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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
As concerns claim 6, it is unclear whether the inner protrusion or outer protrusion is the intended element that is to be formed of fiber-reinforced resin or fiber-free resin.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Hirose (JP 2018/149912).
As concerns the following, Prior Art Reference Hirose - (JP 2018/149912) discloses:
1. A side sill structure (Hirose - Figures 12, 14 and 14) comprising:
a side sill (Hirose - 100) extending in a front-rear direction of a vehicle on an outer side in a vehicle width direction of the vehicle;
a plate member (Hirose - 4) configured to divide at least a part of a cross-section of the side sill (Hirose - 100) in the vehicle width direction; and
a reinforcement (Hirose - 5A, 5B) made of plastic resin, the reinforcement being disposed outside the plate member in the vehicle width direction and bonded (Hirose – Figures13 and 14 illustrate bonding between elements 5A / 5B and 100) to the side sill (Hirose - 100), wherein at least one of the reinforcement (Hirose – 5A, 5B) and the plate member (Hirose - 4) has a plurality of projecting portions (Hirose – at least 52A, 54A), and the other one of the reinforcement (Hirose - 5A, 5B) and the plate member (Hirose - 4) has a plurality of receiving portions (Hirose – whereby filling portion 55A and 53A pass through) into which the projecting portions are inserted.
PNG
media_image1.png
507
763
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
600
1025
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2. The side sill structure according to claim 1, wherein the reinforcement (Hirose - 5A, 5B) has outer protrusions joined to an outer wall, an upper wall, and a lower wall of the side sill (Hirose - 100) with adhesive (Hirose - Element 50 which makes up the reinforcement 5A and B is said to “adhere” to both surfaces of 100 and 4), and an inner protrusion protruding toward the plate member (Hirose - 4), and the projecting portions or the receiving portions are formed at an inner end portion of the inner protrusion. (Figures 13 and 14 illustrate such inner and outer protrusions)
3. The side sill structure according to claim 2, wherein the receiving portions are formed in the plate member (Hirose - 4) to face the inner protrusion, and the plate member (Hirose - 4) has tubular portions extending in the vehicle width direction from edges of the receiving portions. (Hirose – Figures 13 and 14 illustrate wherein cross sectionally, the protrusions are tubular portions, in so far as they extend along the thickness direction in the x plane.)
4. The side sill structure according to claim 3, wherein the projecting portions are formed of solid members to be fitted into the tubular portions. (Hirose – Figures 13 and 14 illustrate this configuration)
5. The side sill structure according to claim 3, wherein the projecting portions are formed of tubular members to be fitted into the tubular portions. (Hirose – Figures 13 and 14 illustrate this configuration)
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 of this title, 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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose in view of Lee et al (US 10,780,926).
As concerns claim 6, Hirose discloses the side sill structure according to claim 2, disclosing the use of resin for forming materials.
Hirose fails to specify wherein the outer protrusions and the inner protrusion of the reinforcement (Hirose - 5A, 5B) are formed of fiber-reinforced resin, and the projecting portions are formed of fiber-free resin.
Lee et al (US 10,780,926) teaches the use of fiber-reinforced resin within vehicles for the purpose of realizing a reduction in weight while maintaining rigidity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Hirose as taught by Lee to include fiber-reinforced resin for the expected benefit of providing substantially rigid and light-weight material, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose in view of Imamura et al (JP 2011/073522).
As concerns claim 7, Hirose discloses the side sill structure according to claim 1.
Hirose however fails to specify wherein each of the receiving portions is formed as a long hole whose length in a longitudinal direction of the side sill (Hirose - 100) is longer than that in a direction orthogonal to the longitudinal direction, an external shape of each of the projecting portions is formed such that a length thereof in the longitudinal direction of the side sill (Hirose - 100) is longer than that in the direction orthogonal to the longitudinal direction, and the projecting portions and the receiving portions are at least partly spaced apart from each other.
Imamura et al (JP 2011/073522) teaches, however, wherein a hole may be elongated for the purpose of managing dimensional errors during manufacturing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Hirose as taught by Imamura to include elongated holes as claimed, for the expected benefit of managing dimensional errors, in order to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose in view of Kuwabara et al JP 2019/166850).
As concerns claim 8, Hirose discloses the side sill structure according to claim 1.
Hirose fails to specify wherein the plate member (Hirose - 4) is disposed directly below a pillar extending upward from the side sill (Hirose - 100).
Kuwabara et al (JP 2019/166850) teaches wherein a reinforced sill has a pillar disposed directly upward therefrom (Figure 4), for the purpose of strengthening the automobile during a side collision.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Hirose as taught by Kuwabara to include a pillar extending upward from the sill, for the expected benefit of further increasing the strength of the vehicle against side collisions, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose in view of Cardimen et al (US 6,834,912).
As concerns claim 9, Hirose discloses the side sill structure according to claim 1.
Hirose fails to specify wherein the side sill (Hirose - 100) includes a plurality of bulkheads spaced apart from each other in a longitudinal direction of the side sill, the bulkheads being arranged within the cross-section of the side sill at positions inward of the plate member (Hirose - 4) in the vehicle width direction.
Cardimen et al (US 6,834,912) however teaches the use of bulkheads (46) along a side sill for the purpose of adding strength to the sill.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Hirose as taught by Cardimen to include the use of bulkheads within the sill for the expected benefit of strengthening the side sill in the event of a side collision, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON L LEMBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3065. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached on (571) 272-5405. 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.
/AARON L LEMBO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights