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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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)(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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Lee et al (US 12,252,174).
As concerns claim 1, Lee et al (US 12,252,174) discloses
1. A seat installation structure, comprising:
a floor (Lee – at least 3 and 5);
a floor cross beam (Lee – 12), connected to lower longitudinal beams (Lee – 2; see Figure 2) on outer sides in a vehicle-width-direction; and
a seat fixing portion (Lee - 15), configured to fix a back seat,
wherein the seat fixing portion comprises:
a fixed seat surface (Lee – 21 and 15a), configured to fix the back seat formed on the floor behind the floor cross beam; and
a reinforcing member (Lee – at least 22, 24, 26 and 27), forming a hollow portion with the fixed seat surface on an outside of the fixed seat surface, and the reinforcing member is connected to the floor cross beam (Lee – 12, see Figure 4 which illustrates a hollow portion within 11, and a connection between 11 and 12).
PNG
media_image1.png
491
511
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
596
1214
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As concerns claim 2, Lee discloses the seat installation structure according to claim 1, wherein the floor cross beam (Lee – 12) is provided between a front panel portion (Lee – 3) and a rear panel portion (Lee - 5) of the floor,
where the rear panel portion is formed above the front panel portion (Lee – figure 2 illustrates this difference in height),
the floor cross beam has a stepped portion between the front panel portion and the rear panel portion (Lee – Figure 2 shows the general vertical surface differentiation between 2, 12 and 5, while Figure 3 illustrates more clearly), and
the reinforcing member (Lee – at least 22, 24 and 27) is provided above the stepped portion. (Lee – see Figures 3 and 4)
As concerns claim 3, Lee discloses the seat installation structure according to claim 2, wherein the stepped portion (Lee – whereby 12 raises upward along edge 63) is entirely bent upward while extending from two ends toward a center. (As best understood, as Applicant’s element 121 appears to comprise a curved element extending around and creating a space UW, so too does the surfaces of 12, namely 63 and 61, extend in the same manner.)
As concerns claim 4, Lee discloses the seat installation structure according to claim 1, wherein the floor cross beam (Lee – 12) comprises an upper portion member (Lee – at least 63 and 61) and a lower portion member (Lee – at least 12b, 62 and 64), and
the upper portion member and the lower portion member form a closed cross-section (Lee - Figure 4), the upper portion member comprises a front wall (Lee – 63) forming a front portion of the closed cross-section and an upper wall (Lee – 61) forming an upper portion of the closed cross-section,
the lower portion member comprises a rear wall (Lee – 64) forming a rear portion of the closed cross-section, a lower wall (Lee – 62) forming a lower side of the closed cross-section, and a rear wall extending portion (Lee – 12b) extending upward from the rear wall to the rear portion of the closed cross-section, and
the reinforcing member (Lee – at least 22, 24, 26 and 27) is connected to the rear wall extending portion. (Lee – Figure 4)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As concerns claim 5, Lee discloses the seat installation structure according to claim 4, wherein the reinforcing member (Lee – at least 22, 24, 26 and 27) comprises a flange (Lee – 11c), which is connected to the rear wall extending portion of the lower portion member, wherein the flange extends downward.
Lee, however, fails to specify wherein the flange comprises a protruded rib portion extending downward.
Lee does not provide any basis or insight as to the use or benefit of a rib or even similar reinforcement structure.
Neither Lee nor any additionally cited art of record teaches or fairly suggests, alone or in combination, inter alia, wherein a seat installation structure comprises a reinforcing member, further comprising a flange, with said flange further comprising a rib, in combination with the rest of the claimed invention.
As concerns claim 6, Lee discloses the seat installation structure according to claim 4, however fails to specify wherein an end portion of an upper edge of the rear wall extending portion on an outer side in the vehicle-width-direction is provided with a bending portion extending toward the lower longitudinal beams and bent downward, and the reinforcing member is provided on an inner side of the bending portion in the vehicle-width-direction.
Lee fails to illustrate, or suggest any type of wrapping with the sides of the rear wall, around the lower longitudinal beams. Such an improvement, in combination with the rest of the recited structure, is found to require more than routine experimentation and thus, is seen as novel over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON L LEMBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3065. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached on (571) 272-5405. 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.
/AARON L LEMBO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679