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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers 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.
Claim(s) 14 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kiyoshita (US 2020/0269922).
Regarding Claim 1, Kiyoshita discloses a back floor bottom panel 19 (Fig. 2), comprising a protrusion portion 18; and a pair of wheel houses 70, disposed on an outer side of the back floor bottom panel in a vehicle width direction, wherein the protrusion portion is disposed on a central side between the pair of wheel houses in the vehicle width direction and protrudes upward in a vehicle up-down direction (Fig. 2), the protrusion portion comprises a longitudinal wall (front wall facing beam 17), and the longitudinal wall is formed at a front end of the protrusion portion in a vehicle front-back direction, the longitudinal wall and the pair of wheel houses are disposed in parallel in the vehicle width direction (Fig. 2; front wall is laterally arranged across vehicle and a line between the centers of the wheel wells is parallel to that lateral direction).
Regarding Claim 2, the back floor bottom 19 panel further comprises: side frames 32, disposed on an outer side in the vehicle width direction, and extending along the vehicle front-back direction; and a pair of longitudinal bones 90 (brace 90 includes ribs in a v-shape and running longitudinally in the vehicle), extending along the vehicle front-back direction, and away from the side frames in the vehicle width direction (Fig. 2), wherein from a viewing angle in the vehicle up-down direction, part of the pair of longitudinal bones overlap the longitudinal wall (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 3, the back floor bottom panel 19 also comprises a floor cross member 23 (Fig. 2), and the floor cross member is connected to the pair of wheel houses 70, the longitudinal wall is disposed further forward than the floor cross member in the vehicle front-back direction, and the floor cross member intersects the pair of longitudinal bones (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 4, the protrusion portion 18 further comprises an upper wall (Fig. 2 between the ribs of 90), the upper wall extends from an upper end of the longitudinal wall in the vehicle up-down direction toward a back in the vehicle front-back direction, and the upper wall intersects the floor cross member 23.
Regarding Claim 9, Kiyoshita further discloses a step portion 16, disposed in front of the longitudinal wall in the vehicle front-back direction, and connecting the front floor bottom panel and the back floor bottom panel, an intermediate step portion (second step between 16 and 17; Fig. 2), disposed between the step portion and the longitudinal wall.
Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishioka (US 2019/0344835).
Regarding Claim 1, Nishioka discloses a back floor bottom panel 13 (Fig. 2), comprising a protrusion portion (between 13c and 13e in Fig. 2); and a pair of wheel houses 32, disposed on an outer side of the back floor bottom panel in a vehicle width direction, wherein the protrusion portion is disposed on a central side between the pair of wheel houses in the vehicle width direction and protrudes upward in a vehicle up-down direction (Figs. 1 and 2), the protrusion portion comprises a longitudinal wall 13e, and the longitudinal wall is formed at a front end of the protrusion portion in a vehicle front-back direction (Fig. 2), the longitudinal wall and the pair of wheel houses are disposed in parallel in the vehicle width direction (Fig. 2; front wall is laterally arranged across vehicle and a line between the centers of the wheel wells is parallel to that lateral direction).
Regarding Claim 10, the pair of wheel houses 32 comprise shock-absorbing support portions 32a, and the shock-absorbing support portions are disposed at upper ends of the pair of wheel houses in the vehicle up-down direction (Fig. 2), the longitudinal wall is disposed further forward than the shock-absorbing support portions in the vehicle front-back direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 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:
Regarding Claims 5-7, applicant’s use of the longitudinal bones being located on the lower surface of the back floor panel, and further including a patch component connected to the bones, is novel.
Regarding Claim 8, applicant’s use of a driving source (battery) located under the floor panel and being overlapped by the pair of longitudinal bones, is novel.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art relates to vehicle rear floor structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON S DANIELS whose telephone number is (571)270-1167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/JASON S DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights