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 Objections
Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 13, line 2, “the supporting structure” has no antecedent basis in the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 12, 13, 21, 22, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goeke (EP 2927105) .
With respect to claim 12, Goeke discloses a method for producing a motor vehicle, comprising:
producing multiple structural modules 25 (6/10), wherein each structural module 6/10 contains at least one structural component of a vehicle body and at least one vehicle component (module 6 includes housing, lights 14 and indicators 15, as mentioned at the top of pg. 14 of the machine translation of Goeke., and module 10 includes a floor, wheel wells, and a drive unit as mentioned at the top of pg. 14 of the machine translation of Goeke), and
assembling the multiple structural modules 6/10 to produce the motor vehicle (as shown in Fig. 1 of Goeke),
whereby the motor vehicle is already equipped with a plurality of vehicle components upon completion of a supporting motor vehicle structure (as shown in Fig. 1 of Goeke), and
wherein the structural modules 6/10 are joined together on a structural component side exclusively using cold joining techniques, the structural modules being inseparably connected together such that the joint connection can only be released by destruction of a joining aid or by damaging the structural module (“it is conceivable that vehicle modules may be used alternatively or, preferably, cumulatively, also by means of non-detachable mechanical connections. e.g. cold or non-thermal, cohesive connection,” and “it is conceivable, for example that vehicle modules are glued,” see middle and lower portions of pg. 10 of the machine translation of Goeke).
With respect to claim 13, Goeke discloses that the supporting structure of the motor vehicle is formed exclusively from structural modules (i.e., modules 6, 7, 10, and 11 as shown in Fig. 2 of Goeke).
With respect to claim 21, Goeke discloses that vehicle doors are also fitted as pre-assembled modules 3 and 4 (see top of pg. 14 of the machine translation of Goeke; Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 22, Goeke discloses a motor vehicle, comprising:
a construction which is composed of multiple structural modules 6/10, wherein each structural module 6/4 contains at least one structural component of a vehicle body and at least one vehicle component (module 6 includes housing, lights 14 and indicators 15, as mentioned at the top of pg. 14 of the machine translation of Goeke, and module 10 includes a floor, wheel wells, and a drive unit as mentioned at the top of pg. 14 of the machine translation of Goeke), and
the structural modules 6/10 are joined together on a structural component side exclusively using cold joining techniques, the structural modules being inseparably connected together such that the joint connection can only be released by destruction of a joining aid or by damaging the structural module (“it is conceivable that vehicle modules may be used alternatively or, preferably, cumulatively, also by means of non-detachable mechanical connections. e.g. cold or non-thermal, cohesive connection,” and “it is conceivable, for example that vehicle modules are glued,” see middle and lower portions of pg. 10 of the machine translation of Goeke).
With respect to claim 23, Goeke discloses that the cold joining techniques are rivet connections, screw connections and/or bonded connections (Goeke teaches bonded connections, “It is conceivable, for example that vehicle modules are glued,” see lower portion of pg. 10 of the machine translation of Goeke).
With respect to claim 25, Goeke discloses that each structural component 6/10 plays a structure-defining role in the motor vehicle (as shown in Fig. 2 of Goeke) and absorbs forces and/or moments (all structures are capable of absorbing forces and moments to a certain extent).
Claims 12 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hofer et al. (US 2012/0139292).
With respect to claim 12, Hofer et al. discloses a method for producing a motor vehicle, comprising:
producing multiple structural modules 131/133, wherein each structural module contains at least one structural component of a vehicle body and at least one vehicle component (module 131 includes dashboard 103, vehicle seat 105, carpets 107, as mentioned in paragraph [0049] of Hofer et al., and module 133 includes trim panels and pre-cabling, as mentioned in paragraph [0050] of Hofer et al.), and
assembling the multiple structural modules 131/133 to produce the motor vehicle (step 17 as shown in Fig. 1 of Hofer et al.),
whereby the motor vehicle is already equipped with a plurality of vehicle components upon completion of a supporting motor vehicle structure (Hofer et al., paragraphs [0049]-[0050]; Fig. 1), and
wherein the structural modules 131/133 are joined together on a structural component side exclusively using cold joining techniques, the structural modules being inseparably connected together such that the joint connection can only be released by destruction of a joining aid or by damaging the structural module (“The upper body module assemblies can be attached to the equipped chassis by cold joining methods, e.g., by adhesive bonding,” Hofer et al., paragraph [0008]).
With respect to claim 22, Hofer et al. discloses a motor vehicle, comprising:
a construction which is composed of multiple structural modules 131/133, wherein each structural module contains at least one structural component of a vehicle body and at least one vehicle component (module 131 includes dashboard 103, vehicle seat 105, carpets 107, as mentioned in paragraph [0049] of Hofer et al., and module 133 includes trim panels and pre-cabling, as mentioned in paragraph [0050] of Hofer et al.), and
the structural modules 131/133 are joined together on a structural component side exclusively using cold joining techniques, the structural modules being inseparably connected together such that the joint connection can only be released by destruction of a joining aid or by damaging the structural module (“The upper body module assemblies can be attached to the equipped chassis by cold joining methods, e.g., by adhesive bonding,” Hofer et al., paragraph [0008]).
With respect to claim 23, Hofer et al. disclose that the cold joining techniques are bonded connections (“The upper body module assemblies can be attached to the equipped chassis by cold joining methods, e.g., by adhesive bonding,” Hofer et al., paragraph [0008]).
Claims 12, 14, 16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fuchs et al. (US 2013/0076069)
With respect to claim 12, Fuchs et al. disclose a method for producing a motor vehicle, comprising:
producing multiple structural modules 2/4, wherein each structural module 2/4 contains at least one structural component of a vehicle body and at least one vehicle component (module 2 includes front axle, rear axle, as mentioned in paragraphs [0044] and [0046] of Fuchs et al. and module 4 includes a floor 72 and seat cross member 72 as mentioned in paragraph [0048] of Fuchs et al.), and
assembling the multiple structural modules 2/4 to produce the motor vehicle (as shown in Fig. 3 of Goeke),
whereby the motor vehicle is already equipped with a plurality of vehicle components upon completion of a supporting motor vehicle structure (as shown in Fig. 3 of Goeke), and
wherein the structural modules 2/4 are joined together on a structural component side exclusively using cold joining techniques, the structural modules being inseparably connected together such that the joint connection can only be released by destruction of a joining aid or by damaging the structural module (“a motor vehicle having a chassis frame and a vehicle body, which are mutually connected by gluing and bolting,” Fuchs et al., paragraph [0005]).
With respect to claim 14, Fuchs et al. discloses that the motor vehicle is constructed such that a first structural module 2 serves as a construction platform for all further modules 4 (“placing the vehicle body onto the chassis frame,” Fuchs et al., paragraph [0030]).
With respect to claim 16, Fuchs et al. discloses that the first structural module form and energy-storage module of the vehicle (“An energy accumulator, preferably an electric energy accumulator, is arranged in this clearance in the completely assembled motor vehicle,” Fuchs et al,. paragraph [0045]).
With respect to claim 18, Fuchs et al. discloses that a front bulkhead module 68 (part of module 4) is used as a further structural module.
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 14, 17, 19, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofer et al. (US 2012/0139292).
With respect to claim 14, Hofer et al. disclose the claimed method except that they are silent on whether the first structural module serves as a construction platform for all further modules. However, Hofer et al. disclose that the first structural module 131 includes a base frame 102, a drive train including a drive 109, a tank 123 and front and rear axles 117 and 119 and wheels 121. Since this module is very likely heavy and has wheels to support itself on the ground, It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the first structural module 131 so that is serves as a construction platform for all further modules including module 133.
With respect to claim 17, Hofer et al. disclose that the first structural module 131 forms a floor unit 125 of the vehicle (as shown in Figs. 2-3 of Hofer et al.).
With respect to claim 19, Hofer et al. disclose that a side frame modules 133 is used as a further structural module (as shown in Fig. 3 of Hofer et al.).
With respect to claim 30, Hofer et al. disclose that the floor unit 125 has a vehicle front end and a vehicle rear end (as shown in Fig. 3 of Hofer et al.) and is configure as an energy-storage module (tank 123 as shown in Fig. 2 of Hofer et al.)
Claims 15, 20 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goeke (EP 2927105) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Kreth (DE 4330559).
With respect to claim 15, Goeke discloses the claimed method except for the component-integrated geometric features which are configured to allow a precise positioning of the structural modules relative to one another. However, Kreth teaches a similar method including structural modules 1/2 that have component-integrated geometric features (node elements 19/19a on module 2 that respectively engage with node elements 9/9a on module 1) which are configured to allow a precise positioning of the structural modules relative to one another (Kreth, paragraph [0028]; Figs. 1 and 3).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Kreth with the method disclosed by Goeke for the advantage of precisely positioning the structural modules relative to one another.
With respect to claim 20, Goeke discloses the claimed method except that they are silent on the structural modules being mechanically pre-fixed and bonded for connection to further structural modules. However, Kreth teach a similar method of attaching vehicle structural modules 1 and 2 including pre-fixing and bonding for connection further structural modules (“Until the adhesive hardens, locking screws 28, 29 hold the module 22 and the passenger compartment 27 together on the node elements 8, 8a,” Kreth, paragraph [0027]).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Kreth with the method disclosed by Goeke for the advantage of continuing processing of the vehicle without needing to wait for the adhesive to cure first.
With respect to claim 27, Kreth teaches that the mechanical pre-fixing is achieve by crew connections 28/29 which fix the structural modules ½ in predefined position relative to one another until an adhesive has hardened (Kreth, paragraph [0027]; Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 28, Kreth discloses that the structural modules 1/2 have mounting faces as shown below in the images taken from Figs. 1 and 3 of Kreth:
[AltContent: textbox (mounting face)][AltContent: textbox (mounting face)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
310
357
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (mounting face)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
285
354
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 24 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofer et al. (US 2012/0139292), as applied to claims 12 or 22 above, and further in view of Wakabayahsi et al. (GB 2075925).
With respect to claim 24, Hofer et al. disclose the claimed method except for providing an anticorrosion coating before the structural modules are joined together. Hofer et al. disclose that the structural modules are painted before the structural modules are joined together (as shown at steps 3, 13, and 17 in Fig. 1 of Hofer et al).
Wakabayashi et al. teaches a similar method including providing an anticorrosion coating to structural modules (i.e., “vehicle door” or “vehicle hood,” Wakabayashi et al., pg. 2, lines 18-27). It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Wakabayashi et al. with the method disclosed by Hofer et al. for the advantage of preventing corrosion of the structural modules.
With respect to claim 32, Hofer et al. disclose the claimed motor vehicle except for providing an anticorrosion coating before the structural modules are joined together. Hofer et al. disclose that the cold joining techniques are bonded connections (“The upper body module assemblies can be attached to the equipped chassis by cold joining methods, e.g., by adhesive bonding,” Hofer et al., paragraph [0008]). Hofer et al. further disclose that the structural modules are painted prior to the structural modules being joined together (as shown at steps 3, 13, and 17 in Fig. 1 of Hofer et al).
Wakabayashi et al. teaches a similar method including providing an anticorrosion coating to structural modules (i.e., “vehicle door” or “vehicle hood,” Wakabayashi et al., pg. 2, lines 18-27). It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Wakabayashi et al. with the motor vehicle disclosed by Hofer et al. for the advantage of preventing corrosion of the structural modules.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofer et al. (US 2012/0139292), as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Xin et al. (US 2022/0363328).
With respect to claim 26, Hofer et al. disclose the claimed method except for the at least one vehicle component on the structural module 131 being at least one of a control unit, a sensor, a vehicle interior trim panel, a vehicle exterior trim panel, a mirror, a signaling device, a vehicle window and a cable. Hofer et al. disclose that the at least one vehicle component of the structural module 133 is a vehicle interior trim panel (Hofer et al., paragraph [0050]).
Xin et al. teach a similar method including providing a chassis structural module 2000 including a sensor 9100 (Xin et al., paragraph [0093]). It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Xin et al. with the method disclosed by Hofer et al. for the advantage of the sensor which sends signals about ground condition to the vehicle controller (Xin et al., paragraph [0093]).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofer et al. (US 2012/0139292), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of JP 08-15877.
With respect to claim 29, Hofer et al. disclose the claimed method except for the first structural module being aligned and fixed in a defined position on a mounting jig. However, JP 08-15877 teaches a vehicle assembly method in which a chassis 13 (first structural module) is mounted on a jig 11, and further modules are assembled starting from the first structural module 13 (see bottom of pg. 3 and top of pg. 4 of the machine translation of JP 08-15877).
It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of JP 08-15877 with the method disclosed by Hofer et al. for the advantage of precise positioning of further modules on the chassis of the vehicle.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hofer et al. (US 2012/0139292), as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Godthi et al. (US 2022/0315114).
With respect to claim 31, Hofer et al. disclose the claimed method except that they are silent on whether the side frame has a deformation element in a region below the openings. Hofer et al. disclose that the side frame extends from an A-pillar via a B-pillar to a C-pillar, opening for side vehicle doors 136/136 are provided in the side frame 133 as shown below in the image taken from Fig. 3 of Hofer et al.:
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (C-pillar)]
[AltContent: textbox (B-pillar)][AltContent: textbox (A-pillar)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image3.png
216
291
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Godthi et al. teaches a side frame of a body including a deformation element 100 in a region below door openings as shown in Fig. 1A of Godthi et al. It 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, with a reasonable expectation of success, to combine the teaching of Godthi et al. with the method disclosed by Hofer et al. for the advantage of protecting the battery 16 from side impact damage (Godthi et al,. paragraph [0031]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive of any error in the above rejection.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 102 rejection of claims 12 and 20 in view of Goeke, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As outlined in the above rejection, Goeke has envisioned embodiments where adhesive is used to bond the connections between the structural modules. Such an adhesive connection would be inseparably connected together such that the joint connection can only be released by destruction of a joining aid.
Additionally, while the rejections in view of Yabushita et al, or Cha et al. have been withdrawn based on Applicant’s amendment to the claims, additional new rejections have been set forth as outlined above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DANIEL J COLILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-2157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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 571-270-5500. 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.
/Daniel J Colilla/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
