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 § 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Besnard et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2025/0075766).
Re claim 1, Besnard discloses an energy absorbing device for use in a vehicle, the energy absorbing device comprising: a sheet formed (51, figure 8, see paragraph 0131) of a composite material, the sheet having a width extending along a width of the vehicle and a length extending along a length of the vehicle (as suggested by figure 1), wherein the sheet has a sinusoidal form formed along the length of the sheet (as shown in figure 8).
Re claim 3, the sinusoidal form is irregular (see paragraph 0119, Besnard discloses the succession of corrugations can have different shapes and/or dimensions).
Re claim 4, the sheet includes a plurality of arcuate sections along the sinusoidal form and a number of arcuate sections in a load portion is greater than the number of arcuate sections in a non-load portion. See the annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image1.png
549
784
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 5, the sheet is a first sheet of material (51, figure 8) and a second sheet of material (also labeled 51 in figure 8), the first sheet of material joined to the second sheet of material to form a plurality of tubes interconnected to each other by a neck portion. See the annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image2.png
555
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 6, the composite material is one selected from the group consisting of: carbon fiber reinforced polymer, glass fiber reinforced polymer, aramid fiber reinforced polymer, and natural fiber reinforced polymer (see paragraph 0097).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Besnard et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2025/0075766).
Re claim 2, Besnard et al. discloses all the limitations of the claim, as applied above, except for a thickness of the sheet of material varying.
Besnard does teach the successive corrugations can have different shapes and/or dimensions (see paragraph 0119).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify an energy absorbing device, such as that disclosed by Besnard, to have a thickness of the sheet of material varying, with a reasonable expectation of success, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claims 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Besnard et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2025/0075766) in view of Shirai et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2025/0206378).
Re claims 7 and 8, Besnard et al. discloses a rocker assembly for use in a vehicle (see paragraph 0095 which teaches the shock-absorbing structure being configured to be placed/integrated in a side rail of the vehicle), a carrier (60) disposed within the interior space, and an energy absorbing device (50) disposed within the interior space and held by the carrier, wherein energy absorbing device is a sheet formed of a composite material (see paragraph 0097), the sheet having a length extending along the length of the rocker and a width extending between in the, wherein the sheet has a sinusoidal form extending along the length of the sheet.
Besnard et al. does not disclose the rocker assembly comprising an inner rocker and an outer rocker coupled together so as to enclose an interior space, the inner rocker and the outer rocker extending along a length of the vehicle, the inner rocker and the outer rocker being made of metal.
Shirai et al. teaches a rocker assembly comprising an inner rocker (26, figure 4) and an outer rocker (24, figure 4) coupled together so as to enclose an interior space, the inner rocker and the outer rocker extending along a length of the vehicle, the inner rocker and the outer rocker being made of metal (steel, see paragraph 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify an energy absorbing device, such as that disclosed by Besnard et al., to have the rocker assembly comprise an inner rocker and an outer rocker coupled together so as to enclose an interior space, the inner rocker and the outer rocker extending along a length of the vehicle, the inner rocker and the outer rocker being made of metal, as taught by Shirai et al, in order to construct the rocker in a conventional manner in which the rocker can be easily manufactured by stamping.
Re claim 9, Bensard further discloses the carrier includes a first flange (58 would necessarily be attached to the energy absorbing device between the inner and outer rocker as it fits in the space between the inner and outer rocker) configured to be attached between the inner rocker and the outer rocker.
Re claim 10, Bensard further discloses the carrier includes a fastening member (58) for attachment to one of the inner rocker or the outer rocker.
Re claim 11 and 18, Bensard does not disclose a thickness of the sheet material varying.
Besnard does teach the successive corrugations can have different shapes and/or dimensions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify an energy absorbing device, such as that disclosed by Besnard, to have a thickness of the sheet of material varying, with a reasonable expectation of success, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Re claims 12 and 19, Bensard further discloses the sheet includes a plurality of arcuate sections along the sinusoidal form and a number of arcuate sections in a load portion is greater than the number of arcuate sections in a non-load portion (see the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
549
784
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claims 13 and 20, Bensard further discloses the sheet includes a plurality of tubes interconnected to each other by a neck portion (see the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
555
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 14, Bensard further discloses the composite material is one selected from the group consisting of: carbon fiber reinforced polymer, glass fiber reinforced polymer, aramid fiber reinforced polymer, and natural fiber reinforced polymer (see paragraph 0097).
Re claims15 and 17, Bensard further discloses the carrier includes a planar surface (58) extending along the length of the sheet and interposed between the sheet and at least one of the inner rocker and the outer rocker (58 would necessarily be attached to the energy absorbing device between the inner and outer rocker as it fits in the space between the inner and outer rocker).
Re claim 16, Bensard in view of Shirai et al. disclose all the limitations of the claim, as applied above, except for a chassis extending along a length of the vehicle between a front of the vehicle and a rear of the vehicle, and a plurality of cross bars extending along a width of the vehicle.
Shirai et al. further discloses a chassis (30, figure 4) extending along a length of the vehicle between a front of the vehicle and a rear of the vehicle, and a plurality of cross bars (28, figure 4) extending along a width of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a vehicle, such as that disclosed by Bensard in view of Shirai et al., to have a chassis extending along a length of the vehicle between a front of the vehicle and a rear of the vehicle, and a plurality of cross bars extending along a width of the vehicle, as taught by Shirai, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide the vehicle with structural integrity.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references all disclose energy absorbing devices.
DE 102019208224A1 teaches a wave shaped energy absorbing element.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason S Morrow whose telephone number is (571)272-6663. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m..
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at (571) 272-5109. 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.
/JASON S MORROW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
June 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights