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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements submitted on 1/29/2025 and 11/30/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 7 is 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.
The term “essentially” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sack-shaped” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 4, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gloyne-Valentine et al. (GB2642228A) (hereinafter Valentine).
Regarding claim 1, Valentine discloses:
A roof module for forming a vehicle roof of a motor vehicle, the roof module comprising: [See Valentine, ¶ 0034-0035, Figs. 1, 2a-2c discloses providing a sensor on a vehicle roof.]
a panel component whose outer surface at least partially forms a roof skin of the vehicle roof, and [See Valentine, ¶ 0018, 0049-0050 discloses a sensor cover panel component. When the sensor 104 is stowed, the sensor cover panel 132 may sit flush with the roof panel 106 for protection of the sensor 104 and for a smooth overall aesthetic of the roof portion of the vehicle.]
an opening in which at least one environmental sensor is disposed, [See Valentine, ¶ 0018, 0022, 0037-0040, 0049, 0052 discloses retracting and extending an environmental sensor from a roof of a vehicle; See Valentine, Figs. 2a-2c illustrate a sensor housing 102 arranged in an opening/aperture formed between a roof panel portion (106) and a front header (156) of a vehicle. Particularly, it is noted that “the sensor housing 102 defines a cavity for receiving the sensor 104.”]
the environmental sensor being configured to send and/or receive electromagnetic signals for detecting the vehicle environment, [See Valentine, ¶ 0015 discloses that an attached sensor may be a radar, a visible image capture device, an infra-red image capture device, an ultra-violet image capture device, or another computer-vision device. One of ordinary skill would readily understand that it is routine and conventional in the art for sensors to both send and receiving electromagnetic signals which are representative of an environment said sensor is detecting.]
wherein the at least one environmental sensor is configured to be displaced between a retracted position and a deployed position, and that a set of weatherstrips surrounding the opening and comprising at least one drain is configured to collect liquid entering through the opening at the at least one drain. [See Valentine, ¶ 0018, 0022, 0037-0040, 0049, 0052 discloses deploying, or retracting and extending an environmental sensor from a roof of a vehicle; See Valentine, ¶ 0050 discloses that the roof panel 106 may comprise a seal (or, “weatherstrip”) located around the perimeter of the sensor housing, and around the perimeter of the sensor cover panel. The seal is configured to provide a fluid-tight seal between the sensor cover panel and the roof panel; See Valentine, ¶ 0052-0053 discloses that the sensor housing may comprise one or more fluid draining conduits.]
Regarding claim 4, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Valentine discloses:
wherein the set of weatherstrips comprises a first weatherstrip portion which is disposed along the circumference of the opening and at least configured to seal the opening when the at least one environmental sensor is in the retracted position by being in contact with a first mating weatherstrip portion of the at least one environmental sensor [See Valentine, ¶ 0050 discloses that roof panel may comprise a seal located around the perimeter of the sensor housing, and around the perimeter of the sensor cover panel when the sensor is stowed. The seal is configured to provide a fluid-tight seal between the sensor cover panel and the roof panel when the sensor is in the stowed position.] and to seal the opening when the at least one environmental sensor is in the deployed position by being in contact with a second mating weatherstrip portion of the at least one environmental sensor. [See Valentine, ¶ 0051 discloses the roof system may comprise a sensor base panel having a base panel seal around the perimeter of the sensor base panel. The sensor base panel and base panel seal may be configured to, when the sensor is deployed as in Figure 2B, form a fluid-tight seal between the sensor base panel and the roof panel and/or sensor housing.]
Regarding claim 6, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Valentine discloses:
wherein the at least one environmental sensor comprises a sensor housing, [See Valentine, ¶ 0037-0039, Figs. 2a-2c discloses a sensor housing 102.]
and the set of weatherstrips comprises a second weatherstrip portion which extends in a flexibly movable manner between the first weatherstrip portion and the housing and on which the at least one drain is disposed. [See Valentine, ¶ 0050-0052 discloses a seal 202, 204 located around the perimeter of a sensor housing 102. The seal 202, 204 is configured to provide a (e.g. fluid fight) seal between the sensor cover panel 132 and the roof panel 106 when the sensor 104 is in the stowed position. Figures 2A and 2B also show a seal 206, 208 located on seal brackets within the sensor housing 102 configured to provide additional sealing to the sealing provided by the seal 202, 204 on the roof panel 106. Such a "double seal" may improve the prevention of water ingress to the sensor housing 102 by channeling water out of the sensor housing 102. Additionally, the roof system 100 may in some examples, as shown, comprise a sensor base panel 210 having a base panel seal (not shown) around the perimeter of the sensor base panel 210. The sensor base panel 210 and base panel seal may be configured to, when the sensor is deployed as in Figure 2B, form a (e.g. fluid tight) seal between the sensor base panel 210 and the roof panel 106 and/or sensor housing 102.]
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.
Claim(s) 2, 5, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gloyne-Valentine et al. (GB2642228A) (hereinafter Valentine) in view of Day et al. (US 20200114836 A1) (hereinafter Day).
Regarding claim 2, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Valentine does not appear to explicitly disclose:
wherein the set of weatherstrips comprises at least one funnel-shaped portion ending in the drain for collecting the entering liquid.
However, Day discloses:
wherein the set of weatherstrips comprises at least one funnel-shaped portion ending in the drain for collecting the entering liquid. [See Day, ¶ 0075 discloses that form factor and drainage properties of a vehicle sunroof and an outer frame of the sunroof determines the outer dimensions of an elastically deformable gasket of a sealing device and how it seals against the roof of the vehicle. Further, that Sunroof enclosures are typically designed with a gutter trough (funnel shape) for water to run along, and a drain tube sheds water down the vehicle to the ground.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Valentine to add the teachings of Day in order to enable shedding of water from a frame of a retractable, roof-mounted sensor assembly to the ground.
Regarding claim 5, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 4.
Day discloses:
wherein the first weatherstrip portion comprises a tubular weatherstrip disposed in an edge area of the opening and realized in one piece. [See Day, ¶ 0075 discloses that form factor and drainage properties of a vehicle sunroof and an outer frame of the sunroof determines the outer dimensions of an elastically deformable gasket of a sealing device and how it seals against the roof of the vehicle. Further, that Sunroof enclosures are typically designed with a gutter trough (funnel shape) for water to run along, and a drain tube sheds water down the vehicle to the ground.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 2.
Regarding claim 10, Valentine in view of Day discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
Day discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion partially forms the at least one funnel-shaped portion ending in the drain for collecting the entering liquid. [See Day, ¶ 0075 discloses that form factor and drainage properties of a vehicle sunroof and an outer frame of the sunroof determines the outer dimensions of an elastically deformable gasket of a sealing device and how it seals against the roof of the vehicle. Further, that Sunroof enclosures are typically designed with a gutter trough (funnel shape) for water to run along, and a drain tube sheds water down the vehicle to the ground.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 2.
Claim(s) 7-9, and 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gloyne-Valentine et al. (GB2642228A) (hereinafter Valentine) in view of Buschmann et al. (US 20150274090 A1) (hereinafter Bushmann).
Regarding claim 7, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 6.
Valentine does not appear to explicitly disclose:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is essentially sack-shaped and surrounds the opening.
However, Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is essentially sack-shaped and surrounds the opening. [See Buschmann, Figs. 1a-1b, 3a-3b illustrates sealing elements 15.2, 15.3 “essentially” sack-shaped surrounding camera objective 12.1.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Valentine to add the teachings of Buschmann in order to provide an elastically expansible sealing element accounting for motion of a retracting and extending camera module.
Regarding claim 8, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 6.
Bushmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is made of a flexible, mat-shaped material of rubber or a liquid-tight textile. [See Buschmann, ¶ 0044 discloses an elastically expansible sealing element.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 9, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 6.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion has the shape of a waterskin. [See Buschmann, Figs. 1a-1b, 3a-3b illustrates sealing element 15 with the shape of a waterskin.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 11, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is connected to an edge portion of the first weatherstrip portion in a liquid-tight manner along a first edge area. [See Buschmann, ¶ 0044, Figs. 1a-1b, 3a-3b illustrates sealing element 15 connected to an edge portion of sealing element 16.1. See Buschmann, Fig. 2 illustrates a perimeter defined around camera unit 12 by sealing element 15.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 12, Valentine in view of Buschmann discloses all the limitations of claim 11.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is connected to the first edge portion of the first weatherstrip portion in a liquid-tight manner along the first edge area via a plug connection, a welded connection or a glued connection. [See Buschmann, ¶ 0016 discloses the sealing element can be connected or assembled with the carrier element and/or the camera unit in an adhesive or force fitting manner.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 13, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is connected to the housing of the at least one environmental sensor in a liquid-tight manner along a second edge area of the second weatherstrip portion. [See Buschmann, ¶ 0044, Figs. 1a-1b, 3a-3b illustrates sealing element 15 connected to upper and lower edge portions of sealing element 16.1. See Buschmann, Fig. 2 illustrates a perimeter defined around camera unit 12 by sealing element 15.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 14, Valentine in view of Buschmann discloses all the limitations of claim 13.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion is connected to the housing along the second edge area in a liquid-tight manner via a plug connection, a welded connection or a glued connection. [See Buschmann, ¶ 0016 discloses the sealing element can be connected or assembled with the carrier element and/or the camera unit in an adhesive or force fitting manner.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 15, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second weatherstrip portion defines a wet area of the roof module, the wet area surrounding the opening, and forms a barrier separating the wet area from a dry area of the roof module in which the at least one environmental sensor is disposed. [See Buschmann, Fig. 1 illustrates an interior side of a sealing element 15 (a dry area), and an exterior side of a sealing element 15 (a wet area).]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 4.
Buschmann discloses:
wherein the second mating weatherstrip portion comprises at least one profile portion disposed on the at least one environmental sensor. [See Buschmann, Figs. 1a-1b illustrate a profile of sealing element 15 disposed on the sensor 12.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 17, Valentine in view of Buschmann discloses all the limitations of claim 16.
Buschmann discloses:
at least part of the at least one profile portion is shaped in such a manner that a constant sealing contact exists between the first weatherstrip portion and the second mating weatherstrip portion while the at least one environmental sensor is being displaced from the retracted position into the deployed position. [See Figs. 1a-1b, 3a-3b illustrates the profile of the sealing member being a constant between alternate sealing supports 16.1.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Valentine discloses:
wherein the at least one environmental sensor can be turned between the retracted position and the deployed position about an axis of rotation. [See Valentine, ¶ 0026 discloses the sensor deployment mechanism may be configured to move the sensor between the stowed position and the deployed position by one or more of: a translational movement of the sensor; and a rotational movement of the sensor.]
Regarding claim 19, Valentine discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Valentine discloses:
wherein the at least one environmental sensor is a lidar sensor and/or a radar sensor and/or a camera sensor and/or a multi-camera sensor. [See Valentine, ¶ 0015 discloses that a vehicle sensor may be lidar, a visible image capture device, etc.]
Regarding claim 20, Valentine discloses:
A motor vehicle comprising a roof module according to claim 1. [See Valentine, ¶ 0008]
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK E DEMOSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-8799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 5712727384. 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.
/PATRICK E DEMOSKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486