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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because paragraph [0043] of the specification describes a plurality of first ribs, a plurality of second ribs, a plurality of third ribs and a plurality of fourth ribs, however only a single rib of each set of ribs is identified in the drawings. As such, it is not clear how an “irregular quadrilateral area” (paragraph [0044], lines 2-3) is formed by the second and fourth plurality of ribs. Also, lead lines for O and P in Figure 7 appear to be pointing to the same feature. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Reference numeral “22” used in paragraph [0033], line 5, does not appear in the drawings. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 4, lines 2-3, “the first reinforcing rib”; on line 3, “the second reinforcing rib”; on line 6, “the third reinforcing rib”; and on line 7, “the fourth reinforcing rib” lack clear antecedent basis.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102013007346 in view of CN 112373580.
Regarding claim 1, DE 102013007346 discloses:
A vehicle (1; Fig. 8) floor, comprising: a rear floor (annotated Fig. 3 below) provided and a connecting assembly (annotated Fig. 5 below); wherein the rear floor comprises a first area (annotated Fig. 3 below) obtained through a fixed mold and a second area (annotated Fig. 3 below) obtained through a variable mold, and the second area of the rear floor is connected to the front floor (as shown in Fig. 1); and the connecting assembly is provided on the second area of the rear floor (as shown in annotated Fig. 3 below) and is configured to connect to a battery pack (41; Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 below) of a vehicle, and a position of the connecting assembly on the second area is naturally determined by a size of the battery pack and a wheel base of the vehicle body since the connecting assembly must correspond to the dimensions of the battery pack and vehicle wheel base in order to provide adequate support for the battery pack.
PNG
media_image1.png
765
735
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
865
617
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, DE 102013007346 discloses:
The vehicle floor according to claim 1, as explained above, wherein the connecting assembly comprises a first connecting assembly (annotated Fig. 3 above) and a second connecting assembly (annotated Fig. 3 above); and the first connecting assembly and the second connecting assembly are provided on the second area of the rear floor at intervals (spaced apart as shown in annotated Fig. 3 above), and both the first connecting assembly and the second connecting assembly are connected to the battery pack (41; where the connection is shown in Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 5 below) .
Regarding claim 3, DE 102013007346 discloses:
The vehicle floor according to claim 2, as explained above, wherein the second area of the rear floor is provided with a first installation point (annotated Fig. 3 above; where the first installation point is a location of the first connecting assembly) and a second installation point (annotated Fig. 3 above; where the second installation point is a location of the second connecting assembly), and positions of the first installation point and the second installation point are naturally determined by the size of the battery pack and the wheel base of the vehicle body since the connecting assembly must correspond to the dimensions of the battery pack and vehicle wheel base in order to provide adequate support for the battery pack; and the first connecting assembly is connected to the first installation point (see annotated Fig. 3 above) in that the first installation point is the location of the first connecting assembly, and the second connecting assembly is connected to the second installation point (see annotated Fig. 3 above) in that the second installation point is the location of the second connecting assembly.
Regarding claim 5, DE 102013007346 discloses:
The vehicle floor according to claim 3, as explained above, wherein both the first installation point and the second installation point are installation columns (the columns being visible in annotated Fig. 3 above and pointed out with a lead line in annotated Fig. 6 above).
Regarding claim 7, DE 102013007346 discloses:
The vehicle floor according to claim 6, as explained above, wherein a specific strength corresponding to a material of the vehicle floor is greater than a preset value, as broadly as recited, given that the preset value has not been specified. Any strength of the material of the floor is greater than a preset value that is lower than the strength of the floor
Regarding claim 8, DE 102013007346 discloses:
The vehicle floor according to claim 7, as explained above, wherein the vehicle floor is made of aluminum alloy. See page 4, line 21 of the provided English language translation.
However, DE 102013007346 fails to disclose a front floor along with the rear floor provided in sequence from a vehicle head to a vehicle tail of a vehicle body with respect to claim 1 and the front floor comprising a front floor body and a front floor extension body with respect to claim 6.
Notwithstanding, CN 112373580 discloses a front floor (11; Fig. 1) along with a rear floor (12; Fig. 1) provided in sequence from a vehicle head to a vehicle tail of a vehicle body (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 below) and further discloses a front floor body (annotated Fig. 1 below) and a front floor extension body (22; Figs. 1 and 2), wherein a first end (annotated Fig. 2 below) of the front floor extension body is connected to the front floor body (the connection shown in Figs. 1 and 2 below), a second end (annotated Fig. 2 below) of the front floor extension body (22; Figs. 1 and 2) is connected to the rear floor (12; Fig. 1; the connection shown in Figs. 1 and 2 below), and a length from the first end of the front floor extension body to the second end of the front floor extension body is determined by the wheel base of the vehicle body, i.e., “the size in the length direction of the vehicle floor” as described on page 5, lines 27-28 of the provided English language translation.
PNG
media_image3.png
741
907
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
680
866
media_image4.png
Greyscale
A person of ordinary skill in the art is someone presumed to have known the relevant art at the relevant time. The CN 112373580 reference is considered to be relevant art in that the CN 112373580 reference is in the same field of endeavor, namely that which pertains to vehicle floor constructions, as the DE 102013007346 reference.
Therefore, 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 to provide the floor construction of DE 102013007346 with a front floor including a front floor body and a front floor extension body CN 112373580 with a reasonable expectation of success in order to complete the vehicle floor construction and to provide for vehicle constructions of differing lengths. Motivation to combine provided by CN 112373580 on page 5, lines 27-28 of the provided English language translation.
Furthermore, the recitation in claim 1 the recitation of a first area of the rear floor being “obtained through a fixed mold” and a second area of the rear floor being “obtained through a variable mold” are considered to be a product by process limitations in that the mentioned phrases are directed to the manner in which the first and second areas of the rear floor are formed rather than structural limitations of the thereof.
According to section 2113 of the MPEP:
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
In this instance, DE 102013007346, as modified by CN 112373580, discloses first and second rear areas which are structurally the same as those recited in claim 1. Thus, “the claim (claim 1) is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 6, DE 102013007346, as modified by CN 112373580, disclose:
The vehicle floor according to claim 1, as explained above, further comprising a front floor body (annotated Fig. 1 above of CN 112373580) and a front floor extension body (22; Figs. 1 and 2 of CN 112373580), wherein a first end (annotated Fig. 2 above of CN 112373580) of the front floor extension body is connected to the front floor body (the connection shown in Figs. 1 and 2 above of CN 112373580), a second end (annotated Fig. 2 above of CN 112373580) of the front floor extension body (22; Figs. 1 and 2 above of CN 112373580) is indirectly connected the second area of the rear floor (12; Fig. 1; the connection shown in Figs. 1 and 2 above of CN 112373580), and a length from the first end of the front floor extension body to the second end of the front floor extension body is determined by the wheel base of the vehicle body, i.e., “the size in the length direction of the vehicle floor” as described on page 5, lines 27-28 of the provided English language translation of above of CN 112373580).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102013007346 in view of CN 112373580, as applied above to claim 1, and further in view of Eichelhard et al. US 10,046,809.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, DE 102013007346, as modified by CN 112373580, disclose a vehicle comprising the floor according to claim 1, as explained above.
However, DE 102013007346, as modified by CN 112373580, do not disclose that such floor is part of a body-in-white of the vehicle as recited in claim 9 and the vehicle comprises the body in white as recited in claim 10
Notwithstanding, Eichelhard et al. disclose a floor (3; Fig. 1) incorporated into a body-in-white of a vehicle as described in col. 3, lines 13-14.
A person of ordinary skill in the art is someone presumed to have known the relevant art at the relevant time. The Eichelhard et al. reference is considered to be relevant art in that the Eichelhard et al. reference is in the same field of endeavor, namely that which pertains to vehicle floor constructions that are incorporated into a vehicle body, as the DE 102013007346 reference.
Therefore, 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 to incorporate the vehicle floor of DE 102013007346, as modified by CN 112373580, into a body-in-white of the vehicle as taught by Eichelhard et al. with a reasonable expectation of success as is a common step in manufacturing a vehicle where the body-in-white is formed prior to painting and assembly of the remainder of the vehicle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
The recitation in claim 4 of the first connecting assembly comprising a first end of a first reinforcing rib being connected to the first installation point, and a second reinforcing rib being connected to second ends of two adjacent first reinforcing ribs; and the second connecting assembly comprising a first end of a third reinforcing rib being connected to the second installation point, and a fourth reinforcing rib being connected to second ends of two adjacent third reinforcing ribs is neither taught nor fairly suggested by the prior art of record. Specifically, DE 102013007346 the closest prior art of record fails to teach the first connecting assembly having first and second ribs configured as recited in claim 4 or the second connecting assembly having third and fourth ribs configured as recited in claim 4. Note the absence of ribs associated with the first and second connecting assemblies shown in annotated Fig. 3 above of DE 102013007346.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tezza II et al. US 2022/0410687 disclose a vehicle segmented floor which includes a floor battery (100; Fig. 1). However, Tezza II et al. fail to teach a rear floor with first and second regions and associated first and second connecting assemblies as required by claim 1.
Choi et al. US 11,407,448 disclose a vehicle center floor (11; Fig. 1) with a battery assembly (50; Fig. 3) attached thereto. However, Choi et al. fail to teach a rear floor with first and second regions and associated first and second connecting assemblies as required by claim 1.
CN 106080804 disclose a rear floor structure (6-14; Fig 1.) which includes a battery mounting plate (304; Fig 6). However, CN 106080804 does not disclose the rib configuration set forth in claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph D. Pape whose telephone number is (571)272-6664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 AM-3:30 PM.
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.
/Joseph D. Pape/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights