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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 20, 21 and 34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/22/2026. Additionally, claim 33 is drawn to a non-elected species (Figure 11) and is hereby additionally withdrawn.
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 beads 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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16, 18, 19, 26, 32, 35 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) and (a2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (hereinafter Kim, US Publication Number 20140008936).
Regarding claim 16, Kim disclose a crash box for a bumper arrangement of a motor vehicle (Figures 1-4), the crash box comprising: at least one outer hollow chamber (Figures 1-3 element 120); at least one inner hollow chamber (Figures 1-3 element 130); a vehicle-side end portion (Figures 1-3 element 110); and a bumper-side front portion (Figures 1-3 unlabeled front portion of elements 120 and 130), wherein, the at least one outer hollow chamber is connected to the at least one inner hollow chamber so as to form a closed multi-chamber profile in the vehicle-side end portion (Figures 2 and 3),in the bumper-side front portion, the at least one outer hollow chamber is separated and spaced apart from the at least one inner hollow chamber (Figures 1-3), and in the vehicle-side end portion, the at least one outer hollow chamber and the at least one inner hollow chamber each comprise a partition which delimits the at least one outer hollow chamber and the at least one inner hollow chamber on an inner side (Figure 2 element 200 and Figure 3).
Regarding claim 18, see figures 2 and 3.
Regarding claim 19, see figure 3.
Regarding claim 26, see figure 2 unlabeled slot between elements 120 and 130.
Regarding claim 32, Kim discloses a bumper arrangement of a motor vehicle (Figure 1), the bumper arrangement comprising: two crash boxes as recited in claim 16 (Figure 1 elements 110, 120 and 130); and at least one crossmember which connects the two crash boxes to one another (Figure 1 element 140).
Regarding claims 35 and 36, see figures 1 and 2 and Paragraph 47.
Claim(s) 16, 18, 19, 22-24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) and (a2) as being anticipated by Braunbeck et al. (hereinafter Braunbeck, US Publication Number 20140319860).
Regarding claim 16, Braunbeck disclose a crash box for a bumper arrangement of a motor vehicle (Figures 1-5 and 8), the crash box comprising: at least one outer hollow chamber (Figure 3 element 3); at least one inner hollow chamber (Figure 3 element 2’); a vehicle-side end portion (Figures 3 and 4 unlabeled aft portion of element 1’); and a bumper-side front portion (Figures 3 and 4 unlabeled front portion of element 1’), wherein, the at least one outer hollow chamber is connected to the at least one inner hollow chamber so as to form a closed multi-chamber profile in the vehicle-side end portion (Figure 4),in the bumper-side front portion, the at least one outer hollow chamber is separated and spaced apart from the at least one inner hollow chamber (Figure 4), and in the vehicle-side end portion, the at least one outer hollow chamber and the at least one inner hollow chamber each comprise a partition which delimits the at least one outer hollow chamber and the at least one inner hollow chamber on an inner side (Figure 3 element 6 and unlabeled inner side wall if element 2’).
Regarding claim 18, see figure 3 elements 8 and 9 and figure 4.
Regarding claim 19, see figures 3 and 4.
Regarding claims 22 and 23, see figures 4 and 8.
Regarding claim 24, see unlabeled slot between elements 3 and 2’ in figures 3 and 4.
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) 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Braunbeck.
Regarding claim 31, Braunbeck discloses the above crash box wherein each chamber has a constant width (Figures 4 and 8), but is silent as to the width of each chamber.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the constant width sections be at least 20mm wide, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). This would provide for the predictable result of providing sufficient structural integrity in the case of a minor crash.
Claim(s) 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kutscher et al. (hereinafter Kutscher, US Publication Number 20160304044) further in view of Braunbeck.
Regarding claim 37, Kutscher discloses a method comprising providing two multi-chamber crash boxes (Figure 1 element 20) and joining them to a crossmember (Figure 1 element 10, Paragraph 35), but fails to teach of the claimed structure of the crash boxes.
However, Braunbeck discloses a similar method comprising providing two multi-chambered hollow profiles (Figure 1 elements 2 and 3 and Figure 5 element 2) and introducing a slot as claimed (Figure 4).
Regarding claim 37, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kutscher to comprise the crash box formation steps of Braunbeck for the predictable result of providing a bumper arrangement capable of absorbing a large amount of collision energy (Braunbeck, Paragraph 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17, 25 and 27-30 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.
The examiner notes that while claims 29 and 30 are indicated as having allowable subject matter, the claimed subject matter is subject to a drawing objection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A MCFALL whose telephone number is (571)270-5769. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-4.
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 Collins can be reached at (571)272-6886. 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.
/Nicholas McFall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644
Prosecution Insights