DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s Response, dated 13 April 2026, which papers have been made of record.
Claims 20-38 are currently presented for examination, of which claims 35-38 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 20-34, in the reply filed on 13 April 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Applicant disagrees with the characterization of Toller. Applicant asserts that reference numbers 4 and 4.1 identify shells which form crash boxes 3 and 3.1, not bushings. Applicant further asserts that reference numbers 5 and 5.1 identify baseplates for connecting the crash boxes 3 and 3.1 to longitudinal members of the vehicle frame, not receptacles for bushings. Applicant provides an annotated Figure at page 2 of the Response identifying structure 16 as the bushing.
This is not found persuasive because the claims are sufficiently broad such that multiple different structures can be interpreted as the structures of the shared technical feature. Applicant and the examiner have identified different structures which can be interpreted as bushings, and the examiner remains convinced that structures 4 and 4.1 can be interpreted as bushings with respect to the rejection of claim 20.
Applicant further appears to argue that the “outward flaring of the bushing opening in the wall results in various advantages including a more even distributing of force in the wall, particularly in the case of sudden loads originating from the bushing.” (Response at page 3). The asserted features are not shared technical features, but are alleged improvements or advances flowing from the shared technical features, and are not necessarily part of the analysis of the shared technical features. In particular, the shared technical feature is silent as to any welding, and features incorporated from the Specification do not necessarily limit or modify the shared technical feature.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 20-34 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “conical” in claim 20 is used by the claim to mean “having a circular base which tapers to a smaller circular end” or “the shape of a truncated cone,” while the accepted meaning is “having the shape of a cone which tapers from a circular base to a point” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claims 21-34 each depend from claim 20, and therefore are rejected for at least the reasons presented above with respect to claim 20.
Claim 21 recites “wherein an angle of inclination of the lateral surface of the bushing and contour of the collar are coordinated such that, with a welded connection between the collar and the bushing, a gap that opens with respect to a gap width is formed on a side of the welded connection facing away from the welding energy input” at lines 1-4. It is unclear how one having ordinary skill in the art would determine how a welded connection faces away from a welding energy input. Claim 21, and claim 20 from which it depends, is understood to be directed to product. The examiner notes that there is no recited input of energy in the product, because there are no method steps being performed, such that it is unclear what direction “facing away from the welding energy input” is or would mean to one having ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the welding energy input" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites “wherein the bushing has a line contact with the collar before welding” at lines 1-2. Claim 23 is understood to be directed to a product, such that there is no method step or temporal component understood to occur or have occured. It is unclear how one having ordinary skill in the art would determine that there is a “before welding.” While other claims recite a “welded connection” there is no way to determine whether the product exists before welding.
Claim 27 recites “wherein a minimum gap width formed by the gap base is large enough for a corrosion-inhibiting coating to reach the gap base” in lines 4-5. Page 5, lines 26-28 of the Specification teaches that “a zinc coating of the shell, are conducted away from the weld pool via this pathway” and page 12, lines 21-25 teaches “the width of the gap base and thus the minimum gap width of the gap 16 is designed to be sufficiently large so that the gap 16 having its gap base can be wetted circumferentially by a corrosion-inhibiting coating.” While one exemplary corrosion inhibiting coating is described, there is nothing of record to suggest that the zing coating is the only corrosion inhibiting coating. It is unclear what minimum dimensions are necessary to allow for the transmission of a corrosion inhibiting coating through a gap, and thus it is unclear what minimum gap dimensions are required by the claim.
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.
Claims 20, 22-25, 28-30, and 33-34
Claims 20, 22-25, 28-30, and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by German Patent Document DE 102019124020 to Toller et al. (hereinafter “Toller”; machine translation provided by Applicant on 7 December 2023).
Regarding claim 20, Toller discloses a motor vehicle support member (see Figs. 1-4) comprising: a structured shell (2) and a bushing (4, 4.1), the shell having a wall (see Fig. 2; wall surrounding member 4 at left side of Figure near arrows) with a recess (portion at arrows surrounding reference character 15) therein, and the bushing (4, 4.1) held in the recess of the wall (see Fig. 2) for receiving and/or mounting a further component (intended use; see Fig. 4; member 16 shown extending through bushing), wherein the recess has a conical collar (portions at 13, 13.1), which is flared in a longitudinal direction (left-right direction with respect to Fig. 2) of the bushing (4, 4.1) and thus protrudes from a plane (plane into and out of page defined in up-down direction with respect to Fig. 2) of the wall of the shell (2), as a receptacle for the bushing (4, 4.1) and the bushing is fixed thereon (parts understood to be secured together in Fig. 2), wherein the bushing, in a section thereof fixed on the collar (at 13, 13.1), has a conical lateral surface (see Fig. 2; radially/uppermost and bottommost portions of bushings tapers in a frustoconical manner).
PNG
media_image1.png
469
774
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the shell (2) has legs (at 13, 13.1; see Fig. 2) which are spaced apart from one another by the wall (see Fig. 2; wall surrounding portion of 4, 4.1 near reference numeral 15).
Regarding claim 23, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the bushing (4, 4.1) has a line contact with the collar before welding or contacts the collar (see Annotated Figure above) with a contact section (see Fig. 2; contact section between leftmost end of members 4, 4.1 and rightmost end of shell at lead lines 13, 13.1 in Fig. 2; select a section of this region which has dimension equal to the material thickness equal to the collar) over a contact surface (material surface of bushing abutting collar; see Annotated Figure) wherein an extension of the contact surface (material surface of bushing abutting collar) in the contact section (see Fig. 2) in the longitudinal direction (left-right direction of Fig. 2) of the bushing (4, 4.1) is not greater than twice a material thickness of the collar (contact region selected has a dimension equal to material thickness of collar). The examiner takes the position that the contact section can be defined as being less than an entirety of the portions of the bushing surface in contact with the collar.
Regarding claim 24, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that a joint (vertically aligned portion of collar abutting bushing; see Fig. 2) of the collar (see Annotated Figure above) is spaced apart from an end (rightmost end of bushing 4, 4.1 is spaced from collar by majority of the bushing bodies) of the bushing (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 25, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that a base surface of the collar (see Annotated Figure above) is round (see Fig. 1; radial interior surface of collar surrounding bushing 4, 4.1 and member 16 understood to have curved portions and thus is “round”).
Regarding claim 28, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the collar (see Annotated Figure above) makes circumferential contact with the bushing (4, 4.1; see Fig. 2, collar shown in contact with bushing).
Regarding claim 29, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the lateral surface of the bushing, in a region thereof that contacts the, has spacers extending in the longitudinal direction of the bushing in the form of thickenings via which the bushing contacts the collar and/or the collar (see Annotated Figure above), in a region thereof that contacts the lateral surface of the bushing (4, 4.1) has spacers (regions of collar abutting thickened arrows adjacent region 15; see Fig. 2) extending in the longitudinal direction of the bushing (left-right direction with respect to Fig. 2) in the form of thickenings (collar understood to be thickened at surface abutting bushing 4, 4.1) or embossings via which the collar contacts the lateral surface of the bushing (see Fig. 2; radially/uppermost and bottommost portions of bushings tapers in a frustoconical manner), such that, between the bushing and the collar, a gap results in areas between the spacers (see Fig. 2; there is a gap between each of the regions interpreted as spacers in the vertical direction with respect to the Figure).
Regarding claim 30, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the shell (2) is a first shell (shell surface at 13; see right side of overall shell 2 in Fig. 2), the support member (see Fig. 2) comprises a second shell (shell surface at 6 and 7; see left side of Fig. 2) and the second shell has a wall (central wall portion at 6.1 in Fig. 2) with a recess (concave portion at 6.1 facing rightward in Fig. 2) axially aligned with the recess of the first shell (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 33, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 30, and further Toller discloses that the first shell (shell surface at 13; see right side of overall shell 2 in Fig. 2) is a hat profile (see Fig. 2) and the second shell (shell surface at 6 and 7; see left side of Fig. 2) is a closing plate complementary thereto (shells understood to have complementary shapes which would substantially mate if abutted together).
Regarding claim 34, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the support member is a bumper cross beam (bumper cross member; see English machine translation at paragraph [0020]) and the bushing (4, 4.1) is a towing sleeve for connecting a towing eye (intended use; any vehicle structure could be indirectly connected to a towing eye).
Alternatively, claims 20, 22-25, 28, 30 and 33-34
Alternatively regarding claim 20, Toller discloses a motor vehicle support member comprising: a structured shell (2) and a bushing (16), the shell having a wall (17) with a recess (interior of portions 8.1, 8.2) therein, and the bushing (16) held in the recess of the wall (17) for receiving and/or mounting a further component (intended use), wherein the recess has a conical collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2 shown in Fig. 4 understood to taper toward left and define a frusto-conical body), which is flared in a longitudinal direction (left-right direction with respect to Fig. 4) of the bushing (16) and thus protrudes from a plane (plane defined into the page and in up-down direction with respect to Fig. 4) of the wall of the shell (2), as a receptacle for the bushing (16) and the bushing is fixed thereon (components in Fig. 2 understood to be secured together), wherein the bushing, in a section thereof fixed on the collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2), has a conical lateral surface (see Fig. 4; sidewall of bushing understood to taper towards left, forming a frusto-conical shape).
Regarding claim 22, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the shell (2) has legs (portions of shell at lead lines 8 and 8.3; see Fig. 4) which are spaced apart from one another by the wall (17).
Regarding claim 23, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the bushing (16) has a line contact with the collar before welding or contacts the collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2) with a contact section (leftmost end of collar abutting outer surface of bushing) over a contact surface (substantially horizontally extending surface adjacent lead line 17, see Fig. 4) wherein an extension of the contact surface in the contact section in the longitudinal direction of the bushing (16; left-right direction with respect to Fig. 4) is not greater than twice a material thickness of the collar (contact surface at lead line 17 is in contact with bushing at the collar with thickness equal to the thickness to the collar).
Regarding claim 24, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that a joint (portion of bushing abutting material of collar at lead line 17; see Fig. 4) of the collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2) is spaced apart from an end (see Fig. 4; left and right end of bushing shown spaced from terminal ends of collar) of the bushing (16).
Regarding claim 25, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that a base surface of the collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2) is round (see Fig. 3b; radial interior surface of collar surrounding bushing 16 understood to have curved portions and thus is “round”).
Regarding claim 28, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2) makes circumferential contact with the bushing (16; see Figs. 3b and 4, collar shown in contact with bushing).
Regarding claim 30, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the shell (2) is a first shell (shell surface at 13; see right side of overall shell 2 in Fig. 2), the support member (see Fig. 2) comprises a second shell (shell surface at 6 and 7; see left side of Fig. 2) and the second shell has a wall (central wall portion at 6.1 in Fig. 2) with a recess (concave portion at 6.1 facing rightward in Fig. 2) axially aligned with the recess of the first shell (see Figs. 2, 3b, and 4).
Regarding claim 33, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 30, and further Toller discloses that the first shell (shell surface at 13; see right side of overall shell 2 in Fig. 2) is a hat profile (see Fig. 2) and the second shell (shell surface at 6 and 7; see left side of Fig. 2) is a closing plate complementary thereto (shells understood to have complementary shapes which would substantially mate if abutted together).
Regarding claim 34, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the support member is a bumper cross beam (bumper cross member; see English machine translation at paragraph [0020]) and the bushing (16) is a towing sleeve (see paragraph [0029]) for connecting a towing eye (intended use).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 26-27
Claims 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toller as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2019/0344385 to Toller et al. (hereinafter “Toller ‘385”)
Regarding claim 26, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the bushing (4, 4.1) is fixed on the collar by welding (see paragraph [0021]; bushing welded together to secure the bushing). Toller does not explicitly disclose that the welding is laser welding.
Toller ‘385 teaches joining vehicle support structures together by a conventional joining technique (see paragraph [0017]) which may be welding. Toller ‘385 teaches that the welding technique can be a welding technique such as MIG or laser welding (paragraph [0017]), which can be advantageously implemented in one stage, beneficially improving the production process.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device taught by Toller to have joined its components using a conventional joining technique such as laser welding, as taught by Toller ‘385. (See MPEP 2143(1)(C)). The resulting device would predictably be joined together in a known and conventional manner without departing from the teachings of Toller, which teaches welding, but provide advantages in the production process of the product of the resulting combination.
Thus, the combination of Toller and Toller ‘385 teaches the limitations of claim 26.
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Toller and Toller ‘385 teaches the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller teaches that a weld seam (see paragraph [0021]; seam formed between bushing longitudinal joint; see Fig. 2) extends into a gap (gap understood to be spaced between leftmost end of bushings 4, 4.1 and rightmost of shell portion adjacent reference numeral 15) between the bushing (4, 4.1) and the collar (see Annotated Figure) and as a result a gap base (empty space shown in Fig. 2) is formed in the gap, wherein opposing surfaces of the collar (see Annotated Figure above) and the bushing (leftmost faces of 4, 4.1 in Fig. 2) are spaced apart by the gap base, and wherein an a minimum gap width formed by the gap base is large enough for corrosion-inhibiting coating to reach the gap base (intended use; visible space in Fig. 2 could receive corrosion inhibiting coating).
Alternatively, regarding claim 26, Toller discloses the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller discloses that the bushing (16) is fixed on the collar by welding (see paragraph [0034]; bushing welded to surface at 17). Toller does not explicitly disclose that the welding is laser welding.
Toller ‘385 teaches joining vehicle support structures together by a conventional joining technique (see paragraph [0017]) which may be welding. Toller ‘385 teaches that the welding technique can be a welding technique such as MIG or laser welding (paragraph [0017]), which can be advantageously implemented in one stage, beneficially improving the production process.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device taught by Toller to have joined its components using a conventional joining technique such as laser welding, as taught by Toller ‘385. (See MPEP 2143(1)(C)). The resulting device would predictably be joined together in a known and conventional manner without departing from the teachings of Toller, which teaches welding, but provide advantages in the production process of the product of the resulting combination.
Thus, the combination of Toller and Toller ‘385 teaches the limitations of claim 26.
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Toller and Toller ‘385 teaches the limitations of claim 20, and further Toller teaches that a weld seam (see paragraph [0034]; seam formed between bushing and surface 17; see Fig. 4) extends into a gap (gap understood to be spaced between circumferential surface at 17 and leftmost flared portion of bushing 16) between the bushing (16) and the collar (walls of 8.1, 8.2) and as a result a gap base (empty space shown in Fig. 4) is formed in the gap, wherein opposing surfaces of the collar (radially inward surfaces of the collar walls at 8.1, 8.2) and the bushing (16) are spaced apart by the gap base (see Fig. 4), and wherein an a minimum gap width formed by the gap base is large enough for corrosion-inhibiting coating to reach the gap base (intended use; visible space in Fig. 4 could receive corrosion inhibiting coating).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21, and 31-32 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 21, the prior art of record does not explicitly disclose “wherein an angle of inclination of the lateral surface of the bushing and contour of the collar are coordinated such that, with a welded connection between the collar and the bushing, a gap that opens with respect to a gap width is formed on a side of the welded connection facing away from the welding energy input,” in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. The examiner notes that the claimed limitation is understood to reflect a method step of welding using a welding energy input, however claim 21 is understood to be a product claim and not a method claim, such that there is never any welding energy input.
Regarding claim 31, the prior art of record does not explicitly disclose or fairly teach “wherein the recess of the second shell has a conical collar which is flared in the longitudinal direction of the busing, wherein the bushing, in sections thereof fixed to the collars of the two shells, has a respective conical lateral surface complementary to the respective collar, wherein taper angles of the collars are not smaller than respective taper angles of the respective lateral surface of the bushing, and wherein the collars are flared in opposite directions to one another,” and further in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
United States Patent Application Publication 2016/0121830 to Rabe et al. teaches a vehicle support structure having a shell-type construction (see paragraph [0004]) with a conical member (frustoconical end of member 13; see Fig. 3) connected to the shell.
United States Patent Application Publication 2005/0023076 to Huff et al. teaches a vehicle support structure (see Fig. 2) with a bushing (4) extending through the vehicle support structure (see Fig. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRELL C. FORD whose telephone number is (313)446-6515. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM to 5:15 PM, Monday to 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/DARRELL C FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights