DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“interior trim assembly stations” recited in claims 1 and 8
“exterior trim assembly stations” recited in claims 1 and 8
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1, 3 – 5, 8, 10 – 12, and 14 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.
As explained above, the claim limitation “interior trim assembly stations,” “exterior trim assembly stations,” and “marriage station” each invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Regarding the limitations ‘interior trim assembly stations’ and ‘exterior trim assembly stations,’ Examiner recognizes that the Specification provide sufficient antecedent basis for the limitations and the claimed functions (paragraphs 55 and 56). However, the Specification does not provide any structure for the limitations to perform the claimed functions. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3 – 5, 8, 10 – 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As explained above, the limitations “interior trim assembly stations” and “exterior trim assembly stations” each invoke interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). As further explained above, the Specification does not teach any structure for the limitations to perform their claimed functions. Therefore, the limitations are not described in the Specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 further recites the limitation “no bottom operating platform being provided in the vehicle final assembly line, the bottom operating platform being configured to assemble the lower body frame, the suspension system, the steering system, the braking system, the chassis electronics control system, and the energy storage system to obtain the electric chassis.” Examiner has been unable to find support for the limitation in the originally filed Specification for several reasons.
First, Examiner recognizes that the Specification teaches that the ‘vehicle final assembly line’ does not include a “bottom operating platform” (paragraphs 7, 10, and 39). However, there is no teaching that the “bottom operating platform” is configured to “assemble the lower body frame, the suspension system, the steering system, the braking system, the chassis electronics control system, and the energy storage” of a vehicle body.
Furthermore, the Specification teaches ‘interior trim assembly stations’ which are configured to assemble ‘a main harness and a front compartment harness, an anti-lock brake system (ABS) module and a braking pipeline, a front compartment air conditioning pipe, an electronic control module, a sunroof, an instrument panel, a roof, a carpet, a console, front and rear windshields, and/or exterior trim’ (paragraph 55) as well as ‘exterior trim assembly stations’ which are configured to assemble ‘a front-end module, headlights, seats, front and rear bumpers, tires, a fuel filler, and/or an electrical check out system (ECOS)’ (paragraph 56). However, there is no express teaching in the Specification that these ‘assembly stations’ are not configured to assemble a ‘lower body frame, a suspension system, a steering system, a braking system, a chassis electronics control system, and an energy storage system’ as recited by the limitation. In fact, the Specification also teaches that the ‘assembly stations’ of the ‘vehicle final assembly line’ are generally configured to assemble “various components” of the vehicle (paragraph 13) and that the ‘assembly stations’ are each configured to assemble a wide variety of components (paragraphs 40 and 58). Because the Specification teaches that the ‘assembly stations’ are each configured to assemble general components, one skilled in the art would not understand that the ‘assembly stations’ of the Specification are not further configured to assemble a ‘lower body frame, a suspension system, a steering system, a braking system, a chassis electronics control system, and/or an energy storage system.’
Furthermore, the Specification expressly teaches that the ‘vehicle final assembly line’ comprises assembly stations for assembling an anti-lock braking system module and braking pipeline (paragraph 55), which may reasonably be considered to be a ‘braking system,’ as well as an electronic control module, instrument panel, and electrical check out system (paragraphs 55 and 56), which may reasonably be considered to be an ‘chassis electronics control system.’ Therefore, the Specification does not teach the ‘assembly stations’ not be configured to assemble a ‘braking system’ or ‘chassis electronics control system,’ as recited by the limitation.
Finally, the Specification expressly teaches the ‘electric chassis,’ which comprises the lower body frame, suspension system, steering system, braking system, chassis electronics control system, and energy storage system, is in a “substantially completed state” and the ‘vehicle final assembly line’ includes a “marriage station” which completes assembly of the ‘electric chassis’ (paragraph 53).
Examiner recognizes that the Specification does not teach these ‘assembly stations’ and ‘marriage station’ comprises the “bottom operating platform.” However, as explained above, the Specification does provide for the ‘assembly stations’ and ‘marriage station’ being configured or at least capable of assembling at least one of ‘the lower body frame, the suspension system, the steering system, the braking system, the chassis electronics control system, and the energy storage system.’ Furthermore, because the Specification does not teach the structure of the ‘assembly stations’ or ‘marriage station,’ it is the position of the Examiner that one skilled in the art may understand the ‘assembly stations’ and ‘marriage stations’ to include a “bottom operating platform.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on pages 8 – 9, that the limitations “plurality of interior trim assembly stations” and “plurality of exterior trim assembly stations” does not invoke interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). This is because, Applicant argues, that one skilled in the art, in light of the Specification, would understand the structure required to perform the claimed functions. Examiner disagrees. Examiner notes that the Specification provides no structure for either the ‘plurality of interior trim assembly stations’ or the ‘plurality of exterior trim assembly stations.’ Applicant has also provided no arguments as to the teachings in either the Specification or understood by one skilled in the art, which would provide the structure for performing the claimed functions. Furthermore, “station” is commonly defined as “any of the places in a manufacturing operation at which one part of the work is done” and “equipment used for performing a particular job.” Therefore, it is the position of the Examiner that the term “station” amounts to a generic placeholder, similar to that as “mechanism” or “system.” MPEP 2181.
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 CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights