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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/10/2026 has been entered.
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) 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya (JP 2011-52365). Tsuchiya discloses, with regard to claim 18, an electric vehicle comprising:
a chassis (see marked up figure below);
a pair of rear wheel assemblies 3;
a pair of front wheel assemblies 2;
a frontmost seat 5 supported by the chassis;
a rearmost seat 6 supported by the chassis, the rearmost seat facing forward (see Fig. 8);
a floorboard coupled the chassis (see marked up figured below);
wherein the floorboard provides a first footwell in front of the frontmost seat 5 and a second footwell 6 in front of the rearmost seat 6 (see Fig. 8);
and an electric motor configured to drive the pair of front wheel assemblies (“The cart 1 is configured as a golf cart. The cart 1 is configured as an EV (electric vehicle) cart that uses a storage battery as a power source and rotates the front wheels 2 or the rear wheels 3 with an electric motor.” – see translation);
wherein the second footwell has a longitudinal footwell depth; and
wherein the lightweight electric vehicle has a longitudinal footprint length.
Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is between about 1:4.5 and about 1:3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is between about 1:4.5 and about 1:3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
PNG
media_image1.png
432
505
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 19, Tsuchiya discloses wherein at least a portion of the seat bottom of the rearmost seat being located longitudinally rearward of an axis extending through a center of the pair of rear wheel assemblies.
With regard to claim 20, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the floorboard is substantially flat such that the first footwell and the second footwell are coplanar (see Figs. 5-7);
Claim(s) 1-17, 21-33, 35-45, 47-49, and 75-78 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya (JP 2011-52365) in view of Kuroda (US 9,440,681). Tsuchiya discloses:
With regard to claim 1 - A lightweight vehicle comprising:
a chassis;
a pair of rear wheel assemblies 3;
a pair of front wheel assemblies 2;
a pedestal supported by the chassis (see marked up figure below);
a frontmost seat 5 supported by the pedestal;
a rearmost seat 6 configured to accommodate a plurality of second occupants, the rearmost seat 6 supported by the chassis, the rearmost seat facing forward (see Fig. 1), at least a portion of a rear seat bottom of the rearmost seat being located longitudinally rearward of an axis extending through a center of the pair of rear wheel assemblies (see marked up figure below);
a floorboard positioned above and supported by the chassis (see below), wherein the floorboard is substantially flat such that a first footwell in front of the frontmost seat and a second footwell in front of the rearmost seat are coplanar; and
an electric motor configured to drive at least one of the pair of front wheel assemblies or the pair of rear wheel assemblies (“The cart 1 is configured as a golf cart. The cart 1 is configured as an EV (electric vehicle) cart that uses a storage battery as a power source and rotates the front wheels 2 or the rear wheels 3 with an electric motor.” – see translation).
PNG
media_image2.png
432
505
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tsuchiya fails to disclose a front suspension system coupling the pair of front wheel assemblies to the chassis and a rear suspension system coupling the pair of rear wheel assemblies to the chassis.
Kuroda teaches a lightweight vehicle comprising a pair of rear wheel assemblies 23, 24;
a pair of front wheel assemblies 21, 22;
a chassis 10;
a front suspension system coupling the pair of front wheel assemblies 22 to the chassis (“The left front wheel 21 and the right front wheel 22 are supported on the front frame 12 in a steerable manner and in an independent-suspension state.” - column 3, lines 28-31);
a rear suspension system coupling the pair of rear wheel assemblies 24 to the chassis (“The left rear wheel 23 and the right rear wheel 24 are supported on the rear frame 13 in an independent-suspension state.” - column 3, lines 37-39);
a frontmost seat 41 configured to accommodate a plurality of first occupants, the frontmost seat 41 including a front seat bottom, a front seat back, and a pedestal supported by the chassis 10 and supporting the front seat bottom;
a rearmost seat 71 configured to accommodate a plurality of second occupants, the rearmost seat supported by the chassis 10, the rearmost seat facing forward; and
at least a portion of the rearmost seat bottom of the rearmost seat 71 being located longitudinally rearward of an axis extending through a center of the pair of rear wheel assemblies (see Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the lightweight vehicle of Jaggi with the teaching of Kuroda so as to include a front suspension system and a rear suspension system, with a reasonable expectation of success, to increase ride comfort through isolation of the vehicle body from road noise.
With regard to claim 2, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the pedestal is spaced inward from lateral edges of the floorboard (see Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 3, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the electric motor is configured to drive the pair of front wheel assemblies. (“The cart 1 is configured as a golf cart. The cart 1 is configured as an EV (electric vehicle) cart that uses a storage battery as a power source and rotates the front wheels 2 or the rear wheels 3 with an electric motor.” – see translation)
With regard to claim 4, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a first longitudinal footwell depth of the first footwell is different from a second longitudinal depth of the second footwell.
PNG
media_image3.png
526
598
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 5, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal depth of the second footwell is greater than 18 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal depth of the second footwell is greater than 18 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 6, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is at least about 1:6. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is at least about 1:6, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 7, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is at least about 1:4.5. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is at least about 1:4.5, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 8, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is at most about 1:3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is at most about 1:3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 9, Tsuchiya discloses a canopy system 8 supported by the chassis (see Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 10, Tsuchiya discloses a rollover protection system 8, 9, 10.
With regard to claim 11, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein the floorboard has a lateral width that is greater than 42 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that the floorboard has a lateral width that is greater than 42 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 12, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least 81 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least 81 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 13, Tsuchiya discloses an electric vehicle comprising:
a chassis;
a pair of rear wheel assemblies 3;
a pair of front wheel assemblies 2;
a pedestal supported by the chassis;
a frontmost seat 5 supported by the pedestal;
a rearmost seat 6 configured to accommodate a plurality of second occupants, the rearmost seat 6 supported by the chassis, the rearmost seat 6 facing forward (see Fig. 1);
a floorboard coupled the chassis;
and an electric motor configured to drive the pair of front wheel assemblies 2;
wherein the floorboard is substantially flat such that a first footwell in front of the frontmost seat and a second footwell in front of the rearmost seat are coplanar (see Fig. 1);
wherein the second footwell has a longitudinal footwell depth; and
wherein the lightweight electric vehicle has a longitudinal footprint length.
Tsuchiya fails to disclose a front suspension system coupling the pair of front wheel assemblies to the chassis; a rear suspension system coupling the pair of rear wheel assemblies to the chassis.
Kuroda teaches a lightweight vehicle comprising a pair of rear wheel assemblies 23, 24;
a pair of front wheel assemblies 21, 22;
a chassis 10;
a front suspension system coupling the pair of front wheel assemblies 22 to the chassis (“The left front wheel 21 and the right front wheel 22 are supported on the front frame 12 in a steerable manner and in an independent-suspension state.” - column 3, lines 28-31);
a rear suspension system coupling the pair of rear wheel assemblies 24 to the chassis (“The left rear wheel 23 and the right rear wheel 24 are supported on the rear frame 13 in an independent-suspension state.” - column 3, lines 37-39);
a frontmost seat 41 configured to accommodate a plurality of first occupants, the frontmost seat 41 including a front seat bottom, a front seat back, and a pedestal supported by the chassis 10 and supporting the front seat bottom;
a rearmost seat 71 configured to accommodate a plurality of second occupants, the rearmost seat supported by the chassis 10, the rearmost seat facing forward; and
at least a portion of the rearmost seat bottom of the rearmost seat 71 being located longitudinally rearward of an axis extending through a center of the pair of rear wheel assemblies (see Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the lightweight vehicle of Jaggi with the teaching of Kuroda so as to include a front suspension system and a rear suspension system, with a reasonable expectation of success, to increase ride comfort through isolation of the vehicle body from road noise.
Tsuchiya further fails to explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is between about 1:4.5 and about 1:3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a ratio of the longitudinal footwell depth to the longitudinal footprint length is between about 1:4.5 and about 1:3, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 14, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal depth of the second footwell is greater than 18 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal depth of the second footwell is greater than 18 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 15, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least 81 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least 81 inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With regard to claim 16, Tsuchiya discloses a canopy system 8 supported by the chassis (see Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 17, Tsuchiya discloses a rollover protection system 8, 9, 10.
With regard to claim 21, Tsuchiya discloses a steering wheel 4.
With regard to claim 22, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat 6 includes a rear seatback, wherein a rearward-facing portion of the rear seatback 6 is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see below).
PNG
media_image4.png
432
505
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 23, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a forward-facing portion of the rear seatback is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see above).
With regard to claim 24, Tsuchiya teaches wherein the rearmost seat 6 includes a rear hip restraint, and wherein a first portion of the rear hip restraint is positioned forward of the axis and a second portion of the rear hip restraint 72 is positioned rearward of the axis (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 25, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat includes a front hip restraint, and wherein the rear hip restraint is at a higher height relative to the floorboard than the front hip restraint (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 26, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seatback, wherein the front seatback has an uppermost point, a lowermost point, and a forward-facing portion, and wherein the uppermost point and the lowermost point are each located rearward of a rear end of a base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
432
505
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 27, Tsuchiya discloses wherein at least a portion of the forward-facing portion of the front seatback extends from the uppermost point to the lowermost point and is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 28, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 29, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seat bottom, and wherein an uppermost portion of the pedestal extends a greater distance from front to back than the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
432
505
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 30, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the uppermost portion of the pedestal extends rearward of the rear end of the base (see above).
With regard to claim 31, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a lateral side of the pedestal is laterally offset from a lateral edge of at least one of the floorboard or the chassis (see Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 32, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 33, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat 6 include a rear seat bottom, and wherein the rear seat bottom is positioned at a higher height relative to the floorboard than the front seat bottom (see Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 35, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the second footwell is planar and extends along a single plane entirely between a first outer lateral edge of the chassis to a second, opposing outer lateral edge of the chassis. (see Figs. 1, 2, and 4).
With regard to claim 36, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein the floorboard has a lateral width that is at least one of (a) greater than 42 inches or (b) less than or equal to 52 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the lightweight vehicle such that the floorboard has a lateral width that is at least one of (a) greater than 42 inches or (b) less than or equal to 52 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in the size of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 37, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least one of (a) at least 81 inches or (b) at most 106 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least one of (a) at least 81 inches or (b) at most 106 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in the size of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 38, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seatback, wherein the front seatback has an uppermost point, a lowermost point, and a forward-facing portion, and wherein the uppermost point and the lowermost point are each located rearward of a rear end of a base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
432
505
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 39, Tsuchiya discloses wherein at least a portion of the forward-facing portion of the front seatback extends from the uppermost point to the lowermost point and is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 40, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 41, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seat bottom, and wherein an uppermost portion of the pedestal extends a greater distance from front to back than the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
432
505
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 42, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the uppermost portion of the pedestal extends rearward of the rear end of the base (see above).
With regard to claim 43, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a lateral side of the pedestal is laterally offset from a lateral edge of at least one of the floorboard or the chassis (see Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 44, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 45, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat 6 include a rear seat bottom, and wherein the rear seat bottom is positioned at a higher height relative to the floorboard than the front seat bottom (see Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 47, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the second footwell is planar and extends along a single plane entirely between a first outer lateral edge of the chassis to a second, opposing outer lateral edge of the chassis. (see Figs. 1, 2, and 4).
With regard to claim 48, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein the floorboard has a lateral width that is at least one of (a) greater than 42 inches or (b) less than or equal to 52 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the lightweight vehicle such that the floorboard has a lateral width that is at least one of (a) greater than 42 inches or (b) less than or equal to 52 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in the size of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 49, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least one of (a) at least 81 inches or (b) at most 106 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least one of (a) at least 81 inches or (b) at most 106 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in the size of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 75, Tsuchiya wherein an uppermost portion of the pedestal extends a greater distance from front to back than the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
432
505
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 76, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seatback, wherein the front seatback has an uppermost point, a lowermost point, and a forward-facing portion, and wherein the uppermost point and the lowermost point are each located rearward of a rear end of a base of the pedestal (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 77, Tsuchiya discloses wherein at least a portion of the forward-facing portion of the front seatback extends from the uppermost point to the lowermost point and is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 78, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
Claims 34 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya and Kuroda as applied to claims 1-33, 35-45, 47-49, and 75-78 above, and further in view of Takeuchi et al (JP 2004008640). Tsuchiya and Kuroda fail to explicitly disclose wherein the electric motor is positioned at least partially directly beneath the rear seat bottom. Takeuchi teaches a golf cart similar to that of Tsuchiya including a rear seat 8 and a motor unit 46, wherein the motor unit 46 is disposed directly beneath the rear seat 8. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vehicle of Tsuchiya and Kuroda with the teaching of Takeuchi such that the electric motor is positioned at least partially directly beneath the rear seat bottom, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow the motor unit to directly drive the rear wheels without need of an intermediate shaft.
Claims 50-65 and 70 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya and Kuroda as applied to claims 1-33, 35-45, 47-49, and 75-78 above, and further in view of Reffitt et al (US 7,422,082). With regard to claim 50, Tsuchiya discloses a forward-facing wall extends from the second footwell towards the rearmost seat (see Fig. 1). Tsuchiya and Kuroda fail to explicitly disclose wherein the rear suspension system includes a suspension member having a first end positioned along the chassis at a first point forward of the pair of rear wheel assemblies, wherein the first point is closer to the forward facing wall than to a tire of the rear wheel assemblies, and wherein a portion of the suspension member rearward of the first end is positioned proximate the axis. Reffitt teaches wherein a forward-facing wall 17 extending from a footwell upwardly, and a suspension member 48 having a first end 47a positioned along a chassis 10 at a first point forward of a pair of rear wheel assemblies 4, wherein the first point 47a is closer to the forward- facing wall 17 than to a tire of the pair of rear wheel assemblies 4, and wherein a portion of the suspension member 48 rearward of the first end 47a is positioned proximate an axis 4a of the rear wheel assembly 4 (see Fig. 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the lightweight vehicle of Tsuchiya and Kuroda with the teaching of Reffitt such that the rear suspension system includes a suspension member having a first end positioned along the chassis at a first point forward of the pair of rear wheel assemblies, wherein the first point is closer to the forward facing wall than to a tire of the rear wheel assemblies, and wherein a portion of the suspension member rearward of the first end is positioned proximate the axis to ensure that the rear wheel is properly suspended thus increasing ride comfort.
With regard to claim 51, Reffitt teaches wherein the suspension member 48 is a leaf spring (“As shown in FIG. 5, under the rear portions 10c arranged to curve upward from the left and right main frames 10, leaf springs 48 are disposed.” – column 5, lines 18-20).
With regard to claim 52, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat 6 includes a rear seatback, wherein a rearward-facing portion of the rear seatback 6 is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see below).
PNG
media_image4.png
432
505
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 53, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a forward-facing portion of the rear seatback is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see above).
With regard to claim 54, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seatback, wherein the front seatback has an uppermost point, a lowermost point, and a forward-facing portion, and wherein the uppermost point and the lowermost point are each located rearward of a rear end of a base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
432
505
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 55, Tsuchiya discloses wherein at least a portion of the forward-facing portion of the front seatback extends from the uppermost point to the lowermost point and is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 56, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 57, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the frontmost seat 5 includes a front seat bottom, and wherein an uppermost portion of the pedestal extends a greater distance from front to back than the base of the pedestal (see marked up figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
432
505
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 58, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the uppermost portion of the pedestal extends rearward of the rear end of the base (see above).
With regard to claim 59, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a lateral side of the pedestal is laterally offset from a lateral edge of at least one of the floorboard or the chassis (see Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 60, Tsuchiya discloses wherein an entirety of the front seatback is positioned rearward of the rear end of the base (see marked up figure above).
With regard to claim 61, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat 6 includes a rear seatback, wherein a rearward-facing portion of the rear seatback 6 is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see below).
PNG
media_image4.png
432
505
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 62, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a forward-facing portion of the rear seatback is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see above).
With regard to claim 63, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat 6 includes a rear seatback, wherein a rearward-facing portion of the rear seatback 6 is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see below).
PNG
media_image4.png
432
505
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 64, Tsuchiya discloses wherein a forward-facing portion of the rear seatback is positioned entirely rearward of the axis (see above).
With regard to claims 65 and 70, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the rearmost seat include a rear seat bottom, and wherein the rear seat bottom is positioned at a higher height relative to the floorboard than the front seat bottom (see figure above).
Claims 66-69 and 71-74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuchiya, Kuroda, and Reffitt as applied to claims 50-65 and 70 above, and further in view of Takeuchi et al (JP 2004008640). With regard to claims 66 and 71, Tsuchiya, Kuroda, and Reffitt fail to explicitly disclose wherein the electric motor is positioned at least partially directly beneath the rear seat bottom. Takeuchi teaches a golf cart similar to that of Tsuchiya including a rear seat 8 and a motor unit 46, wherein the motor unit 46 is disposed directly beneath the rear seat 8. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vehicle of Tsuchiya, Kuroda, and Reffitt with the teaching of Takeuchi such that the electric motor is positioned at least partially directly beneath the rear seat bottom, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow the motor unit to directly drive the rear wheels without need of an intermediate shaft.
With regard to claims 67 and 72, Tsuchiya discloses wherein the second footwell is planar entirely between a first lateral edge of the chassis to a second, opposing lateral edge of the chassis (see Fig. 2).
With regard to claims 68 and 73, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein the floorboard has a lateral width that is at least one of (a) greater than 42 inches or (b) less than or equal to 52 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the lightweight vehicle such that the floorboard has a lateral width that is at least one of (a) greater than 42 inches or (b) less than or equal to 52 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in the size of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claims 69 and 74, Tsuchiya fails to explicitly disclose wherein a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least one of (a) at least 81 inches or (b) at most 106 inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to construct the lightweight vehicle such that a longitudinal length between a frontmost portion of the pair of front wheel assemblies and a rearmost portion of the pair of rear wheel assemblies is at least one of (a) at least 81 inches or (b) at most 106 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in the size of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 2/10/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-78 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Tsuchiya, Kuroda, Reffitt, and Takeuchi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY WILHELM whose telephone number is (571)272-6980. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:30.
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, Paul Dickson can be reached at 571-272-7742. 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.
/TIMOTHY WILHELM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617 April 9, 2026
Prosecution Insights