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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed March 3, 2026, have been fully considered.
Applicant has argued that the amendments to the drawings overcome the objection set forth in the previous Office Action. Examiner respectfully disagrees. See below in the “Drawings” section for additional discussion.
Applicant has argued that the objection to claim 5 has been overcome by amendment. Examiner agrees, and has withdrawn the objection to claim 5.
Applicant has argued that the claim amendments overcome the rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Examiner agrees, and has withdrawn the rejection.
With regard to the prior art rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103:
Applicant argues that Lee in view of Tomozawa does not render amended claim 1 obvious, because “the cross member side components of claim 1 explicitly recite a top hat cross sectional shape, and Lee’s crossmembers 15 have a closed hollow rectangular cross sectional shape” (Remarks, Page 9). Examiner agrees, and has modified the rejection to rely on Tomozawa for the teaching of a cross member with a top hat cross section. Thus, this Office Action has not been made final.
Regarding claim 4, applicant argues that “claim 4 recites ‘a plurality of upper ribs’ disposed ‘on an upper surface’ of the cross member center component, with the upper ribs ‘extending so as to intersect the longitudinal direction of the vehicle.’ The walls 31, 32, 33, 34 of the boss 30 in Lee do not satisfy this limitation at least because: (1) the walls are components of a boss structure that defines a cavity, not ribs; (2) the walls are located at the side edges of the center tunnel 22 where the crossmember 15 couples, not on an upper surface of a cross member center component; and (3) the walls function to receive and couple with the crossmember end portion, not to provide structural reinforcement as ribs on an upper surface” (Remarks, Page 10). Examiner respectfully disagrees. With regard to point (1), the structures identified in the Fig. below define both ribs, and cavities between the ribs. With regard to point (2), the center tunnel 22 can be thought of as a thin sheet element that consists of an upper surface (or “top”) and a lower surface (or “bottom”). Thus, all the elements projecting from the top side of the sheet element are projecting from “an upper surface.” There is nothing in the claim that precludes this interpretation. With regard to point (3), the purpose of the ribs is irrelevant, although examiner disputes applicant’s assertion that the ribs do not provide structural reinforcement. Claim 4 is an apparatus claim that simply requires rib structures. Lee teaches these structures, as shown in the Fig. provided below.
PNG
media_image1.png
310
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 5, applicant argues that Natsume teaches “bolting to a seat rail 99. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a seat rail is not a leg of a seat” (Remarks, Page 11). Applicant continues, stating that “a leg of a seat is a structural support member that is part of the seat and extends downwardly from the seat to support the seat above the floor. A seat leg is fundamentally different from a seat rail. A seat rail is a floor mounted track that guides seat movement, whereas a seat leg is a component of the seat that provides vertical support” (Remarks, Page 12). Examiner respectfully disagrees, as applicant’s argument contradicts their own disclosure. From a purely visual perspective, Natsume’s element 99 is exactly the same thing as applicant’s element 54 (see Figs. provided below). Additionally, applicant’s specification states that “the leg of the seat may be an under rail 54 for a seat track” (Page 10, lines 1-2). Therefore, Natsume’s element 99 matches the term “seat leg” perfectly, in light of applicant’s specification. The rejection is maintained.
PNG
media_image2.png
230
234
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 - Applicant's "seat leg" 54
PNG
media_image3.png
250
254
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 - Natsume's "seat leg" 99
Drawings
The drawings were received on March 3, 2026. These drawings are not acceptable.
The drawings are objected to because:
The amended replacement sheet 2/3 has poor line quality, and does not meet the standards of 37 CFR 1.84(L). Note that the drawings must be viewed in the USPTO Patent Center in order to see this problem. The drawings likely contains grayscale elements, which cause image degradation in the USPTO electronic filing system. Drawings must be entirely bi-tonal, containing only black or white color values.
The section view identifiers I-I, II-II, and III-III do not correctly correspond to the figure numbers of the section views they correspond with. As stated in the previous Office Action, section view identifiers “I-I,” “II-II,” and “III-III” should be changed to III-III, V-V, and VI-VI, respectively, to correspond with Figs. 3, 5, and 6.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
With regard to claims 3 and 4, the phrase “the plurality of lower/upper ribs extending so as to intersect the longitudinal direction of the vehicle” is being interpreted to mean that the ribs can be shown to project in any direction that is not completely parallel with the longitudinal direction of the vehicle.
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 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2020/0180698, hereinafter Lee) in view of Tomozawa (US 2008/0231078).
With regard to claim 1, Lee discloses a vehicle floor structure (see annotated Fig. 3, provided below), comprising, a floor panel having a raised tunnel portion extending along the longitudinal direction of a vehicle; and
a floor cross member (15+22) extending along the lateral direction of the vehicle so as to traverse the tunnel portion (see Fig. 3 below), and being joined at both ends to left and right rockers (12, 13) extending along the left and right edges of the floor panel (see Fig. 3 below), and further joined to an upper surface of the floor panel (see Fig. 3 below, also note that paragraph 0054 states “an overlapped portion between the rear end of the front tunnel 21 and the front end of the center tunnel 22 may be coupled by welding and/or using fasteners”), wherein
the floor cross member comprises both a cross member center component (22) which is disposed so as to traverse the tunnel portion and made of an aluminum alloy cast with a recess formed in an undersurface of the cross member center component to accommodate the tunnel portion (Paragraph 0054, “the center tunnel 22 may be an aluminum cast product which is produced by casting an aluminum material.” Also, note that Fig. 3 of Lee illustrates the recess portion formed in the underside of the center component 22 that accommodates the vehicle tunnel), and left and right cross member side components (15), each of which is (via the connection that is illustrated in Fig. 7 of Lee),
the cross member center component comprises a base plate (see Fig. 4 below) disposed at the same height as an upper plate (see Fig. 4 below) of each of the left and right cross member side components, each of the upper plates extending straight along the lateral direction of the vehicle (see Fig. 4 below), with an end of each of the upper plates abutting against a corresponding one of contact surfaces (see Fig. 4 below) disposed at both lateral ends of the base plate,
the cross member center component has, in left and right end regions thereof, a top hat cross sectional shape (see Fig. 5 below); and
the top hat cross sectional shape of each of the cross member side components overlaps (see Fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
455
668
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 3
PNG
media_image5.png
400
644
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Figure 4
PNG
media_image6.png
220
523
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Figure 5
PNG
media_image7.png
287
368
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Figure 6
Lee fails to teach that the cross member side components each have a top hat cross sectional shape, and are each made of a steel plate. Lee instead discloses a closed cross-section having a bottom, 15d. Lee is also silent as to the material of the cross member side components, forcing one of ordinary skill in the art to look elsewhere to determine a suitable material for the cross member side components.
Tomozawa discloses a vehicle floor with a cross member (13) having a top hat cross-sectional shape (Fig. 1) and formed of a steel plate (e.g., Paragraph 0034).
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 Lee such that the cross members have an open bottom, rather than a closed bottom, with a reasonable expectation of success given that Tomozawa teaches the use of top-hat (i.e. open-bottom) cross members in a vehicle floor. The removal of the bottom portion 15d of the cross member 15 of Lee can provide weight savings in the vehicle, as portion 15d is redundant and overlapping with respect to the floor panel 11. Also, it would have been considered obvious to modify Lee by forming the cross member of steel plate, as even though Lee does not provide guidance for the side cross member materials, Tomozawa shows that it is known to utilize steel for cross members in vehicle floors, thereby providing a reasonable expectation of success in using such material.
With regard to claim 3, Lee teaches that the cross member center component comprises a plurality of lower ribs (26, see Fig. 3) disposed on the undersurface in a region facing a side wall of the tunnel portion (i.e. facing towards the tunnel element 21—see Fig. below), the plurality of lower ribs extending so as to intersect the longitudinal direction of the vehicle (see Fig. below).
PNG
media_image8.png
423
527
media_image8.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 4, Lee discloses a vehicle floor structure (see annotated Fig. 3, provided above), comprising, a floor panel having a raised tunnel portion extending along the longitudinal direction of a vehicle; and
a floor cross member (15+22) extending along the lateral direction of the vehicle so as to traverse the tunnel portion (see Fig. 3 above), and being joined at both ends to left and right rockers (12, 13) extending along the left and right edges of the floor panel (see Fig. 3 above), and further joined to an upper surface of the floor panel (see Fig. 3 above, also note that paragraph 0054 states “an overlapped portion between the rear end of the front tunnel 21 and the front end of the center tunnel 22 may be coupled by welding and/or using fasteners”), wherein
the floor cross member comprises both a cross member center component (22) which is disposed so as to traverse the tunnel portion and made of an aluminum alloy cast with a recess formed in an undersurface of the cross member center component to accommodate the tunnel portion (Paragraph 0054, “the center tunnel 22 may be an aluminum cast product which is produced by casting an aluminum material.” Also, note that Fig. 3 of Lee illustrates the recess portion formed in the underside of the center component 22 that accommodates the vehicle tunnel), and left and right cross member side components (15), each of which is (via the connection that is illustrated in Fig. 7 of Lee),
the cross member center component comprises a base plate (see Fig. 4 above) disposed at the same height as an upper plate (see Fig. 4 above) of each of the left and right cross member side components, each of the upper plates extending straight along the lateral direction of the vehicle (see Fig. 4 above), with an end of each of the upper plates abutting against a corresponding one of contact surfaces (see Fig. 4 above) disposed at both lateral ends of the base plate, and
the cross member center component comprises, on an upper surface thereof, a plurality of upper ribs extending so as to intersect the longitudinal direction of the vehicle (see Fig. below).
PNG
media_image1.png
310
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee fails to teach that the cross member side components are each made of a steel plate. Lee is silent as to the material of the cross member side components, forcing one of ordinary skill in the art to look elsewhere to determine a suitable material for the cross member side components.
Tomozawa discloses a vehicle floor with a cross member (13) formed of a steel plate (e.g., Paragraph 0034).
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 Lee such that the cross members were made of steel plate, as even though Lee does not provide guidance for the side cross member materials, Tomozawa shows that it is known to utilize steel for cross members in vehicle floors, thereby providing a reasonable expectation of success in using such material.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Tomozawa and Natsume et al. (US 11,008,048, hereinafter Natsume).
With regard to claim 5, Lee discloses a vehicle floor structure (see annotated Fig. 3, provided above), comprising, a floor panel having a raised tunnel portion extending along the longitudinal direction of a vehicle; and
a floor cross member (15+22) extending along the lateral direction of the vehicle so as to traverse the tunnel portion (see Fig. 3 above), and being joined at both ends to left and right rockers (12, 13) extending along the left and right edges of the floor panel (see Fig. 3 above), and further joined to an upper surface of the floor panel (see Fig. 3 above, also note that paragraph 0054 states “an overlapped portion between the rear end of the front tunnel 21 and the front end of the center tunnel 22 may be coupled by welding and/or using fasteners”), wherein
the floor cross member comprises both a cross member center component (22) which is disposed so as to traverse the tunnel portion and made of an aluminum alloy cast with a recess formed in an undersurface of the cross member center component to accommodate the tunnel portion (Paragraph 0054, “the center tunnel 22 may be an aluminum cast product which is produced by casting an aluminum material.” Also, note that Fig. 3 of Lee illustrates the recess portion formed in the underside of the center component 22 that accommodates the vehicle tunnel), and left and right cross member side components (15), each of which is (via the connection that is illustrated in Fig. 7 of Lee),
the cross member center component comprises a base plate (see Fig. 4 above) disposed at the same height as an upper plate (see Fig. 4 above) of each of the left and right cross member side components, each of the upper plates extending straight along the lateral direction of the vehicle (see Fig. 4 above), with an end of each of the upper plates abutting against a corresponding one of contact surfaces (see Fig. 4 above) disposed at both lateral ends of the base plate, and
the cross member center component (22) comprises an overlapping portion (see Fig. provided below) extending from the contact surface toward a lateral outside of the vehicle (see Fig. below), the overlapping portion designed to be overlaid on a part of the cross member side component (15), and
PNG
media_image9.png
312
438
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Lee fails to teach that the cross member side components are each made of a steel plate. Lee is silent as to the material of the cross member side components, forcing one of ordinary skill in the art to look elsewhere to determine a suitable material for the cross member side components.
Tomozawa discloses a vehicle floor with a cross member (13) formed of a steel plate (e.g., Paragraph 0034).
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 Lee such that the cross members were made of steel plate, as even though Lee does not provide guidance for the side cross member materials, Tomozawa shows that it is known to utilize steel for cross members in vehicle floors, thereby providing a reasonable expectation of success in using such material.
Lee, as modified by Tomozawa, fails to teach or suggest that the overlapping portion, the cross member side component, and a leg of a seat in the vehicle are bolted together.
Natsume teaches a vehicle floor in which a center cross member (50) overlaps a side cross member (14a), and an overlapping portion is bolted to a seat rail (99) (see annotated Fig. below). Note: The claim does not require that a single bolt connects all three elements together, but merely that they are “bolted” together.
PNG
media_image10.png
368
479
media_image10.png
Greyscale
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 Lee in view of Tomozawa such that the overlapping portion was also bolted to a seat rail as shown by Natsume, with a reasonable expectation of success given that Natsume teaches that such a configuration is known in the art and thus could be used to achieve the predictable result of reinforcing the tunnel area while providing additional support and deformation resistance for the seat in a side impact collision.
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