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 .
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.
Claims 9-12 and 14 are 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 9 recites “another suitable locking member.” This term is not defined structurally either in the claim or in the specification and is therefore not definite. This is not a general term in the art, nor is there a special definition of this term in the specification.
Claim 10 recites “a force store.” This term is unclear. There is no general or otherwise known definition for this feature in the art, nor is there a special definition in the specification. It is unclear if this is a term under 112(f) since only functional features are recited but no generic or nonce word is recited. Is this a means for storing force? What structurally is a “store” in this field of art?
Claim 14 recites “the decoupling module is designed axially symmetrical in the axial longitudinal direction.” The symmetrical feature is described on page 4 of the specification as “the pressure effect portion can comprise a plurality of recesses or a plurality of gas channels that are symmetrically distributed, in particular symmetrically distributed on the pressure effect portion.” This description accurately represents the embodiments that illustrate the three gas channels equally spaced around the circumferential direction. However, this symmetry is not along the axial direction and only applies to the gas channels. The specification also describes “The axially symmetrical decoupling module has, on the one hand, the first coupling interface of the module housing designed as a screw thread and with an opening for the locking unit, designed as a pin or a shaft end, and, on the other hand, the second coupling interface, designed for example as a hexagon or nut.” This means that the one end is different relative to the other end and that the symmetry that is mentioned is not along the axial direction. Thus, reading the phrase axially symmetric to mean its general definition meaning symmetry of one axial end relative to the other axial end would be inconsistent with the description. Is the axial longitudinal direction a direction other than the direction along axis 210? What symmetry is described by axially symmetrical in the axial longitudinal direction? This feature is not definite when read in view of the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 5201657B2 (hereinafter “JP ‘657”).
Claim 1
JP ‘657 discloses a decoupling module for two releasably interconnected components (13A, 13B), comprising:
a module housing (11) with a first coupling interface (24 connected to 13B) for one of the components and with a hollow space (space inside 11),
a locking unit (12) which on the one hand is mounted axially movably in the module housing (11) and, in an initial state, protrudes at least partially from the module housing (11) (see FIGS. 4 and 5 illustrating the end of 12, specifically 27, extending past the end of 11 and into the indent in a cap 14) in order to lock the two components releasably to each other, and
a drive unit (28) which on the other hand is arranged in a positionally fixed manner (via 30) in the module housing, wherein the locking unit and the drive unit are designed interacting in such a way that, upon triggering or firing of the drive unit, the locking unit (12) can be acted upon or is acted upon abruptly and directly by a pressure surge propagating in the hollow space and moves into the module housing (see e.g., paragraphs [0012] and [0014]).
Claim 2
JP ‘657 discloses wherein the module housing (11), the drive unit (28) and the locking unit (12) are arranged coaxially to one another (see e.g., FIG. 4).
Claim 4
JP ‘657 discloses wherein a module cover (14) is provided which, in an assembled state of the decoupling module, is connected to the module housing (11) by form-fit and/or force-fit engagement.
Claim 5
JP ‘657 discloses wherein the locking unit (12) comprises a locking portion (27) and a pressure effect portion (26) which, upon triggering or firing of the drive unit, can be acted upon by the pressure surge, such that the locking unit is moved under acceleration into the module housing and such that the locking unit decouples the two components from each other (see e.g., FIG. 6).
Claim 6
JP ‘657 discloses wherein the pressure effect portion (26) is designed as a cylindrical hollow chamber or beaker-shaped hollow chamber with at least one recess (29) or with at least one gas channel (see paragraph [0008] and FIG. 6).
Claim 7
JP ‘657 discloses wherein the at least one recess or the at least one gas channel (26 including a central longitudinal channel and transverse holes 29) extends along an axial longitudinal direction and a transverse direction running perpendicular to the axial longitudinal direction, wherein the extent in the axial longitudinal direction is greater than the extent in the transverse direction (see FIG. 6).
Claim 8
JP ‘657 discloses wherein a plurality of recesses or a plurality of gas channels (29) are distributed symmetrically on the pressure effect portion (see FIG. 6).
Claim 9
JP ‘657 discloses wherein the locking portion (12) is designed as a shaft end, a bar, a pin or another suitable locking element (see FIG. 6 illustrating this component as a bar or pin or “another suitable locking element”).
Claim 13
JP ‘657 discloses wherein the module housing has, in a housing base (11) for a shaft end of the locking unit, an opening (left end of 11 in FIG. 5) through which the shaft end, in the connected state, protrudes at least in part from the module housing in order to connect the two components to each other by locking.
Claim 14
As best understood, JP ‘657 discloses wherein the decoupling module is designed axially symmetrically in the axial longitudinal direction since similar to the disclosed embodiment, the entire device is generally along a longitudinal axis and is symmetrical around that axis.
Claim 15
JP ‘657 discloses a vehicle seat having a decoupling module as claimed in claim 1 (see Abstract and rejection of claim 1).
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘657 in view of Yamaguchi (US 2004/0256850; hereinafter “Yamaguchi”).
Claim 3
JP ‘657 does not disclose wherein the first coupling interface is designed as an external thread. However, Yamaguchi discloses wherein a coupling interface is designed as an external thread (see FIG. 4, housing 21c includes external threads to connect to another member 15). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified JP ‘657 so that the manner of fastening the housing to another member, i.e., either of the first or second coupling interfaces, included an external thread since this is a well-known fastening method that yields predictable results including easy assembling and high strength of retention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With reference to claim 10, if the phrase “a force store” were interpreted under 112(f) to encompass a spring, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious the combination of features including “wherein the locking unit, in a connected state of the two components, is mounted in a pretensioned manner by a force store for the locking connection of the two components.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP200000136A discloses an explosive release device for a vehicle seat including a piston that moves a pin member axially. KR 0134174Y1 discloses a seat explosive release device comprising a gas channel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACEY A FLUHART whose telephone number is (571)270-1851. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-7PM.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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.
/STACEY A FLUHART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
