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 .
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.
Claim 5 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "one end side" and “other end side” in lines 7-9. It is unclear if the one end side and the other end side are directed to the first control unit or the flexible substrate. For the purpose of examination, the claim limitations are interpreted such that the one end side and other end side are referring to ends of the flexible substrate. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (US 8278553 B2 (see US PGpub 2010/0186983 for paragraph citations)) in view of Takamatsu (US 20190118744 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki teaches in figure 11 a wire harness with a trunk module (4) having a flexible substrate (31 or 32) having flexibility (wherein 31 and 32 are made of a material having a degree of flexibility), wherein the flexible substrate is disposed along a reinforcement (1) provided in an instrument panel ([0051]; wherein the reinforcement 1 is in an instrument panel) and extending in a vehicle width direction of a vehicle ([0058]; wherein the harness module body extends with the width of a vehicle), and is assembled to the reinforcement (substrates 31 and 32 are attached to module mounting portion 5 on the reinforcement 1).
Suzuki does not teach a branch wire module having an electric wire connected to the flexible substrate.
However, Takamatsu teaches in figure 1 a branch wire module (branch modules 31, 32, and 33) having an electric wire ([0196]; wherein sub-harnesses 42, 43, and 44 provide wiring connections for the branch modules) connected to the trunk line (21).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the branch module and wires of Takamatsu into the wire harness of Suzuki in order to allow the connections of various electrical components to the main wire harness body to perform various circuit operations.
Regarding claim 2, Suzuki teaches in figure 11 that the flexible substrate (31 or 32) has one end extending to a position of one end portion of the reinforcement and the other end extending to between a central position of the reinforcement and a position of the other end portion (wherein the substrates extend across the reinforcement 1).
Suzuki does not teach that the wire harness further includes a first electric wire module connected to the other end of the flexible substrate and having an electric wire.
However, Takamatsu teaches in figure 1 that the wire harness further includes a first electric wire module (branch module 31) connected to the other end of the trunk line (21) and having an electric wire ([0196]; wherein sub-harness 42 attaches to 31 and can attach to transmission lines).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the first electric wire module and wires of Takamatsu into the wire harness of Suzuki in order to allow the connection of various electrical components to perform various circuit operations.
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki teaches in figure 11 that the flexible substrate (31 or 32) extends from a position of one end portion of the reinforcement (1) to a position of the other end portion of the reinforcement (wherein the substrates 31 and 32 extend across the reinforcement 1).
Suzuki does not teach that the wire harness further includes a first electric wire module connected to one end of the flexible substrate and having an electric wire; and a second electric wire module connected to the other end of the flexible substrate and having an electric wire.
However, Takamatsu teaches in figure 1 that the wire harness further includes a first electric wire module (31) connected to one end of the trunk line (21) and having an electric wire ([0196]; wherein sub-harness 42 can attach to transmission lines); and a second electric wire module (32) connected to the other end of the trunk line (21) and having an electric wire ([0196]; wherein sub-harness 43 can attach to transmission lines).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the first electric wire module, second electric wire module, and wires of Takamatsu into the wire harness of Suzuki in order to allow the connection of various electrical components to perform various circuit operations.
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki teaches in figure 11 that the trunk module is provided with the flexible substrate over an entire section (wherein the substrates 31 and 32 extend across the trunk module 4).
Suzuki does not teach a first control unit is connected to one end of the flexible substrate, and a second control unit is connected to the other end of the flexible substrate.
However, Takamatsu teaches in figure 1 that a first control unit (51) is connected to one end of the flexible substrate, and a second control unit (52 or 53) is connected to the other end of the flexible substrate (wherein control unit 51 is attached with branch module 31 to trunk line 21 and control units 52 and 53 are attached with branch module 32 to trunk line 21).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the control units of Takamatsu to the wire harness of Suzuki to be able to control various electrical components of the vehicle (Takamatsu [0198]).
Regarding claim 6, Suzuki in figure 11 teaches the trunk module (4) includes a first protective plate (34a) attached to a side of the reinforcement (mounting portion 5 on reinforcement 1) of the flexible substrate (31 or 32; [0091]).
Regarding claim 7, Suzuki teaches in figure 11 a clamp (41) attached to the first protective plate (34a) and fixed to the reinforcement (1).
Regarding claim 8, Suzuki teaches in figure 11 the trunk module (4) includes a second protective plate (11) that is attached to the flexible substrate (31 or 32) on a side opposite to the reinforcement (1) and sandwiches and protects the first protective plate and the flexible substrate (wherein protective cover 11 covers 31, 32, and 34a).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 9 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, and if the 112 rejection above is overcome.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 5, the prior art of record neither anticipates norrenders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole eithertaken alone or in combination, in particular, prior art of record does not teach “wherein the first control unit and the second control unit are disposed at positions deviated from each other in a direction intersecting an extending direction of the reinforcement, and the flexible substrate is connected to the first control unit by bending one end side on the reinforcement, and is connected to the second control unit by bending the other end side on the reinforcement" in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims 1 and 4.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record neither anticipates norrenders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole eithertaken alone or in combination, in particular, prior art of record does not teach"wherein the trunk module is connected, at least at one end, to a control unit disposed at a position deviated in a direction intersecting with an extending direction of the reinforcement, and the flexible substrate is connected to the control unit by bending the one end on the reinforcement, and the first protective plate and the second protective plate are bent corresponding to a bent shape of the flexible substrate, and sandwich and protect the flexible substrate" in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims 1, 6, and 8.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent toapplicant's disclosure. Sugiura (US 6177635 B1), Son (US 20210213830 A1), and Hashizawa (US 20180248167 A1).
Sugiura teaches a wiring substrate and reinforcing member, both capable of being bent into a desired shape, as well as a connection portion of exposed wires within the substrate.
Son teaches a flexible substrate with a supporting member capable of being bent.
Hashizawa teaches a flexible substrate with a reinforcing film, wherein the reinforcing film can be bent into a recessed position and the substrate is bent to follow this reinforcement.
None of the references, alone or in combination, teach all of the limitations for theclaims including: “wherein the first control unit and the second control unit are disposed at positions deviated from each other in a direction intersecting an extending direction of the reinforcement, and the flexible substrate is connected to the first control unit by bending one end side on the reinforcement, and is connected to the second control unit by bending the other end side on the reinforcement” as recited in claim 5, and “the trunk module is connected, at least at one end, to a control unit disposed at a position deviated in a direction intersecting with an extending direction of the reinforcement, and the flexible substrate is connected to the control unit by bending the one end on the reinforcement, and the first protective plate and the second protective plate are bent corresponding to a bent shape of the flexible substrate, and sandwich and protect the flexible substrate” as recited in claim 9.
Therefore, prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the instantapplication claimed invention as a whole either taken alone or in combination.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no laterthan the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferablyaccompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments onStatement of Reasons for Allowance."
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL MARIE THAYER whose telephone number is (571)270-0134. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th/F 7:30-5:00.
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, Timothy Dole can be reached at (571) 272-2229. 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.
/ABIGAIL MARIE THAYER/Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/Timothy J. Dole/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights