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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s information disclosure statement filed 9/12/2023 has been considered and is included in the file.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 2-3, “separated into front and back” should be changed to --separated--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “center of gravity of an opening”. It is unclear since the accepted meaning is “average location of a weight of an object.” The term is indefinite because an opening does not have mass, and therefore does not have a center of gravity.
Claims 2-7 are rejected for being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagashima et al. (JP 5288996, machine translation attached) in view of Mori (WO 2010/097690.
Regarding claim 1, Nagashima et al. discloses an impact absorber (1) comprising a hollow blow molded article (paragraph [0004] of the machine translation), wherein the blow molded article includes a front wall (4) and a back wall (5) separated into front and back (front and back sides of the absorber, Fig. 2) and facing each other and a side wall (3) connecting the front wall with the back wall (Figs. 1-2), the front wall (4) includes a tubular front side concave rib (6) formed by indenting the front wall (Fig. 1), the back wall (5) includes a tubular back side concave rib (7) formed by indenting the back wall (Figs. 1-2), and the front side concave rib and the back side concave rib have distal end portions welded to each other (Fig. 2, at (8), paragraph [0009] of the machine translation), at least one of the front side concave rib (6) and the back side concave rib (7) has a buckling induction section (9) formed as origin of buckling for impact absorption (Figs, 1-2, 8, paragraphs [0010] and [0013] of the machine translation teach the buckling induction section provides the initial point of buckling), and when a load is applied in an axial direction (from the top to the bottom of Fig. 1) of the front side concave rib (6) and the back side concave rib (7), the at least one of the front side concave rib (6) and the back side concave rib (7) is configured to cause at least one of center of gravity of an opening surrounded by an opening edge of the front side concave rib (As best understood with respect to the 112b rejection, Fig. 2, midpoint of opening along (4)) and center of gravity of an opening surrounded by an opening edge of the back side concave rib (As best understood with respect to the 112b rejection, Fig. 2, midpoint of opening along (5)) to buckle in a mode of moving in a direction crossing the axial direction by the buckling induction section.
Nagashima et al. does not explicitly disclose buckling in a mode of moving in a direction crossing the axial direction by the buckling induction section.
Mori, like Nagashima et al., teaches an impact absorber (1), and further teaches buckling in a mode of moving in a direction crossing the axial direction by the buckling induction section ((13) and (14), paragraphs [0044] and [0065], see annotated Figs. 6A and 6B below, buckling induction section (14) is shown to move, crossing the central axis).
PNG
media_image1.png
342
598
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6A of Mori
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the impact absorber of Nagashima et al. to provide buckling in a mode of moving in a direction crossing the axial direction by the buckling induction section as taught by Mori, with a reasonable expectation of success, by providing buckling induction sections on diagonally opposite sides of the impact absorber in order to provide compressive deformation providing a convex-concave deformation for efficient dampening of the impact force (Mori: paragraph [0052]). Please note in the combination, the shape of the tubular front side concave rib and tubular back side concave rib is taught by Nagashima et al. and the positioning of the buckling induction section is taught by Mori.
PNG
media_image2.png
460
596
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6B of Mori
Regarding claim 2, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori teaches the impact absorber of claim 1, and teaches (references to Mori) wherein the buckling induction section ((13) and/or (14)) is provided in an inhomogeneous position in a circumferential direction of at least one of the first side concave rib and the back side concave rib (each of (13) and/or (14) are only positioned at one point along a circumferential direction.
Regarding claim 3, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori teaches the impact absorber of claim 1, and teaches wherein the front side concave rib is provided with a front side buckling induction section (Fig. 8 of Nagashima et al. modified by (13) of Mori), and the back side concave rib is provided with a back side buckling induction section (Fig. 8 of Nagashima et al. modified by (14) of Mori).
Regarding claim 4, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori teaches the impact absorber of claim 3, and teaches (references to Mori) wherein the front side buckling induction section (13) is provided in a position in a first direction orthogonal to the axial direction on a tubular surrounding wall of the front side concave rib ((13) on the surrounding wall of (1), along (11)), and the back side buckling induction section (14) is provided in a position in a second direction orthogonal to the axial direction on a surrounding wall of the back side concave rib and shifted 90 degrees or more to the first direction (Fig. 6A shows (14) with a shift of approximately 180 degrees from (13) along the axial direction).
Regarding claim 5, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori teaches the impact absorber of claim 4, and teaches (references to Mori) wherein the front side buckling induction section (13) is configured to cause the front side concave rib to buckle in a mode of moving the front side buckling induction section in a direction opposite to the first direction (the movement shown from Fig. 6A to 6B provides a direction opposite of the first direction), and the back side buckling induction section (14) is configured to cause the back side concave rib to buckle in a mode of moving the back side buckling induction section in a direction opposite to the second direction (the movement shown from Fig. 6A to 6B provides a direction opposite of the second direction).
Regarding claim 6, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori teaches the impact absorber of claim 5, and teaches (references to Mori) wherein the first direction is a direction shifted 180 degrees to the second direction (Fig. 6A shows the first and second directions in a shift of 180 degrees between them).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagashima et al. (JP 5288996, machine translation attached) in view of Mori (WO 2010/097690 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamada et al. (JP 2017/214954, machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 7, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori teaches the impact absorber of claim 1, and Mori teaches one extended rib with a front side and a back side (Fig. 6A). However, Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori does not explicitly teach wherein the impact absorber includes only one of the front side concave rib and only one of the back side concave rib.
Tamada et al., like Nagashima et al., teaches an impact absorber (1) and further teaches wherein the impact absorber includes only one of the front side concave rib (1 fa) and only one of the back side concave rib (1 ra).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the impact absorber of Nagashima et al. as modified by Mori to provide only one of the front side concave rib and only one of the back side concave rib as taught by Tamada et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, having already identified the benefits of the z-shaped deformation created by the buckling induction sections on one item in Mori, it would be obvious to try one set of concave ribs to determine if the advantages are there, and additionally, based on desired side of the impact absorber, only one set of concave ribs would be reasonable to place if no room for additional ribs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Aouadi (US 6695393), Hirose (US 20140191532), Hedderly (US 20080169682), Kimura (JP 2013044407) teach impact absorbers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate Friday.
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, Peter M Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643