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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 12-20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabe et al. (US 2018/0236863) in view of JP 2010-274848.
Kawabe et al. discloses a floor structure for a passenger car (B) comprising a first side skirt (11) that defines a first cavity, a second side skirt (11) that defines a second cavity, and a vehicle floor (21) connected to the first and second side skirts (11) at the lateral edges of the vehicle floor, as shown in Figures 1 and 2. A plurality of crossbeams (31a,31b,57,58) extend between the first side skirt (11) and the second side skirt (11), as shown in Figures 1, 2, and 5-11. A first energy absorption element (41) runs along the first side skirt (11) and extends over an entire length of the first side skirt (11) and a second energy absorption element (41) runs along the second side skirt (11) and extends over an entire length of the second side skirt (11), as shown in Figures 2, 5, and 7A. The plurality of crossbeams (31a,31b,57,58) are arranged at different heights in a vertical direction of the passenger car across a course of the floor structure in a longitudinal direction of the passenger car, as shown in Figure 9. The first and second energy absorption elements (41) are arranged in a transverse direction of the passenger car and in the vertical direction of the passenger car at least partially overlap with the plurality of crossmembers (31a,31b,57,58), as shown in Figures 2 and 9.
In reference to claim 13, the first energy absorption element (41) is arranged inside the first cavity and the second absorption element (41) is arranged inside the second cavity, as shown in Figure 2.
In reference to claim 17, the first and second energy absorption elements (41) extend in a central region at least substantially at a level of crossmembers (31a,31b) of the plurality of crossmembers that run above a base plate (21) of the vehicle floor, as shown in Figures 1 and 2.
In reference to claim 18, the first and second absorption elements (41) run with respective front end region at a level of a crossmember (58a) of the plurality of crossmembers that runs underneath the vehicle floor (21), as shown in Figures 1 9, and 11.
In reference to claim 19, the first and second energy absorption elements (41) run with the respective rear end region at a level of a crossmember (58b) of the plurality of crossmembers that run underneath the vehicle floor (21), as shown in Figures 1, 9, and 11.
In reference to claim 20, the first and second energy absorption elements (41) run in the respective central region at least substantially above an energy storage device (51) arranged underneath the vehicle floor (21) and between the first and second sills (11), as shown in Figures 1 and 2.
In reference to claim 22, a modular system for a body of a motor vehicle comprises an electrically operable construction variant and a side sill (11) of a floor structure (21), as shown in Figures 1 and 2 and disclosed in paragraph [0027]. The side sill (11) has a hollow profile at least in a longitudinal region, as shown in Figure 2.
However, Kawabe et al. does not disclose each energy absorption element having a non-linear longitudinal region.
JP 2010-274848 teaches forming an energy absorption element (25) that has a non-linear longitudinal region in a longitudinal course, as shown in Figures 1-5.
PNG
media_image1.png
527
735
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 14, each energy absorption element (25) has a central region, a front end region, and a rear end region wherein the front end region and the rear end region are connected with the central region by a respective non-linear transition region, as shown in Figure 4.
In reference to claim 15, the front end region and the rear end region are non-linear with the respective central region, as shown in Figure 4.
In reference to claim 16, the front end region and the rear end region are lowered downwards with respect to the central region, as shown in Figure 4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the first and second energy absorption elements of Kawabe et al. with non-linear longitudinal region with the front and rear ends are lowered downwards with respect to the central region, as taught by JP 2010-274848, with a reasonable expectation for success to increase impact absorbing effect in the vehicle front-back direction to improve vehicle safety while maintaining side impact protection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 February 27, 2026