DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 浜辺 勉 (JP 5888456 B2) in view of 田村 洋一 (JP 5807663 B2).
Regarding 1, JP’456 teaches “A bumper assembly attachable to a front portion of a vehicle (10; JP’456 Fig 1) , the bumper assembly comprising, in a state of being attached to the vehicle: a beam (12; JP’456 Fig 1) extending in a vehicle width direction; an energy absorption member (30; JP’456 Fig 1) (stay) partially joined with a rear surface of the beam (12b; JP’456 Fig 1) ; and a load transmission member (50; JP’456 Fig 1) located between a position, in the beam, against which a barrier (S; JP’456 Fig 5) is to collide in an SOT (small overlap test) and the energy absorption member…”
JP’456 does not teach a joining portion of the load transmission member to overlap the energy absorption portion.
However, JP’663 teaches “…joined with the rear surface of the beam so as to overlap at least a portion of the energy absorption member in the vehicle width direction (54; JP’663 Fig 7) .”
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the mounting plate of JP’663 with the load transmission member of JP’456 with a reasonable expectation of success for a more stable load transmission beam that is easier to properly align with the energy absorption member.
With respect to claim 2, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, teaches “The bumper assembly of claim 1, wherein in a state of being attached to the vehicle, the load transmission member comprises: a plate-like portion (54; JP’663 Fig 7) extending along the beam (12; JP’456 Fig 1) in a cross-section parallel to a horizontal plane and including a flat plate portion overlapping at least a portion of the energy absorption member (30; JP’456 Fig 1) in the vehicle width direction, and a protrusion portion (50; JP’456 Fig 1) protruding from the plate-like portion into a space between the rear surface of the beam and the energy absorption member.”
In reference to claim 3, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, teaches “The bumper assembly of claim 2, further comprising a plate (16; JP’456 Fig 2) to be joined with a frame (14; JP’456 Fig 2) of the vehicle, wherein: the energy absorption member (30; JP’456 Fig 2) is joined with the plate, the plate comprises a peripheral portion (34; JP’456 Fig 2) extending in the vehicle width direction beyond the energy absorption member , and in a state of being attached to the vehicle, the protrusion portion (50; JP’456 Fig 2) of the load transmission member is located in a space defined by the rear surface of the beam, the energy absorption member and a plane extending from the plate, in a cross-section parallel to the horizontal plane (16; JP’456 Fig 1) .”
Regarding claim 4, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, teaches “The bumper assembly of claim 3, wherein the protrusion portion (50; JP’456 Fig 5) comprises a first portion (76; JP’456 Fig 5) contacting the peripheral portion (34; JP’456 Fig 5) of the plate (16; JP’456 Fig 5) in the SOT.”
With respect to claim 5, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, teaches “The bumper assembly of claim 4, wherein the protrusion portion (50; JP’456 Annotated Fig 5) comprises a second portion (As seen JP’456 Annotated Fig 5) contacting, in the SOT, a side surface of the energy absorption member (30; JP’456 Annotated Fig 5) , the side surface being perpendicular to the plate (16; JP’456 Annotated Fig 5) .”
PNG
media_image1.png
426
394
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 6, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, teaches “The bumper assembly of claim 5, wherein the protrusion portion comprises a third portion (56; JP’456 Fig 5) that, in the SOT, becomes generally parallel to a line connecting the position, in the beam (12; JP’456 Fig 5) , against which the barrier (S; JP’456 Fig 5) is to collide and an intersection of the plate and the side surface of the energy absorption member (30; JP’456 Fig 5) , the third portion becoming generally parallel to the line in the cross-section parallel to the horizontal plane.”
5. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 浜辺 勉(JP 5888456 B2) in view of 田村 洋一 (JP 5807663 B2) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Mukaigawa et al. (US 11702142 B2) .
Regarding claim 7, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 2, teaches a rear surface of a beam (12b; JP’456 Fig 1) in the vehicle width direction and a plate-like portion (54; JP’663 Fig 7) mounting a load transmission member (50; JP’456 Fig 1) .
The combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 2, does not teach a recess in the rear beam surface to receive this plate-like portion.
However, Mukaigawa et al. teaches a recess in a beam extending in the vehicle width direction (4c; Mukaigawa et al. Fig 4) configured to receive a load transmission member (44; Mukaigawa et al. Fig 4).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the beam of JP’456 to receive the plate of JP’663, as taught by Mukaigawa et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for a simplified assembly, where automated spot welding can be used to secure the pieces and eliminates the possibility of fasteners shearing.
6. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 浜辺 勉(JP 5888456 B2) in view of 田村 洋一 (JP 5807663 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gotanda et al. (US 20020060463 A1).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, teaches the energy absorption member (30; JP’456 Fig 1).
The combination of JP’456 and JP’663, as applied to claim 1, does not teach a plurality of cylindrical portion in the energy absorption member.
However, Gotanda et al. teaches an energy absorption member (17; Gotanda et al. Fig 1A) comprising a plurality of cylindrical portions extending in the vehicle front-rear direction (21-23; Gotanda et al. Fig 1A).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the energy absorption member of JP’456 to have a cross section of cylindrical portions, as taught by Gotanda et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for a more cross-sectional area, thus more rigidity.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Komatsu et al. (US-20250145221-A1) teaches a front-end frame, with a beam, an energy absorption member, and a load transmission member, but lacks a plate to mount to the frame. Additionally, the reference does not qualify as prior art, due to the later filing date.
Nakayama et al. (US-20170320455-A1) teaches a front-end frame, with a beam, an energy absorption member, and a load transmission member, but lacks a recess in the beam to receive a plate from the load transmission member.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL ROBERT DIGIOVANNANTONIO whose telephone number is (571)272-4526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 a.m. to 5 p.m..
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 5712705500. 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.
/D.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights