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 CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first Office action on the merits for Application No. 18/851,934, filed 09/27/2024. Claims 1-8 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs’) received on 09/27/2024, 06/30/2025 and 10/10/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 2-3 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “virtual line of the vehicle” in line 2 which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what structural component the virtual or imaginary line associated with it. The virtual or imaginary line is nothing but a graphical representation which does not make any contribution to the structure of the claimed invention. The claim is directed toward an apparatus and the representation of an imaginary/reference line of the apparatus does not add any structural significance to the invention because it is not a part of the claimed invention. The Office recommends the limitation should be avoided or changed to clear the subject matter. See MPEP 2173.05 (s).
Claim 3 is rejected upon dependent from a rejected base claim and they inherit its deficiencies.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (CN 208544331U, machine translation attached) in view of Inoue (US 2019/0016391 A1, from IDS filed 06/30/2025).
Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses a bottom structure of a vehicle (figs. 1-3), the bottom structure comprising:
a frame (11,12,13,14) above which a cabin is provided (paras. [0012], [0014], [0016], [0031], i.e., a cabin or cockpit above the frame or frame beams, not labeled);
a power plant (i.e., motor assembly 53 includes a motor) located below the frame and including a high-voltage component (4); and
a spare tire (7) located below the frame and supported on the frame behind the mount (fig. 3).
Sun teaches the motor unit is connected to and supported by the vehicle frame but does not specifically teach a mount for supporting the power plant on the frame. Mounting devices including brackets are well recognized to a skilled person in the art for rigidly mounting a battery unit and/or motor unit to the vehicle frame.
Inoue discloses an engaged bracket 54 located behind a battery pack 14 and couples a motor unit 16 to a rear floor cross-member 44. See Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0048], [0049], [0054], [0058], [0059] and [0078].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for Sun, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have a mount located behind a high-voltage or battery component and supports the motor unit on a rear cross beam of the vehicle frame instead of having a connection mount as taught by Inoue for the purpose of rigidly engaged the rear cross member and the motor unit and efficiently transmit collision load to the motor unit without deviation during a vehicle collision (paras. [0048], [0049], [0058], [0054] and [0078], i.e., in case which collision load is input toward the vehicle front-rear direction inner side). Moreover, a mount between a motor unit and a vehicle frame is well known in the art for mounting and supporting the electric motor component and substituting it for the mounting of Sun would not change the way the overall apparatus functions. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Furthermore, the modified bottom structure of Sun and Inoue further teaches wherein when viewed from a front-rear direction of the vehicle, the high-voltage component and the mount overlap with each other, and the spare tire (42) and the mount (54) overlap with each other. See Figure 2 and Annotated Figures below.
Regarding claim 2, as modified the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 1, Inoue further teaches (see annotated Figure 4 below) wherein a center of the spare tire (42) is deviated from a virtual line (“VL”) of the vehicle to one side in a vehicle width direction, the virtual line passing through the mount and extending in the front-rear direction of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 3, as modified the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 2, Inoue further teaches wherein a center of the high-voltage component (4) in the vehicle width direction is deviated from the virtual line (“VL”) to the other side in the vehicle width direction.
Regarding claim 4, as modified the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 1, Inoue further teaches wherein the frame is provided with a protector (fig. 1 and paras. [0034], [0045], i.e., rear cross-member 34) that extends downward from the frame (44) at a location between the mount (54) and the spare tire (42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for modified bottom structure, with a reasonable expectation of success, to include a protector that extends downward from the frame at a location between the mount and the spare tire as further taught by Inoue in order to support the mount between the motor and the vehicle frame as the predictable result of reducing vibration during traveling under various road conditions.
Regarding claim 5, as modified the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 4, Inoue further teaches wherein the protector (i.e., rear cross member 34) is formed such that one side in a vehicle width direction is more deformable than the other side in the vehicle width direction (fig. 1, paras. [0045] and [0048], i.e., side face of the rear cross-member 34 from the vehicle front side via a bracket and a support mount configured by an elastic member, not illustrated in the drawings).
Regarding claim 6, as modified the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 4, Inoue further teaches wherein the protector is provided with a reinforcing member (46).
Regarding claim 8, as modified the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 6, Inoue further teaches (see annotated Figure 2 below) wherein the reinforcing member (46) is a bulkhead including
an upper surface portion (“USP”) and
a lower surface portion (“LSP”) that extend in the front-rear direction of the vehicle, and
a top surface portion (“TSP”) that extends in an upper-lower direction of the vehicle to connect front end portions of the upper surface portion (“USP”) and the lower surface portion (“USP”), and the top surface portion faces the mount (fig. 1, bracket 54).
PNG
media_image1.png
782
1025
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
881
1033
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 4 Annotated Figure 2
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious the bottom structure of the vehicle according to claim 6 and in combination with the remaining features recited.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamada et al. (US 2018/0065670 A1) discloses a rear vehicle-body structure of vehicle includes a spare tire mounted in a spare-tire storage 3a, see Figures 1-6;
Sakita et al. (US 8,388,041 B2) discloses a spare tire installation structure includes a spare tire wheel 11, see Figures 2 and 3;
Yoshimura et al. (JP 2018/039314A, machine translation attached) discloses a vehicle body rear part structure includes a spare tire mounted in a spare tired storage section 3a provided in the rear floor panel 3, see Figures 1-3; and
Yuchao (CN 1022,205,853A, machine translation attached) discloses a chassis structure of pure electric automobile includes a spare tire rack 8 for mounting a spare tire, see the Figure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tinh T Dang whose telephone number is (571)270-1776. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM.
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 Mon-Friday from 8AM-4:30PM 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.
/TINH T DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights