extends along the separating gap (a majority of the length of the hinge 16 extends along the length of the gap as seen in figures 1-5b), wherein an elastic deformation of the connecting element is pronounced at different degrees along the separating gap in the open position of the cover (hinge element 16 bends along the gap at different angles as seen in figure 4c).
Regarding claim 8, Grando discloses further comprising a further cover (bodywork part 10 comprises two orifices as shown in figure 1 with closure devices 14 and closure elements 15, figs.1-5b), wherein the further cover is connected to the frame via further connecting elements (hinge element 16, figs.1-5b), wherein the further cover can be moved between a further closed position and a further open position (open and closed positions of closure element 15, figs.1-5b), in which the further cover is at least partially moved out from an opening plane of the cooling opening delimited by the frame via an elastic deformation of the further connecting element (hinge element 16 is elastic deformed as seen in figure 4c), wherein the further cover adjoins an exterior of the cover in the closed position (both closure devices 14 are on the bodywork part 10, fig.1).
Regarding claim 9, Grando discloses a front cooling device grill (closure device 14 is on front bumper bodywork 10 as seen in figure 1) for cooling a drive motor and/or a traction battery of a motor vehicle, said front cooling grill comprising at least one opening against which the travel-induced airflow can flow and the air-cooling device of claim 1 inserted into the opening (orifice 11 and closure device 14, fig.1).
Regarding claim 11, Grando discloses a motor vehicle (bodywork 10 of a motor vehicle, fig.1) comprising the air-cooling device of claim 1.
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grando (FR 3090559 A1) in view of Toda (US 20140199930 A1)
Regarding claim 5, Grando discloses wherein, in the open position of the cover, the cover delimits an input opening between the cover and the frame (the closure element 15 and bodywork part 10 define the input opening in the open position, fig.3c-d and 4c), a surface normal of which substantially faces in a direction of travel (outer face 17, figs.1-5b), wherein a partial flow cross-section extending from the input opening counter to the direction of travel tapers between the cover and an opening plane of the cooling opening (figs.1-5b), but fails to disclose wherein the partial flow cross-section is substantially semi-circular in shape.
Toda discloses flow cross-section is substantially semi-circular in shape (openings 24a are oval shaped as seen in figure 8A).
Grando and Toda are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of vehicle grills. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Grando with the oval openings and partial flow of Toda with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of lower air turbulence with reduced friction and better airflow.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grando (FR 3090559 A1) in view of Schmidt (DE 102008013336 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Grando discloses the air-cooling device of claim 1 and the air-cooling device is on a front bumper (fig.1) and comprising at least one opening against which the travel-induced airflow can flow and the air-cooling device of claim 1 inserted into the opening (orifice 11 and closure device 14, figs.1-5b), but fails to disclose a side cooling device grill for cooling a drive motor, and/or a traction battery, and/or a braking system of a motor vehicle.
However, Schmidt discloses a side cooling device grill for cooling a drive motor, and/or a traction battery, and/or a braking system of a motor vehicle (ventilation holes with flaps 18 is arranged at front, lateral upside, or below motor compartment area or below bodywork, abstract, figs.1-10b).
Grando and Schmidt are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of air-cooling devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Grando with the ventilation holes and covers on side as taught by Schmidt with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have combined prior art elements yielding predictable results of providing proper ventilation, fuel efficiency, and better aerodynamics.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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 6 depends upon claim 1 which is rejected, but claim 6 has the limitation of “further comprising at least two of the connecting elements which are attached to edges of the cover that face away from one another”. The primary reference of Grando discloses a connecting element (hinge element 16) to allow the closure device to open and close. Having another connecting element the same as the hinge element on an edge that faces away from the current hinge element would prevent the closure element from opening. For the reason above claim 6 has allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The prior art not relied upon but considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure is included in the 892 form. The art included has features related to claim limitations, the general structural of the invention, teachings, and other analogous art to the invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IAN BRYCE SHELTON whose telephone number is (571)272-6501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303)-297-4337. 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.
/IAN BRYCE SHELTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3613