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 § 103
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 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 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugiyama (JP 2015016809) in view of Watanabe et al. (JP 2007090999), and further in view of Algargoosh et al. (US 9,058,799).
With respect to claim 1, Sugiyama teaches a vehicle sound-absorbing device (Fig.3, Item 50) configured to be disposed in a ventilation space (Fig.3, Item 50D) between a vehicle exterior (Fig.3, Item 14) and a vehicle interior (Fig.3, Item 30), the vehicle interior having a communication opening (Fig.1, Item 32) through which the ventilation space communicates with a vehicle compartment, the vehicle sound-absorbing device comprising a sound absorbing structure (Fig.3, Item 10) configured to be connected to the vehicle exterior and the vehicle interior and thus divide the ventilation space into a first space in which the communication opening is disposed and a second space other than the first space (Fig.3). However, Sugiyama fails to disclose the vehicle sound-absorbing device comprising a shield plate configured to be connected to the vehicle exterior and the vehicle interior and thus divide the ventilation space into a first space in which the communication opening is disposed and a second space other than the first space; and a sound-absorbing structure protruding from a first face of the shield plate toward the first space, the first face facing the first space.
On the other hand, Watanabe et al. teach a shield plate (Fig.4) configured to be connected to the vehicle exterior and the vehicle interior and thus divide a ventilation space into a first space in which the communication opening is disposed and a second space other than the first space (Figs.3 and 4; Abstract); and a structure (Fig.4 and 5, Ribs, unnumbered) protruding from a first face of the shield plate toward the first space, the first face facing the first space.
Algargoosh et al. disclose wherein structures (Fig.1, Item 1, 3 and 4 and 6) protruding from a first face of a shield plate toward a first space could work as a sound-absorbing structure (Col.4, Lines 24 – 27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the Watanabe et al. and Algargoosh et al. shield plate configuration as the Sugiyama sound-absorbing device because it would provide a shield plate that prevent acoustical and environmental communication between selected spaces while effecting an appropriately tuned sound absorbing performance as necessitated by the specific requirements of the particular application.
With respect to claim 2, Watanabe et al. and Algargoosh et al. teach wherein the shield plate has a shape extending in a front-rear direction of the vehicle; the sound-absorbing structure includes a plurality of sound-absorbing plates aligned in a direction intersecting the front-rear direction (Watanabe et al.: Fig.4); and the sound-absorbing plates each have a continuous wavy shape (Algargoosh et al.: Fig.4) in the front-rear direction from a viewpoint facing the first face.
With respect to claims 3 and 4, Watanabe et al. teach wherein either the vehicle interior (Fig.3, Item 1a) or the vehicle exterior (Fig.3, Item 6) is a first exterior, the vehicle interior or the vehicle exterior other than the first exterior is a second exterior, and the shield plate (Fig.3, Item 16) is fixed to the first exterior swingably relative to the second exterior or through an adhesive layer (Fig.3, Item 18) and supported by the second exterior via an elastic member (Fig.3, Item 17).
With respect to claims 5 and 6, Watanabe et al. teach wherein the shield plate includes a reinforcing rib (Fig.4, Ribs, unnumbered) protruding from the first face toward the first space, the reinforcing rib has a straight-line shape extending in a direction intersecting the front- rear direction from a viewpoint facing the first face, and the plurality of sound-absorbing plates includes the sound-absorbing plates connected to the reinforcing rib, and wherein the shield plate includes two reinforcing ribs protruding from the first face toward the first space, the reinforcing ribs each have a straight-line shape extending in a direction intersecting the front-rear direction and align in the front-rear direction, from a viewpoint facing the first face, and the plurality of sound-absorbing plates is disposed between the two reinforcing ribs and includes the sound-absorbing plate connected to the two reinforcing ribs (Fig.4, Ribs perpendicular to each other).
With respect to claim 7, Watanabe et al. and Algargoosh et al. teach wherein the shield plate and the sound-absorbing structure are integral (Watanabe et al. and Algargoosh et al.: Fig.4).
Conclusion
The attached hereto PTO Form 892 lists prior art made of record that the Examiner considered it pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGARDO SAN MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2074. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 - 5:00 M - F.
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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached on 571-272-3985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Edgardo San Martin/
Edgardo San Martín
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2837
September 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights