DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to applicant's amendment received on 12/2/2025. Amended claim 12 is acknowledged and the following new grounds of rejection below are formulated. Claims *** are cancelled. The amendments to the specification have been considered and accepted.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosendahl et al. (U.S. Publication 2003/0140887), hereinafter “Rosendahl”.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Rosendahl discloses the same invention substantially as claimed such as the same invention substantially as claimed such as a device for producing an oil pan, the device comprising an oil pan underside (underside of 1) with an oil pan bottom (bottom of 1) and an all-round sidewall (shown in figure 2) arranged on the oil pan bottom to form a leakproof hollow space with the oil pan bottom (inherent), wherein a partition wall (wall of suction side of outlet opening 5, paragraph 37) is provided in the hollow space, which divides the hollow space into a suction space (space where suction occurs through outlet opening 5) for forming a suction opening and an outflow space (space where suction doesn’t take place) for forming an outflow opening (5) for the oil to flow out along an outflow direction, wherein in the partition wall (wall for 5) defines a fluid opening are provided for the oil to flow through from the suction space (space where 5 sucks oil from the pan) into the outflow space (space within the pan 12 that isn’t in the suction zone); a filter element (9) and/or sieve element is provided, which is integrated in the outflow space (shown in figure 3) in order to filter the oil flowing through the outflow space (paragraphs 35), and wherein a supporting grid (shown in figure provided below) is provided, which is arranged in the outflow direction of the oil above the filter element (9) and/or sieve element, wherein the supporting grid (shown in figure below) is attached to an inside of the sidewall (frame 2 is part of the grid like structure and is attached to the inside of the sidewall through elements 10, paragraph 36) configured to fix the filter element (9) and/or the sieve element between the supporting grid (shown in figure below along with 2) and the oil pan bottom (shown in figure 3) when the oil flows out in the outflow direction, but is silent to disclose that the partition wall defines more than one opening and fastening means are provided on an outside of the sidewall for fastening the oil pan underside to a correspondingly designed wall that is configured as the upper side to form the oil pan. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide more than one opening instead of one large opening, since applicant has not disclosed that such an arrangement solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with one large opening in all directions. It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide fastening elements for the flange of the oil pan to connect to the engine although not shown.
PNG
media_image1.png
880
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Rosendahl discloses the device according to Claim 1, wherein the supporting grid (shown in figure above) is attached to the inside of the sidewall with interlock (shown in figure 3 with elements 10).
Regarding claim 3, Rosendahl discloses the device according to Claim 2, wherein the supporting grid (shown in figure above) is welded to the inside of the sidewall. Examiner notes that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to weld such a component into the oil pan.
Regarding claim 4, Rosendahl discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the filter element (9) and/or sieve element spans across the whole of the outflow space (space of oil pan) so that all of the oil flows through the filter element (9) and/or sieve element as it flows out (shown in figure 1).
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Rosendahl discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the fastening means on the outside of the sidewall comprise holding elements (flange of oil pan 1) that project in an axial direction (shown in figure 2) and sleeves (obvious just as mentioned in claim 1 that sleeves of openings to allow for bolts to pass through are obvious to allow for connecting the oil pan to the engine) that pass through the holding elements (flange of oil pan shown in figure 2) in a vertical direction (V), so that by way of the sleeves the oil pan underside (underside of 1) can be fixed to the wall by means of fastening elements (shown in figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, Rosendahl discloses the claimed invention but is silent to disclose the partition wall being integral to the oil pan underside. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of when the invention was made to have such an arrangement, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993).
Regarding claim 7, Rosendahl discloses the claimed invention but is silent to disclose the holding elements, oil pan underside, the sidewall and the partition wall being cast in plastic. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of when the invention was made to use such a material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 8, Rosendahl discloses the same invention substantially as claimed but is silent to disclose the oil pan having a groove and a seal disposed within the groove. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art to provide a seal within a groove of the oil pan such as an oil pan gasket when attaching the oil pan to the engine component for the purpose of preventing leakage. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of when the invention was made to provide a seal within a groove of the oil pan for the purpose of preventing leakage.
Regarding claim 9, Rosendahl discloses the claimed invention except for the ribs being honeycomb like. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have honeycomb-like ribs, since applicant has not disclosed that such an arrangement solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with intersecting grid like ribs. Examiner notes that the ribs are provided on an outside of the pan bottom as an element housing the filter (shown in figure above). Claim does not specify that it has to be on an exterior surface of the oil pan.
Regarding claim 10, Rosendahl discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose that the supporting grid is made of stainless steel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of when the invention was made to provide such a material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 11, Rosendahl discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the supporting grid (shown in figure above) is molded around the filter element (9) on both sides (paragraph 35, extruded around the filter 9).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 12 have been considered but are moot because the rejection uses new art Rosendahl.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED O HASAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0990. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 11AM-7PM.
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/SYED O HASAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747 3/5/2026