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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figure 2 includes reference numeral 21 in the lower left corner of mid gate 20 pointing to what appears to be the glass channel. The glass channel is reference numeral 22 and the slit 21 is located at the top of 20, not the lower corner.
Per 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(1) reference characters should not be used in association with brackets. Brackets should be removed from figures 5-7. The proper way to indicate a structure or section generally, such as first glass gear 63 in figure 5, is with an arrow per 37 C.F.R. 1.84(r)(1).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 20 recites “[a] vehicle”, “a passenger compartment”, “a cargo compartment”, and “a mid-gate assembly”, however, claim 20 depends from claim 1, which already recites all four elements. As such the correct antecedent is “the”. Examiner notes claim 20 is to the combination of the vehicle while claim 1 is to the subcomination of the mid-gate assembly.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 12, 14-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US patent 7845712 to Gordon (hereinafter Gordon) in view of US patent 10350972 to Azzouz (hereinafter Azzouz) and US patent 6796600 to Ferer (hereinafter Ferer).
Regarding claim 1, the mid-gate assembly is shown in Gordon in figures 1-2D with
a module frame (28) installed between a passenger compartment (18) and a cargo compartment (20) of a vehicle (10) and spaced apart from a floor (12) of the vehicle;
a mid-gate (16) rotatably installed on the floor (12) and configured to close a lower side of the module frame (28) or to open the lower side of the module frame (28) by being folded toward the floor (12); and
a back glass (30) installed on the module frame (28) and the mid-gate (16).
While Gordon teaches the glass as being removable in column 4 lines 43-46, Gordon does not teach the glass or the mid-gate being movable by regulators.
A window regulator is shown in Azzouz in figures 1-4E where back glass (2) is moved by glass regulator (54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mid-gate assembly or Gordon with the glass regulator of Azzouz because glass regulators provided the known benefit of increased ease for the user to move the glass (i.e. moving by motor rather than manually).
A gate regulator is shown in Ferer in figures 14a-14b where gate (354) is moved by gate regulator (350,352).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mid-gate assembly or Gordon with the gate regulator of Ferer because gate regulators provided the known benefit of increased ease for the user to move the gate (i.e. moving by motor rather than manually).
Regarding claim 12, the mid-gate (16) is hingedly connected to the floor (12) of the vehicle and, when provided with the gate regulator of Ferer, the mid-gate (16) is folded by the mid-gate regulator installed on the floor and opens or closes a lower side (figure 2A closed, figure 2B open) of the module frame (28) in Gordon.
Regarding claim 14, when provided with the window regulator of Azzouz, the mid-gate (16) would have a slit (i.e. the glass needs a slit to slide into the gate) in Gordon.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, as Gordon does not include any regulators Gordon does not teach a controller for controlling regulators in communication with sensors.
A controller and sensors are shown in Ferer in figures 20-22 (in conjunction with gate regulator of figures 14a-14b) where a controller (further taught in column 9 line 7) communicates with a mid-gate sensor (ajar switch step 471) to control operations of the mid-gate regulator (close gate step 476) and the glass regulator (move glass via electrical means step 474). When provided to the mid-gate of Gordon with the module frame and having the glass regulator and glass movement of Azzouz the control would include a second glass sensor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mid-gate assembly or Gordon, having the glass regulator of Azzouz and the gate regulator of Ferer, with the controller and sensors of Ferer because controllers and sensors provided the known benefit of monitoring motor operated system such as gate and glass regulators and providing for automatic control (via sensors) to prevent damage to gate or glass.
Regarding claim 17, when provided with the glass regulator of Azzouz and the controller and sensors of Ferer, the controller would move the glass between maximum upward and downward positions (similar to positions in Azzouz) in Gordon.
Regarding claim 18, when provided with the glass regulator of Azzouz and the controller and sensors of Ferer, the controller would move the gate when the entire glass is accommodated in the gate (similar to Azzouz figure 4e) in Gordon. Examiner notes claim includes alternative or and as such controller only needs to be configured to open the gate in one of the two options.
Regarding claim 20, the vehicle (10) includes passenger compartment (18) and cargo compartment (20) in Gordon.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Azzouz, and Ferer as applied to claim 1 (as well as claims 12, 14-18, and 20) above, and further in view of US PG Pub 2024/0217315 to Wolf (hereinafter Wolf).
Regarding claim 2, when provided with the glass regular of Azzouz, the mid-gate (16) would include glass channels (similar to channels 46 and 48 in Azzouz, necessary part of window regulator system) in Gordon.
However, neither Gordon not Azzouz shows glass rails on the frame.
Glass rails are shown in Wolf in figures 1-10 where back glass (12) has glass rails (34) connected to glass channels (36) when the gate (14) is closed (i.e. the glass runs in upper rails and lower channels to move from closed to open position). The rails are mounted to a fixed member (24) above the gate (14) and when provided to the mid-gate of Gordon would be on the module frame (i.e. the module frame is the fixed structure above the gate).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mid-gate assembly or Gordon, having the glass regulator of Azzouz and the gate regulator of Ferer, with the glass rails of Wolf because the glass rails allow for upper guiding of the glass for more balanced control for the glass movement and can also allow for additional features such as flush movement of the glass as in Wolf.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Azzouz, Ferer, and Wolf as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US patent 7410198 to Queener (hereinafter Queener).
Regarding claim 3, neither Gordon not Azzouz teaches a rack gear arrangement.
A rack gear arrangement is shown in Queener in figures 1-7B where back glass (44) has rack gears (78) on opposite ends (figure 7B), the rack gears (78) having teeth in a height direction. When provided to Gordon, having the window regulator of Azzouz and the glass rails of Wolf, the rack gears would be in the glass rail or glass channel (i.e. the racks are on the edge of the glass and the edge of the glass is in the rails and channels).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mid-gate assembly or Gordon, having the glass regulator of Azzouz, the gate regulator of Ferer, and the glass rails of Wolf, with the rack gear arrangement of Queener because rack gears provided reliable vertical guiding and driving of back glasses.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon, Azzouz, and Ferer as applied to claim 1 (as well as claims 12, 14-18, and 20) above, and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 12, while the movable glass of Azzouz is described as being held in the gate in column 3 lines 33-40, Azzouz is silent as to whether it is held by a window holder or just held by the glass regulator.
Examiner takes Official Notice that glass holders were old and well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mid-gate assembly or Gordon, having the glass regulator of Azzouz and the gate regulator of Ferer, with the known glass holder because glass holders provided the benefit of limiting movement of the glass, which can be desirable when the glass is in a moving wing such as a mid-gate as in Gordon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-11 and 19 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. Examiner notes claims 5-11 are objected to as depending from objected to claim 4 and have not otherwise been considered for patentability.
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 CATHERINE A KELLY whose telephone number is (571)270-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/CATHERINE A KELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619