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 communication is in response to application No. 18/827,446 Structure and Movable Object Including the Same; filed on 09/06/2024 and amended on 07/07/2025. Claims 1-7, and 9-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Claim 8 has been cancelled by amendment.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the Republic of Korea on 01/29/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2024-0013326 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. The file does include a Translation of Foreign Priority Documents (doc code FR TRANS) dated 07/14/2025, but a certified copy of application KR10-2024-0013327 has not been included.
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 7 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 1, line 9-11 has been amended to add the limitation; the stabilizer bar fixing member is attached and not fixedly coupled directly to the suspension frame. Claim 7, which depends from claim 1, states that the stabilizer bar fixing member is fixed relative to the suspension frame. If the stabilizer bar fixing member is attached (claim 1) and fixed (claim 7), then it cannot also be “not fixedly coupled” (claim 1).
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.
PNG
media_image1.png
463
744
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murai (US 2020/0262483 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Murai discloses;
A structure comprising: a suspension module including a suspension frame (suspension member 16; Paragraph 78, Fig.1);
a stabilizer bar (torsion bar portion 32; Fig. 4, paragraph 79) provided to face one side of the suspension frame; (Fig. 1 shows the stabilizer bar mounted on the upper surface of the suspension frame 16.)
a fixing portion (first attachment portion 92/96; paragraph 78) including one side fixedly coupled to the suspension frame (see paragraphs 81 and 85) and configured to fix the stabilizer bar (32) relative to the suspension frame (16); and
a power electronics (PE) module (motor 22) fixedly coupled to one side of the fixing portion, (Paragraph 32 describes the motor as being an electric motor.)
wherein the fixing portion includes a stabilizer bar fixing member (first attachment portion 92/96; paragraphs 79/81) configured to define a region penetrated by the stabilizer bar, (The base portion 92A has a lower portion which is rectangular and an upper portion which is semicircular. When the front flange (92B) and the rear flange (92C) are affixed to the frame member 16 by bolts 45, the stabilizer fixing member is pressed between the attachment portion 92 and the frame member 16. Paragraph 79-80)
wherein the stabilizer bar fixing member is attached to the suspension frame. (see Fig. 4 and paragraphs 80 and 84)
wherein the stabilizer bar fixing member is not fixedly coupled directly to the suspension frame (Paragraph 74 of Murai describes the stabilizer bar (102) as supported in a rotatable state by the mount (82). Paragraph 79 describes through hole (93) which penetrates the base (92A) or mount (82), through which the bar is inserted and allowed to rotate. The stabilizer bar is attached to the suspension frame by the mount and not fixedly coupled as it is allowed to rotate in its mounting.)
Regarding Claim 2, Murai further discloses;
wherein the stabilizer bar is provided to penetrate the fixing portion (see Fig. 4), and
wherein a spacing distance between the suspension frame and a region in which the PE module is fixed to the fixing portion is longer than a spacing distance between the suspension frame and a region in which the stabilizer bar is provided to penetrate the fixing portion. (Murai discloses a composite mount where the stabilizer bar passes through the lower portion of the mount at holes 93/97, while the motor mount is affixed above and to the rear of the bar. Fig. 4 is a top-down view of the composite mounts (left 86 and right 84) which are formed as an integrated member with first (92) and second (94) attachment members. (paragraph 78).)
Regarding Claim 3, Murai further discloses;
wherein the fixing portion further includes: a PE module fixing member (second attachment portion 94/98; Fig. 4) including one side fixedly coupled to the suspension frame (paragraph 81 and 85) and configured to define a region to which the PE module is fixed; and
a stabilizer bar fixing member (base 92A/96A; Fig. 4) including one side fixedly coupled to the suspension frame (paragraphs 79 and 83) and configured to define a region penetrated by the stabilizer bar (holes 93/97), and
wherein the stabilizer bar is provided to penetrate the PE module fixing member. (Fig. 4; Murai discloses a composite mount 82 through which a stabilizer bar passes, which also affixes a mount for the vehicle motor.)
Regarding Claim 4, Murai further discloses;
wherein the PE module fixing member (second attachment portion 94/98; paragraph 81/85) and the stabilizer bar fixing member (first attachment portion 92/97; paragraphs 79/81) are spaced apart from each other in a direction in which the suspension frame extends. (Fig. 4, (which is a top down view) and paragraphs 79-85 describe the stabilizer bar fixing portion as located to the front of and below the PE fixing portion)
Regarding Claim 5, Murai further discloses;
wherein the fixing portion includes:
a PE module fixing member (second attachment portion 94/98) including one side fixedly coupled to the suspension frame (paragraph 81/85) and configured to define a region to which the PE module is fixed; and
Regarding Claim 6, Murai further discloses;
wherein a region of the stabilizer bar fixing member, which is penetrated by the stabilizer bar, includes a through-hole (hole 93/97; Fig. 4, paragraphs 79 and 83) shape surrounded by a closed curve. (The base portion 92A has a lower portion which is rectangular and an upper portion which is semicircular. Paragraph 79)
Regarding Claim 7, Murai further discloses;
wherein the stabilizer bar fixing member is fixed relative to the suspension frame as the PE module fixing member and the suspension frame are fixedly coupled. (Fig. 4 and paragraphs 80 -85 describe the fixing of the stabilizer bar and the motor mount to the suspension frame 16 at three points by fasteners 45.)
Regarding Claim 9, Murai further discloses;
further including: a penetration member (bolts 45) configured to penetrate the PE module fixing member (94/98) and coupled to the suspension frame (16). (see paragraphs 81, 82, and 85)
Regarding Claim 20, Murai further discloses;
A vehicle (vehicle 10; paragraph 70, Murai) including the structure of claim 1 (see the above rejection of Claim 1), wherein one side of the structure is connected to a front wheel of the vehicle. (Fig. 1 and paragraph 38 describe the stabilizer bar end as connected to link 28 which is connected to the vehicle suspension in order to suppress stroke differences between the two front wheels.)
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) 10-16, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murai in view of Leighton (US 2,554,784).
PNG
media_image2.png
697
840
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, Murai discloses the limitation described above but does not disclose first and second side stabilizer bars provided to be attachable to or detachable from each other. However, Leighton teaches:
wherein the stabilizer bar includes:
a first side stabilizer bar (bar section 31; Leighton, Figs 4-6, Col. 4, lines 11-36); and
a second side stabilizer bar (bar section 30), and
wherein the first side stabilizer bar and the second side stabilizer bar are provided to be attachable to or detachable from each other. (Col. 4, lines 11-36 describe a two piece (left and right) stabilizer bar connected in the central section as shown in Figs. 4-8.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Murai to include first side stabilizer bar and a second side stabilizer bar provided to be attachable to or detachable from each other as taught by Leighton, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle stabilizer bars. As disclosed by Leighton, it is well known for a vehicle stabilizer bar to consist of a first side stabilizer bar and a second side stabilizer bar provided to be attachable to or detachable from each other. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murai to include a first side stabilizer bar and a second side stabilizer bar provided to be attachable to or detachable from each other as taught by Leighton, as such a modification would provide the ability to lessen the spring resistance added to the coil springs during normal operation of the vehicle. (Col. 2, lines 40-44).
The modification of Murai, based on the teaching of Leighton, would replace the one-piece stabilizer bar of Murai with the two-piece stabilizer bar of Leighton and place the first side stabilizer bar in a position where it would face a first side region of the suspension frame (suspension frame 16; Murai) and the second side stabilizer bar in a position where it would face a second side region of the suspension frame.
Regarding Claim 11, Murai further discloses;
wherein the fixing portion includes:
a first side fixing portion (first attachment portion 96; Murai, Fig. 4) configured to be penetrated by the first side stabilizer bar and including the PE module fixing member and the stabilizer bar fixing member (hole 97); and
a second side fixing portion (first attachment portion 92; Fig. 4) configured to be penetrated by the second side stabilizer bar and including the PE module fixing member and the stabilizer bar fixing member (hole 93).
Regarding Claim 12, Leighton further teaches;
a bolt member (bolt 48; Leighton, Fig. 6) configured to penetrate the first side stabilizer bar (bar 31) and the second side stabilizer bar (bar 30) in a region in which the first side stabilizer bar and the second side stabilizer bar overlap together; and
a nut member (nut 49; Leighton, Fig. 6) coupled to the bolt member.
Regarding Claim 13, Leighton further teaches,
PNG
media_image3.png
552
964
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein the first side stabilizer bar is provided to face the suspension frame with the second side stabilizer bar interposed therebetween in a region in which the bolt member is provided to penetrate the first side stabilizer bar and the second side stabilizer bar. (Murai discloses the stabilizer bar as affixed, through bolting, to the suspension frame 16 which is located beneath the stabilizer bar. With the modification provided by Leighton to split the bar into left and right sections affixed together in the center by a bolt oriented in a vertical direction, the second-side bar is interposed between the first-side bar and the frame in the area where the two bars are bolted together.
Regarding Claim 14, Leighton further teaches,
wherein in a region in which the first side stabilizer bar (bar 16; Leighton, Figs. 1, 2) and the second side stabilizer bar (bar 17) overlap together, a first concave-convex region (23) is formed on the first side stabilizer bar and includes a first section protruding toward the second side stabilizer bar, and a second section recessed in a direction away from the second side stabilizer bar, and a second concave-convex region (portion of bar 17 inserted into part 23 of bar 16) including a shape corresponding to the first concave-convex region is formed on the second side stabilizer bar, and
wherein the first concave-convex region and the second concave-convex region are coupled while engaging with each other. (Leighton, Figs. 1-3, describe a connection between the left and right stabilizer bars in which the first bar (16) consists of a vertically oriented toroid through which the second stabilizer bar (17) is attached. This toroid contains concave-convex surfaces which protrude toward the second stabilizer bar and a recessed section (through which the second bar passes) which is recessed away from the second bar. The second bar, being cylindrical contains a convex curve which corresponds to the toroid shape of the first bar. These two parts are coupled together when the two stabilizer bars are engaged.
Regarding Claim 15, Leighton further teaches,
wherein no configuration is provided to relatively fix the first concave-convex region and the second concave-convex region. (Leighton describes a toroid and cylindrical connection between the two, side stabilizer bars. This connection allows the two bars to engage with each other without being affixed together.)
Regarding Claim 16, Leighton further teaches,
wherein a relative movement between the first concave-convex region and the second concave-convex region, in a region in which the first concave-convex region and the second concave-convex region engage with each other, is restricted only by interference between the first concave-convex region and the second concave-convex region and a frictional force between the first concave-convex region and the second concave-convex region. (Leighton describes a connection between the two, side stabilizer bars which it restricted only by the connection of the two parts (the parts are not fixed together) and the only force between the two bars is a frictional force where the two parts interact.)
Regarding Claim 18, Murai in view of Leighton discloses,
wherein a direction in which the first side stabilizer bar is provided to penetrate the stabilizer bar fixing member of the first side fixing portion is parallel to a direction in which the first side stabilizer bar faces the first concave-convex region. (Murai describes a stabilizer bar with a central area which passes through two bar fixing members in a parallel, horizontal orientation. Leighton teaches a two piece stabilizer bar joined in the middle. Because the central area of Murai is straight and the bar fixing members are parallel to one another, the combination Murai with the two piece construction of Leighton would place the first concave-convex section in the central area of the stabilizer bar and in a horizontal orientation, parallel to the bar fixing members.)
Regarding Claim 19, Murai in view of Leighton discloses,
wherein a region of the first side stabilizer bar, which extends from the stabilizer bar fixing member of the first side fixing portion to the first concave-convex region, includes a straight shape. (The central area of the stabilizer bar as disclosed by Murai is straight between the bar fixing members. With the addition of the two piece construction of Leighton, the area between the bar fixing member and the concave-convex region is straight.)
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murai in view of Leighton (US 2,554,784) and further in view of Joo (KR 20060062513 A).
Regarding Claim 17, Murai in view of Leighton discloses the limitations described above but does not disclose a first section protruding in a cross shape and a second section recessed in a cross shape corresponding to the cross shape of the first concave-convex region. However, Joo teaches:
wherein the first concave-convex region includes the first section protruding in a cross shape (slider 12; Fig. 2), and
wherein the second concave-convex region includes a section recessed in a cross shape (main body 32) and including a shape corresponding to the cross shape of the first concave-convex region. (Joo demonstrates a “cross” shaped slider as part of the side stabilizer bars 10 and 20 which interfaces with the main body housing 32 which contains a matching “cross” shape.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Murai as modified by Leighton to include a first section protruding in a cross shape and a second section recessed in a cross shape corresponding to the cross shape of the first concave-convex region as taught by Joo, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle stabilizer bars. As disclosed by Joo, it is well known for a vehicle stabilizer bar to include a first section protruding in a cross shape and a second section recessed in a cross shape corresponding to the cross shape of the first concave-convex region. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murai in view of Leighton to include a first section protruding in a cross shape and a second section recessed in a cross shape corresponding to the cross shape of the first concave-convex region as taught by Joo, as such a modification would provide the ability to simplify the manufacturing and assembly processes as well as allow changed to stabilizer bar rigidity. (Line 322-370).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended claim 1 to include the limitations that the stabilizer bar fixing member is attached, and not fixedly coupled directly to the suspension frame. This is understood to mean than the stabilizer bar is allowed certain movement within its attachment to the suspension frame. Both the present application and reference Murai describe a stabilizer bar attachment arrangement where the bar is restricted in vertical, horizontal and fore-and-aft directions, but which can rotate about its longitudinal axis, permitting a torsional displacement of the opposing bar ends.
Applicant has amended claim 1 to include the limitations that the stabilizer bar fixing member is configured to define a region penetrated by the stabilizer bar. This limitation was added from an older version of claim 3 and has been rejected by the references previously applied to that limitation within claim 3.
Claim 7, which depends from claim 5 and 1 now contradicts claim 1. Claim 7 states that the stabilizer bar fixing member is fixed relative to the suspension frame, while claim 1 states that the stabilizer bar fixing member is not fixedly coupled directly to the suspension frame.
Applicant notes in the Remarks, dated 07/07/2025 that both claims 5 and 8 have been cancelled. However the Claims document shows claim 8 cancelled, while claim 5 has only been amended. For examination purposes, claim 5 has been interpreted as amended, rather than cancelled.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER whose telephone number is (703)756-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 9:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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.
/SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614