DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the applicant’s reply filed on August 5, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Amendment
Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-20 are newly added. Claims 1-20 are pending and addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed August 5, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 USC 102(a)(1) and 35 USC 103.
Specifically, the applicant has amended claim 1 to include limitations that were not taught by the previously cited prior art.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “existing vehicle airbag system” and “an existing vehicle system” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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.
Claims 3 and 16 are 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.
Claims 3 and 16: The recitation of “a location and functionality of an existing vehicle airbag system” is unclear as to how a storage volume located under the vehicle body floor can be “configured to maintain a location and functionality of an exiting vehicle airbag system” as there is no mention in the claim as to how the flooring system and an existing vehicle airbag system are related much less how the flooring system maintains a location and functionality of an existing airbag system. Additionally, on review of the Specification as filed on April 12, 2024 (hereinafter Specification) it appears when the flooring system utilizes space previously allocated for seat storage that this would necessarily ensure that the existing vehicle systems, such as the airbags, remain functional (see Specification, par [0005]). There are no further details as to how the utilizing space maintains a location and functionality of an existing vehicle system or on how the airbag system and the flooring system are even related. Further, the airbag system is not included in the drawings nor is the “exiting vehicle systems”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Khan et al., US 2006/0181104 (hereinafter Khan).
Claim 1: Khan discloses a flooring system (storage box cover 17) configured to interconnect to a vehicle body floor (floor 19) (see Fig 2-4), comprising:
a first panel (first lid 60)
a second panel (second lid 62) operatively interconnected to the first panel (connected to 60 as shown in Fig 4) ;
wherein the first panel (60) and second panel (62) are interconnected to provide a transition configured to compensate for an uneven portion (vehicle floor 19 is uneven as shown in Fig 5, 11) of the vehicle body (par [0062]-[0064]);
an opening provided in at least one of the first panel (60) or second panel (62) (storage box cover 17 includes first lid 60 and second lid 62 that each pivot open and closed, see Fig 8-9, par [0051]-[0054]); and
a storage volume (storage box 14) accessible through the opening (see Fig 8-9, par [0051]), wherein the storage volume (14) is defined in part by the opening and in part by at least one vehicle body component (storage box 14 is designed to conform to the shape of the third row seat area 36 such that the storage box cover 17 is maintained level with the cargo surface 18, thereby extending the flat cargo space within the vehicle V as shown in Fig 3-4, 10, par [0043]-[0044]).
Claim 2: Khan discloses wherein the transition is configured to level a cargo van floor (storage box 14 is designed to conform to the shape of the third row seat area 36 such that the storage box cover 17 is maintained level with the cargo surface 18, thereby extending the flat cargo space within the vehicle V, par [0043], installable in vans or passenger vehicles that have uneven surfaces that can serve as extended cargo space, par [0064]).
Claim 3: Khan discloses wherein the flooring system is configured to maintain a location and functionality of an existing vehicle airbag system (vehicle body structure includes a storage box installed in a location within the vehicle that is originally arranged and configured to receive a rear passenger's seat, see abstract, par [0002], this would necessarily maintain a location and functionality of an existing vehicle airbag system).
Claim 4: Khan discloses wherein the opening is selectively closed by a door (first and second lids 60, 62, form doors, par [0039], [0059]).
Claim 5: Khan discloses wherein the door includes a handle (lid 60 includes strap handles 73, and lid 62 includes strap handles 75 see Fig 4, par [0039], [0053]).
Claim 6: Khan discloses wherein a plurality of offsets (connectors 80, 82) interconnecting the first panel (60) and the second panel (62) to the vehicle body (as shown in Fig 13-15 each offset (80, 82) including an end that interconnects to the vehicle body (interconnects to vehicle body through faster 81, 82 and restriction member 66, 68, see Fig 13, par [0057]-[0058]).
Claim 7: Khan discloses further comprising a plurality of fasteners (fasteners 81, 83) selectively associated with the plurality of offsets (80, 82) and configured to permit the first panel and the second panel to be removed from the vehicle body (storage box cover 17 is removable as a unit from the storage box 14, Fig 13, par [0058]-[0060]).
Claim 8: Khan discloses a flooring system (storage box cover 17) configured to interconnect to a vehicle body floor (floor 19) (see Fig 2-4), comprising:
a plurality of panels (first lid 60 and second lid 62) including a first panel (first lid 60) and a second panel (second lid 62) selectively interconnected to each other (connected to 60 as shown in Fig 4);
wherein the plurality of panels (60, 62) is interconnected to provide a transition configured to compensate for an uneven portion (vehicle floor 19 is uneven as shown in Fig 5, 11) of the vehicle body (par [0062]-[0064]);
at least one opening provided in at least one panel of the plurality of panels (60, 62) (storage box cover 17 includes first lid 60 and second lid 62 that each pivot open and closed, see Fig 8-9, par [0051]-[0054]); and
a storage volume (storage box 14) accessible through the at least one opening (see Fig 8-9, par [0051]), wherein the storage volume (14) is defined in part by the at least one opening and in part by at least one vehicle body component (storage box 14 is designed to conform to the shape of the third row seat area 36 such that the storage box cover 17 is maintained level with the cargo surface 18, thereby extending the flat cargo space within the vehicle V as shown in Fig 3-4, 10, par [0043]-[0044]).
Claim 9: Khan discloses wherein the at least one transition is configured to level a cargo van floor (storage box 14 is designed to conform to the shape of the third row seat area 36 such that the storage box cover 17 is maintained level with the cargo surface 18, thereby extending the flat cargo space within the vehicle V, par [0043], installable in vans or passenger vehicles that have uneven surfaces that can serve as extended cargo space, par [0064]).
Claim 10: Khan discloses wherein the plurality of panels (60, 62) extends from about a midpoint of the vehicle body (about second row seats 12) toward a rear of the vehicle body (at rear hatch 23) (see Fig 1-4).
Claim 11: Khan discloses wherein the storage volume occupies space previously allocated for seat storage (vehicle body structure includes a storage box installed in a location within the vehicle that is originally arranged and configured to receive a rear passenger's seat, see abstract, par [0002]).
Claim 12: Khan discloses wherein the flooring system (17) is configured to maintain a location and functionality of the existing vehicle system (third row passenger seats, see Fig 2-3, par [0008], [0030]).
Claim 13: Khan discloses wherein the at least one opening is selectively closed by a door (first and second lids 60, 62, form doors, par [0039], [0059]).
Claim 14: Khan discloses wherein the door includes a handle (lid 60 includes strap handles 73, and lid 62 includes strap handles 75 see Fig 4, par [0039], [0053]).
Claim 15: Khan discloses a flooring system (storage box cover 17) configured to convert a van having a vehicle body and an existing vehicle system (Fig 2-4), comprising:
a first panel (first lid 60)
a second panel (second lid 62) operatively interconnected to the first panel to define a flooring surface (connected to 60 as shown in Fig 4) ;
wherein the first panel (60) and second panel (62) are interconnected to provide a transition configured to compensate for an uneven portion (vehicle floor 19 is uneven as shown in Fig 5, 11) of the vehicle body (par [0062]-[0064]);
an opening provided in at least one of the first panel (60) or second panel (62) (storage box cover 17 includes first lid 60 and second lid 62 that each pivot open and closed, see Fig 8-9, par [0051]-[0054]); and
a storage volume (storage box 14) accessible through the opening (see Fig 8-9, par [0051]), and positioned in a space previously allocated for seat storage (see abstract, par [0004]), wherein the storage volume (14) is defined in part by the opening and in part by at least one vehicle body component (storage box 14 is designed to conform to the shape of the third row seat area 36 such that the storage box cover 17 is maintained level with the cargo surface 18, thereby extending the flat cargo space within the vehicle V as shown in Fig 3-4, 10, par [0043]-[0044]); and
wherein the flooring system (17) is configured to maintain a location and functionality of the existing vehicle system (third row passenger seats, see Fig 2-3, par [0008], [0030]).
Claim 17: Khan discloses wherein the flooring system (17) extends from about a midpoint of the vehicle body (about second row seats 12) toward a rear of the vehicle body (at rear hatch 23) (see Fig 1-4).
Claim 18: Khan discloses wherein the flooring system (17) is associated with a bottom portion of the vehicle body (near floor 19, as shown in Fig 2-4, 11).
Claim 19: Khan discloses wherein the opening is selectively closed by a door (first and second lids 60, 62, form doors, par [0039], [0059]) that includes a handle (lid 60 includes strap handles 73, and lid 62 includes strap handles 75 see Fig 4, par [0039], [0053]).
Claim 20: Khan discloses wherein a plurality of offsets (connectors 80, 82) interconnecting the first panel (60) and the second panel (62) to the vehicle body (as shown in Fig 13-15) each offset (80, 82) including an end that interconnects to the vehicle body (interconnects to vehicle body through faster 81, 82 and restriction member 66, 68, see Fig 13, par [0057]-[0058]) each offset including an end that interconnects to the vehicle body (as shown in Fig 13), and a plurality of fasteners (fasteners 81, 83) selectively associated with the plurality of offsets (80, 82) and configured to permit removal of at least one of the first panel or the second panel (storage box cover 17 is removable as a unit from the storage box 14, Fig 13, par [0058]-[0060]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan in view of Meyers et al., US 2017/0166150 (hereinafter Meyers)
Claim 3: Khan discloses wherein the flooring system (17) is configured to maintain a location and functionality of the existing vehicle system (vehicle body structure includes a storage box installed in a location within the vehicle that is originally arranged and configured to receive a rear passenger's seat, see abstract, par [0002], this would necessarily maintain a location and functionality of an existing vehicle system).
Khan is silent at the existing vehicle system comprises an airbag system.
Meyer discloses a vehicle having an airbag system (airbag electronic control components, par [0002]) and storage compartments operatively connected to the floor panel (12) (par [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary y skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the existing vehicle system of Kahn to comprises an airbag system as disclosed by Meyers as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of an airbag system would have yielded the predictable results of retaining the vehicle airbag ECCU to a floor panel during impacts and protecting the vehicle occupants.
Claim 16: Khan is silent at the existing vehicle system comprises an airbag system.
Meyer discloses a vehicle having an airbag system (airbag electronic control components, par [0002]) and storage compartments operatively connected to the floor panel (12) (par [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the existing vehicle system of Kahn to comprises an airbag system as disclosed by Meyers as one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of an airbag system would have yielded the predictable results of retaining the vehicle airbag ECCU to a floor panel during impacts and protecting the vehicle occupants.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The disclosure of Chawalk et al., US 2016/0200258 (hereinafter Chawalk) a vehicle storage compartment for an uneven floor is relevant to the claims but has not been relied upon in the current rejection.
Claims 1-20 are rejected. No claims are allowed.
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 CAROLINE N BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1623. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 pm 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, Tara E Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/CAROLINE N BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
