DETAILED ACTION
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/20/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3-4, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKinzie et al. (US 10,442,455), in view of Sasaki (US 2019/0106139).
Regarding the claims, McKinzie discloses the following:
1. (Currently Amended) A steering wheel (10) comprising a left and right pair of grip portions (124) that extend in a vehicle vertical direction (figs. 3, 11-12) and are configured to be gripped by a vehicle occupant (col. 5, lines 20-27); a base portion (50) that extends in the vehicle vertical direction and a vehicle width direction (fig. 7); a connecting portion (52) that connects (i.e., directly or indirectly) lower end portions of the left and right pair of grip portions in the vehicle width direction (fig. 5); an attachment piece (48) that extends in the vehicle vertical direction (fig. 7) and connects the connecting portion (52) to a lower end portion of the base portion (50); an upper right perimeter portion comprising: an upper right steering portion (figs. 3, 11-12 show right portion 126 nearest 124) that longitudinally extends toward a left side from an upper end portion of a grip portion at a right side (fig. 3 shows the claimed configuration of the right portion of 126 nearest 124); and a right sightline guide portion (figs. 3, 11-12 show curved portion of 126) that longitudinally extends from an end of the upper right steering portion toward a vehicle front such that the upper right steering portion and the right sightline guide portion form an oblique angle therebetween at the end of the upper right steering portion (fig. 3 shows the claimed configuration, where the curve of 126 is an oblique angle), the right sightline guide portion connected with (figs. 4-5) an upper end portion of the base portion (50); and an upper left perimeter portion comprising: an upper left steering portion that longitudinally extends toward the right side from an upper end portion of a grip portion at the left side; and a left sightline guide portion that longitudinally extends from an end of the upper left steering portion toward the vehicle front such that the upper left steering portion and the left sightline guide portion form an oblique angle therebetween at the end of the upper left steering portion, the left sightline guide portion connected with the upper end portion of the base portion (fig. 3 shows symmetrical configuration of 28).
McKinzie does not disclose wherein the left and right pair of grip portions illuminate in a case in which a need for the vehicle occupant to grip the left and right pair of grip portions arises (claim 1); wherein a steering wheel switch is provided at at least one of the upper right perimeter portion or the upper left perimeter portion (claim 3).
Sasaki teaches wherein the left and right pair of grip portions (portions of 83 nearest respective 81, 82) illuminate (i.e., 41) in a case (i.e., conditional limitation) in which a need for the vehicle occupant to grip the left and right pair of grip portions arises (as disclosed by para. 44, illumination prompts the operator to grip the grip portions 83); wherein a steering wheel switch (2, para. 26) is provided at (the scope of the phrasing “at” includes “near”) at least one of the upper right perimeter portion or the upper left perimeter portion (fig. 1A shows the claimed configuration, where each of 2 is near respective upper right and left portions of 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to use the illumination and/or switch as taught by Sasaki, in combination with the steering wheel structure as disclosed by McKinzie, for the expected benefit of increased user safety and/or increased functionality.
The combination, as motivated above, suggests the claimed limitations as follows (mapping to McKinzie unless otherwise noted):
4. (Previously Presented) The steering wheel according to claim 1, further comprising a column portion (22) that projects toward a vehicle rear (figs. 3, 5) from an instrument panel (12), wherein the base portion (50) is turnably attached (i.e., user turns grips 28, which are rotationally secured to 20) to the column portion (22).
7. (Previously Presented) A steering module comprising: a steering wheel according to claim 1; and a display device (48) for a vehicle that displays information, the display device being disposed between the left and right pair of grip portions and an instrument panel (fig. 3 shows 48 between a left grip portion and the instrument panel, and between a right grip portion and the instrument panel).
8. (Previously Presented) The steering module according to claim 7, wherein the steering wheel is movable in a vehicle front-rear direction between a usage position (fig. 3), at which the vehicle occupant may steer and the display device and the left and right pair of grip portions are spaced apart in the vehicle front-rear direction, and a stowed position (fig. 1), at which the left and right pair of grip portions touch against the display device (col. 5, line 37-col. 6, line 3).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKinzie et al. (US 10,442,455) and Sasaki (US 2019/0106139), in view of Lubischer et al. (US 10,343,706).
McKinzie does not disclose the limitations of claim 5.
Lubischer teaches a sensor (36) that is configured to detect the vehicle occupant (i.e., disclosed as detecting if the driver is in position to safely retake control of the vehicle) is provided at (i.e., near) a distal end portion of the column portion (i.e., disclosed as positioned on steering column shaft 16; see also fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to use the sensor of Lubischer in combination with the steering wheel of the prior art, for the expected benefit of an enhanced user experience and/or improved user safety.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKinzie et al. (US 10,442,455) and Sasaki (US 2019/0106139), in view of Nakajima (US 2020/0353971).
McKinzie does not disclose the limitations of claim 6.
Nakajima teaches an air blowing hole (12D) that is configured to blow air toward the vehicle rear (fig. 2; para. 52) is provided at a distal end portion (fig. 1) of the column portion (14). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to combine the air blowing structure of Nakajima with the steering wheel structure of McKinzie, for the expected benefit of increased user comfort and/or usability. However, even in absence of the express motivation to combine, the combination of the prior art would have been obvious to an ordinary practitioner since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.1
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKinzie et al. (US 10,442,455) and Sasaki (US 2019/0106139), in view of Shibata et al. (US 2021/0107358).
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of McKinzie and Sasaki suggests the general structure of the claim as explained above, but does not disclose that the display device [extends] beyond the steering wheel in a vehicle width direction. Shibata teaches a display (26) that extends beyond the steering wheel in a vehicle width direction (fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of effective filing to use the display device as taught by Shibata in combination with the structure of McKinzie, for the expected advantage of increasing the visual input provided to the driver.
The limitations of Claims 10-11 flow naturally from the explanations of the prior art above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to T. S. FIX whose telephone number is (571)272-8535. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-3p.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 5712707778. 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.
/T. SCOTT FIX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
1 KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)
Prosecution Insights