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 .
This is the first action on the merits for application 18/682,146. Responsive to the preliminary amendment filed 2/8/2024, Claims 1-15 are currently pending in this application.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. PCT/CN2022/101484, filed on 6/27/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 2/13/2024 and 2/21/2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 8, “on the corresponding sides” should be changed to - -on corresponding sides- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 12, “to the corresponding rear wheel covers” should be changed to - -to corresponding rear wheel covers- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 7, “the rear floor longitudinal beam” should be changed to - -the rear floor longitudinal beams- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 4, “rear floor longitudinal beams”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 7, “the rear floor force transmission beam” should be changed to - - the rear floor force transmission beams- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 2, line 3, “rear floor force transmission beams”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 3, “the rear floor longitudinal beam rear section is” should be changed to - -the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections are- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, lines 2-3, “rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 5, “the rear floor longitudinal beam rear section is” should be changed to - -the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections are- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, lines 2-3, “rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: lines 7-8, “the rear floor longitudinal beam rear section” should be changed to - -the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, lines 2-3, “rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 6, “of the corresponding” should be changed to - -of corresponding- - for claim consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 4, “the connecting plate” should be changed to - -the connecting plates- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 12, “two connecting plates”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 4, “the rear wheel cover” should be changed to - -the rear wheel covers- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 7, “rear wheel covers”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 6, “the connecting plate” should be changed to - -the connecting plates- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 1, line 12, “two connecting plates”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 7, “the reinforcing rib” should be changed to - -the reinforcing ribs- - for claim consistency (see, for reference, Claim 12, line 3, “reinforcing ribs”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-10 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 207060175 U. Note, although already cited by Applicant, all references herein to CN 207060175 U are made to the English language translation provided with this action.
Regarding Claim 1, CN 207060175 U discloses a lower vehicle body rear structure (Figs. 1-2), comprising: a rear floor (300) integrally formed in a die-casting mode (Note, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight.), rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections (rear sections of elements 100 shown in Fig. 1) fixedly connected to the rear floor, a shelf (500), and a spare tire cabin (600); wherein the rear floor is formed with rear floor longitudinal beams (100) arranged on two sides of the rear floor, and a rear floor middle cross beam (210) and a rear floor rear cross beam (220), wherein the rear floor middle cross beam and the rear floor rear cross beam are connected between the rear floor longitudinal beams on the two sides (Fig. 2); and rear wheel covers (430) respectively connected to the rear floor longitudinal beams on the corresponding sides are arranged on the two sides of the rear floor; the shelf is located above the rear floor (Fig. 1), and two ends of the shelf are arranged in one-to-one correspondence with the rear wheel covers on the two sides (Fig. 1) and both connected to the corresponding rear wheel covers respectively by two connecting plates (400); and the rear floor, the shelf and the two connecting plates are connected to form an annular structure arranged along a height direction of a vehicle body (Fig. 1); and a number of the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections is two (Figs. 1-2), and the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections are connected to rear ends of the rear floor longitudinal beams on the two sides (Figs. 1-2), a rear supporting plate (proximate lead line for element 300 in Fig. 2) is connected between rear ends of the two rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections, and the spare tire cabin is arranged in a mounting space defined by the rear floor, the rear supporting plate, and the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections on the two sides (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5, CN 207060175 U discloses a rear spring mounting seat (generally shown at 700 in Fig. 2) is formed on the rear floor longitudinal beams on the two sides, respectively.
Regarding Claim 6, CN 207060175 U discloses a rear shock absorber mounting seat (generally shown at 700 in Fig. 2) is formed on the rear wheel covers on the two sides, respectively.
Regarding Claim 7, CN 207060175 U discloses the rear floor longitudinal beam rear section is integrally formed in an extruding mode (Note, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight.); a cross section of the rear floor longitudinal beam rear section is in a shape of a rectangle with a bar across two opposite edges of the rectangle (Fig. 1); and an overhanging lap-joint plate is formed at a side portion of the rear floor longitudinal beam rear section (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 8, CN 207060175 U discloses an inserted groove (Fig. 1) is formed in each of the rear ends of the rear floor longitudinal beams; and each of the rear floor longitudinal beam rear sections is fixedly inserted in the inserted groove of the corresponding rear floor longitudinal beam (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 9, CN 207060175 U discloses the shelf comprises an upper plate (Fig. 1), and a lower plate buckled and fixedly connected to a bottom of the upper plate (Fig. 1); the upper plate is provided with a plurality of bending portions to be similar to a shape of steps (step shape best shown on upper left side of Fig. 1); and a cavity is defined by the lower plate and the upper plate (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 10, CN 207060175 U discloses a connecting seat is formed at a top of each of the rear wheel covers (Fig. 1); a first end of the connecting plate connected to the rear wheel cover is connected to the connecting seat (Fig. 1); and a second end of the connecting plate connected to the shelf is connected to a bottom of the lower plate (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 15, CN 207060175 U discloses a vehicle (Abstract, “vehicle”), wherein a vehicle body (Abstract, “vehicle body”) of the vehicle is provided with the lower vehicle body rear structure according claim 1 (see detailed rejection of Claim 1 above).
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.
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) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 207060175 U.
Regarding Claim 14, CN 207060175 U discloses the lower vehicle body rear structure according to claim 1, described in detail above, and further wherein the spare tire cabin is integrally formed (Figs. 1-2) but does not explicitly disclose the rear floor is integrally formed by adopting cast aluminum and the shelf is integrally formed by adopting aluminum alloy. Note, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, these limitations have not been given patentable weight.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to have in CN 207060175 U the rear floor be integrally formed by adopting cast aluminum and the shelf be integrally formed by adopting aluminum alloy, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 11-13 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
NITTA et al. (US 2022/0379974 A1) discloses a vehicle rear structure (see Fig. 1).
KODAMA et al. (US 2021/00618081 A1) discloses a rear structure of a vehicle (see Fig. 1).
KOYAMA et al. (US 2010/0072786 A1) discloses a vehicle body rear structure (see Figs. 1-5).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN YOUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-4781. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 pm (CST).
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, Jacob S Scott can be reached at (571)270-3415. 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.
EDWIN YOUNG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/Edwin A Young/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655