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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 1, with respect to claims 1 and 12, Applicant argues that,
Cho does not disclose a magnet and control module where the magnet is controlled to provide either an attractive force or a repulsive force. The magnet in Cho only attracts the striker of a door latch. Cho has no disclosure anywhere of reversing polarity. Further, the entire purpose of Cho's magnet is to hold the striker in the latch groove, which is a purely attractive function (see paragraphs [0019] and [0057]-[0061]). Reversing polarity in Cho's system would push the striker away from the latch, which would defeat its entire purpose.
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the claim does not recite reversing polarity of the electromagnet, but “the control module is configured selectively control the magnetic member to apply an attractive force or a repulsive force to the magnetic receiver based on a controlled polarity of the electromagnet.”
Cho at least discloses the control module selectively control the electromagnet to apply an attractive force based on a controlled polarity of the electromagnet in paragraphs [0066], [0068], [0070]-[0071] to attract the striker (when the electromagnet is mounted on the latch. See, [0064]), or to attract the latch (when the electromagnet is mounted on the striker. See, [0065]). Examiner respectfully submits that, although not specified by Cho as magnetized to either north pole or south pole, the electromagnet must be polarized to one of these poles when a current is applied as described at least in [0066], [0068], [0070]-[0071]. This polarity of the electromagnet is clearly controlled via the applied current. Further, based on this controlled polarity, the electromagnet applies an attractive force to either the striker or the latch depending on its mounted location.
As such, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 12 are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 2-4, 10, 13-14, and 20 are moot in view of the discussion of claims 1 and 12 above.
On page 2, with respect to claims 22 and 25, Applicant argues that,
Claim 22 recites: "mounting one of the magnetic member or magnetic receiver at a location spaced apart from a door latch of the door." Cho teaches mounting a magnet as part of the door latch. Further, modifying the location of the magnet in Cho directly defeats the entire purpose of Cho. Thus, claim 22 is allowable for at least this additional reason. Claim 25 is also allowable for at least this reason.
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Cho discloses the electromagnet can be mounted to either (1) the latch, or (2) the striker.
In case (1): the striker is the magnetic receiver spaced apart from the latch. In case (2), the electromagnet is spaced apart from the latch because it is mounted at the location of the striker.
Thus, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 22 and 25 are also not persuasive.
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 11-12, 15-19, 22, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cho (US 2023/0003057 A1 – hereinafter Cho).
Regarding claim 1, Cho discloses an assembly, comprising: a door mounted for movement relative to a fixed vehicle structure (Fig. 1; [0049] – door 10 mounted for movement relative to a vehicle body 30, which is a fixed vehicle structure); a magnetic member associated with at least one of the door and the fixed vehicle structure ([0050]; [0052]; [0064]-[0065]; [0071] – a magnet is attached at a predetermined location to either the door 10 or the vehicle body 30, e.g. to a latch 20 of the door 10 or to mounted in a region of the striker 40 of the vehicle body 30); a magnetic receiver associated with the other of the door and the fixed vehicle structure ([0050]; [0052]; [0064]-[0065]; [0071] – a magnet receiver, e.g. a striker 40 attached to the vehicle body 30 when the magnet is attached to the latch of the door, or the latch of the door when the magnet is attached to the striker of the vehicle body); and a control module configured to selectively activate the magnetic member to interact with the magnetic receiver in response to at least one predetermined vehicle condition ([0066]-[0077]; Figs. 9-10 – a controller configured to selectively activate the magnet in response to a vehicle condition, e.g. vibration, opening, closing of the door by pulling or an unlocking button of smart key being pressed).
Regarding claim 4, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a door closing event ([0066]; [0068] – an event of switching signal indicating closing of the door).
Regarding claim 5, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a door opening event ([0066]; [0068] – an event of receiving a signal indicating opening of the door from the smart key).
Regarding claim 6, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, including at least one bumper associated with the magnetic member, wherein the at least one bumper is mounted with the magnetic member to the at least one of the doors and the fixed vehicle structure ([0014]-[0015]; Fig. 1 – weather strip 50).
Regarding claim 7, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, including at least one bumper associated with the magnetic member, wherein the at least one bumper is mounted to the other of the at least one of the doors and the fixed vehicle structure and faces opposite the magnetic member when the door is in a closed position (Fig. 9; [0075]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 8, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, including a door seal associated with one of the at least one of the doors and the fixed vehicle structure, and wherein the magnetic member is separate from the door seal ([0014]-[0015]; Fig. 1 – weather strip 50 as door seal and the magnet is separate from the weather strip 50 as further shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 9, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, wherein the fixed vehicle structure comprises a door pillar (Fig. 1 – the vehicle body comprises at least a C-pillar).
Regarding claim 11, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, wherein the door includes a frame portion extending around an opening for a window (Fig. 1 – a frame portion extending an opening for a window as shown), and wherein the magnetic member is associated with the frame portion (Fig. 1 – the magnet is associated with the frame portion at the location of latch 20).
Regarding claim 12, Cho discloses a method comprising: mounting a door mounted for movement relative to a fixed vehicle structure between an open position and a closed position (Fig. 1; [0049] – mounting door 10 for movement relative to a vehicle body 30, which is a fixed vehicle structure); associating a magnetic member with at least one of the door and the fixed vehicle structure ([0050]; [0052]; [0064]-[0065]; [0071] – associating a magnet at a predetermined location to either the door 10 or the vehicle body 30, e.g. to a latch 20 of the door 10 or to mounted in a region of the striker 40 of the vehicle body 30); associating a magnetic receiver with the other of the door and the fixed vehicle structure ([0050]; [0052]; [0064]-[0065]; [0071] – associating a magnet receiver, e.g. a striker 40 attached to the vehicle body 30 when the magnet is attached to the latch of the door, or the latch of the door when the magnet is attached to the striker of the vehicle body); and selectively activating the magnetic member to interact with the magnetic receiver in response to at least one predetermined vehicle condition ([0066]-[0077]; Figs. 9-10 – a selectively activating the magnet in response to a vehicle condition, e.g. vibration, opening, closing of the door by pulling or an unlocking button of smart key being pressed).
Regarding claim 15, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a door closing event ([0066]; [0068] – an event of switching signal indicating closing of the door), and including activating the magnetic member when a door closing signal is received to reduce closing effort as the door is moved toward the closed position ([0071]).
Regarding claim 16, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a door opening event ([0072]-[0079] – an event of receiving a signal indicating opening of the door when unlocking button of the smart key is pressed), and including activating the magnetic member when a door opening signal is received to facilitate opening effort as the door is moved toward the open position ([0072]-[0079] – making the door easily opened).
Regarding claim 17, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12, including installing at least one bumper to at least one of the doors and the fixed vehicle structure at a location adjacent to the magnetic member ([0014]-[0015]; Fig. 1 – installing a weather strip 50 to the vehicle body 30 at a location adjacent to the magnet as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 18, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12, including providing a door seal on one of the doors and the fixed vehicle structure, and including mounting the magnetic member to be separate from the door seal ([0014]-[0015]; Fig. 1 – installing a weather strip 50 as door seal and mounting the magnet to be separate from the weather strip 50 as further shown in Fig. 9).
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 22, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12, including: mounting one of the magnetic member or magnetic receiver at a location spaced apart from a door latch of the door ([0064]-[0065] – in a case the electromagnet is mounted at a location of the latch, then at least the striker as the magnetic receiver is mounted at a location spaced apart from the latch of the door, and in a case the electromagnet as the magnetic member, is mounted to the striker, then it is spaced apart from the latch of the door).
Claim 25 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 22 above.
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.
Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho as applied to claims 1, 4-9, 11-12, 15-19, 22, and 25 above, and further in view of Salter et al. (US 2020/0277810 A1 – hereinafter Salter).
Regarding claim 2, see the teachings of Cho as discussed in claim 1 above. However, Cho does not explicitly disclose the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a vehicle speed being greater than a predetermined threshold.
Salter discloses at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a vehicle speed being greater than a predetermined threshold ([0007]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Salter into the activation of the magnet member taught by Cho to prevent or to reduce unwanted vibration due to the vehicle moving at high speeds.
Regarding claim 13, Cho also discloses the method of in claim 12, wherein the method further comprises: including activating the magnetic member when a predetermined threshold is exceeded to increase a holding force for the door when the door is in the closed position ([0059]-[0060]).
However, Cho does not explicitly disclose the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a vehicle speed being greater than the predetermined threshold.
Salter discloses at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises a vehicle speed being greater than a predetermined threshold ([0007]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Salter into the activation of the magnet member in the method taught by Cho to prevent or to reduce unwanted vibration due to the vehicle moving at high speeds.
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho as applied to claims 1, 4-9, 11-12, 15-19, 22, and 25 above, and further in view of Rider et al. (US 2017/0089114 A1 – hereinafter Rider).
Regarding claim 3, see the teachings of Cho as discussed in claim 1 above. However, Cho does not explicitly disclose the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises an unauthorized entry attempt.
Rider discloses at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises an unauthorized entry attempt ([0024] - monitoring images captured by a camera or other sensor data to detect whether and unauthorized entry is being attempted and, if so, activating the door collision avoidance system comprising electromagnets as further described at least in [0018] to secure the door 500 in a closed position).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Rider into the assembly taught by Cho to secure the door thus preventing any unauthorized access to the vehicle.
Regarding claim 14, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12 further comprising, including activating the magnetic member when an unauthorized entry signal is received to increase a holding force for the door when the door is in the closed position ([0059]-[0060]).
However, Cho does not explicitly disclose the at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises an unauthorized entry attempt.
Rider discloses at least one predetermined vehicle condition comprises an unauthorized entry attempt ([0024] - monitoring images captured by a camera or other sensor data to detect whether and unauthorized entry is being attempted and, if so, activating the door collision avoidance system comprising electromagnets as further described at least in [0018] to secure the door 500 in a closed position).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Rider into the activation of the magnet member in the method taught by Cho to secure the door thus preventing any unauthorized access to the vehicle.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho as applied to claims 1, 4-9, 11-12, 15-19, 22, and 25 above, and further in view of Renner et al. (US 2020/0224462 A1 – hereinafter Renner).
Regarding claim 10, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 9, wherein the door pillar includes an opening that receives the magnetic member (Fig. 9 – an opening of the striker).
However, Cho does not disclose including a power connection interface to connect the magnetic member to a power source.
Renner discloses including a power connection interface to connect a magnetic member to a power source ([0081]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Renner into the striker taught by Cho to provide power needed for proper operation of the electro-magnet.
Regarding claim 20, Cho also discloses the method of claim 12, including: installing the magnetic member in an opening formed in a door pillar that comprises the fixed vehicle structure ([0065] – installing the magnet in an opening of the striker), or associating the magnetic member a frame portion extending around an opening for a window in the door (Fig. 1 – associating the magnet to with a frame portion extending an opening for a window as shown).
However, Cho does not disclose connecting the magnetic member to a power source.
Renner discloses connecting a magnetic member to a power source ([0081]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Renner into the method taught by Cho to provide power needed for proper operation of the electro-magnet.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho as applied to claims 1, 4-9, 11-12, 15-19, 22, and 25 above, and further in view of Son et al. (US 2023/0294574 A1 – hereinafter Son).
Regarding claim 23, Cho also discloses the assembly of claim 1, including a plurality of vehicle condition inputs that are input directly into the control module through a communication, wherein the control module uses these plurality of vehicle condition inputs to control polarity of the magnetic member to perform a desired operation ([0070]; [0073] – door closing input and door opening input are inputted into the control module to selectively apply current to control polarity of the electromagnetic to perform a desired operation).
However, Cho does not disclose a control area network (CAN) communication.
Son discloses a control area network (CAN) communication ([0054]-[0056]; Fig.1 – vehicle condition inputs are directly inputted into a control module through a CAN communication).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Son into the assembly taught by Cho because a control area network (CAN) communication were known to have been advantageous in low cost and flexibility in implementation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 24 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1116. The examiner can normally be reached IFT.
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, Thai Q Tran can be reached at 571-272-7382. 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.
/HUNG Q DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights