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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group III (claims 1-2 and 45) and species 2 (fig. 13) in the reply filed on 4/2/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-7, 10-11, 14, 16, 19, 22, 24-25, 27-28, 35-36, 48-49, and 51 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/2/26.
Applicant states on pg. 12 that “Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 16, 19, 27, 28, 35, 36, 45, 48, 49, and 51 encompass the elected group.” However, Applicant elected group III which is encompassed by claims 1-2 and 45. Claims 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 16, 19, 27, 28, 35, 36, 48, 49, and 51 are each directed to one of non-elected groups I-II, IV and V. Accordingly, claims 6-7, 10-11, 14, 16, 19, 22, 24-25, 27-28, 35-36, 48-49, and 51 have been withdrawn from further consideration.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Austria on 4/30/21. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the A 60126/2021 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 and 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Soanes (GB 2574895 A).
As to claim 1, Soanes teaches a platform for a dummy for simulating traffic situations, the platform comprising;
a base body 2 which comprises a bottom surface (bottom surface shown in fig. 2) and a surface (upper surface in fig. 1) which is formed opposed to the bottom surface,
at least one roller element 6 which is arranged at the bottom surface,
wherein the at least one roller element is configured such that the base body is displaceable along a ground by the roller element (see the abstract and pg. 5 at lines 5-21),
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (AS)][AltContent: textbox (AR)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 1)]
PNG
media_image1.png
386
762
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the base body comprises an attachment region AR (fig. 1 above) and an installation region (at the underside of the platform where the roller element 6 is installed – fig. 3; alternatively, the upper surface of the platform, excluding the attachment region, can be considered an installation region, since it is capable of having something installed on it),
wherein on an attachment surface AS (fig. 1 above) of the attachment region, an attachment device 4 for attaching the dummy is formed (see pg. 4 lines 26-27, which teaches that a soft target can be mounted via attachment device 4; the soft target of Soanes can be considered a dummy, as broadly recited; alternatively, the dummy is not positively recited as part of the claimed platform, so the attachment device 4 is capable of use for attaching a dummy),
wherein in the installation region, functional elements (e.g., at least motors on the underside of the platform – see figs. 3-4 and pg. 5 lines 5-21) are installable (alternatively, the functional elements are not positively recited as part of the claimed platform, meaning that the installation region is capable of use for the installation of functional elements),
wherein the base body is configured, such that a collision vehicle can drive over the base body without damage (the collision vehicle is not positively recited as part of the claimed platform; accordingly, the base body is capable of being driven over by a collision vehicle configured such that the base body is configured, such that the collision vehicle can drive over the base body without damage).
As to claim 45, Soanes teaches at least one of the following features:
wherein the roller element comprises a roller axis (abstract).
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Wirthl et al. (US 20220185264 A1, hereafter Wirthl).
As to claim 1, Wirthl teaches a platform 10 for a dummy 92 for simulating traffic situations, the platform comprising:
a base body 10 which comprises a bottom surface (at cover 100 – fig. 8 and ¶46) and a surface (upper surface) which is formed opposed to the bottom surface,
at least one roller element 28 which is arranged at the bottom surface,
wherein the at least one roller element is configured such that the base body is displaceable along a ground by the roller element (¶40),
[AltContent: textbox (14X)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
202
678
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the base body comprises an attachment region 16 and an installation region 14X (fig. 6 above; ¶46),
wherein on an attachment surface (upper surface) of the attachment region, an attachment device 96 for attaching the dummy is formed,
wherein in the installation region, functional elements are installable (¶46), wherein the base body is configured such that a collision vehicle can drive over the base body without a damage (the base body is capable of being driven over a collision vehicle in such a manner).
As to claim 2, Wirthl teaches the platform according to claim 1, comprising at least one of the following features:
wherein the base body is configured in a step-shaped manner (fig. 6).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 45 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11092515 (hereinafter Haffelner). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
As to instant claim 1, Haffelner recites a platform for a dummy (the test object of Haffelner’s claim 1 is capable of use as a dummy; alternatively; Haffelner’s platform is capable of having a dummy attached to it at the attachment device recited on col. 18 lines 66-67) for simulating traffic situations (Haffelner’s platform is capable of use for using the dummy to simulate traffic situations), the platform comprising:
a base body (comprising a base body, attachment device and installation box of Haffelner’s claim 1) which comprises a bottom surface and a surface “attachment surface” which is formed opposed to the bottom surface (see claim 1 of Haffelner),
at least one roller element which is arranged at the bottom surface (see claim 1 of Haffelner),
wherein the at least one roller element is configured such that the base body is displaceable along a ground by the roller element (see claim 1 of Haffelner),
wherein the base body comprises an attachment region (having the attachment device of Haffelner’s claim 1) and an installation region (having the installation box of Haffelner’s claim 1) ,
wherein on an attachment surface of the attachment region, an attachment device for attaching the dummy is formed (see claim 1 of Haffelner),
wherein in the installation region, functional elements are installable (see claim 1 of Haffelner; note that the functional elements are not positively recited as part of the claimed apparatus; accordingly, it can alternatively be considered that the installation region of Haffelner is capable of having functional elements installed via the installation box recited by Haffelner), wherein the base body is configured such that a collision vehicle can drive over the base body without damage (the collision vehicle is not positively recited as part of the claimed apparatus; accordingly, the base body is capable of fitting under a collision vehicle that is configured to drive over the base body without damage).
As to instant claim 45, claim 16 of Haffelner recites wherein the roller element comprises a roller axis (at least due to being rotatable on an axle as recited by Haffelner).
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of Haffelner in view of Wirthl et al. (US 20220185264 A1, hereinafter Wirthl).
As to instant claim 2, Haffelner recites the platform according to claim 1, except for at least one of the following features:
wherein the base body is configured in a step-shaped manner;
wherein the attachment thickness is less than 40 mm, or
wherein the installation thickness is less than 60 mm or less than 55 mm or
wherein the maximum thickness of the platform between a ground support of the roller element on the ground and the surface is less than 60 mm or less than 55 mm;
wherein the attachment region comprises more than 30% of the surface of the base body;
wherein between the installation region and the attachment region, a transition region is formed,
wherein the surface in the transition region comprises an angle, α, to the surface in the installation region or the attachment region between 5° and 45°.
Wirthl teaches a platform with a base body configured in a low-profile, step-shaped manner with a minimal radar cross section (figs. 3-6; ¶9 and ¶30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Haffelner such that base body is configured in a step-shaped manner with a minimal radar cross section as taught by Wirthl to desirably prevent ADAS sensors from registering the platform (¶5-6 and ¶32 of Wirthl).
Haffelner as modified teaches the platform according to claim 1, comprising at least one of the following features:
wherein the base body is configured in a step-shaped manner (in view of Wirthl).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20200003658 A1 and US 20130162479 A1 teach various elements relevant to the disclosed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUBEN C PARCO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1968. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/R.C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights