DETAILED ACTION
This is on the merits of Application No. 18/912661, filed on 10/11/2024. Claims 1-10 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 10/11/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2019/0291556 to Caliskan et al.
Caliskan discloses:
(Claim 1) A vehicle (Fig. 1 element 20) comprising: a vehicle body frame (22); and a battery pack including a battery (58) and a battery case (60) in which the battery is accommodated and attached to the vehicle body frame, wherein the vehicle body frame includes a pair of side frames (24 25) extending along a front-rear direction of the vehicle and arranged on both sides in a left-right direction of the vehicle, the battery pack is fixed to the pair of side frames, the battery case includes a case main body (42) on which the battery is disposed, and a battery cover (30) covering the case main body from above and having an upper surface forming a floor panel of the vehicle, and the battery cover is integrally provided with a cross member portion (46) extending in the left-right direction and having an upper portion on which a seat (90) configured to allow a passenger to sit on is mounted (see Fig. 4).
(Claim 2) wherein the cross member portion includes a first cross member portion and a second cross member portion arranged in the front-rear direction, and the seat is mounted across the first cross member portion and the second cross member portion (see Fig. 4, seat mounted across two cross member portions 46).
(Claim 3) wherein a seat rail (92) along which the seat is slidable is installed between the first cross member portion and the second cross member portion.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE102022003077 to Chodankar et al.
Chodankar discloses:
(Claim 1) A vehicle (see Abstract, for a vehicle) comprising: a vehicle body frame (see vehicle body frame in Fig. 3); and a battery pack (306) including a battery (battery portion of 306) and a battery case (case of 306) in which the battery is accommodated and attached to the vehicle body frame, wherein the vehicle body frame includes a pair of side frames (302) extending along a front-rear direction of the vehicle and arranged on both sides in a left-right direction of the vehicle, the battery pack is fixed to the pair of side frames, the battery case includes a case main body (main body of 306) on which the battery is disposed, and a battery cover (202) covering the case main body from above and having an upper surface forming a floor panel of the vehicle, and the battery cover is integrally provided with a cross member portion (204) extending in the left-right direction and having an upper portion on which a seat configured to allow a passenger to sit on is mounted (see Abstract, Figs. 2A and 3, 204 is integral with the battery cover 202).
(Claim 2) wherein the cross member portion includes a first cross member portion (Fig. 2A element 204-3) and a second cross member portion (204-4) arranged in the front-rear direction, and the seat is mounted across the first cross member portion and the second cross member portion (par. [0032], 204 is designed to allow mounting of vehicle seats).
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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caliskan in view of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 20200023905 to Kawase.
Caliskan discloses:
The limitations of claim 1.
(Claim 5) wherein both ends of the cross member portion in the left-right direction are fixed to the pair of side frames (Par. [0022], first ends 74 of the cross-members 46 are attached to the sidewalls 72 of the rockers by welding, fasteners, or the like.
(Claim 6) wherein seat brackets (94) to which the seat is attached are provided at the both ends of the cross member portion in the left-right direction (Par. [0023], seats can include a pair of spaced apart rails 92 in which seat brackets can connect at locations aligned with the rails, thus having two spaced apart seat brackets).
Caliskan does not explicitly disclose:
(Claim 5) further comprising: an extension member fixed to each of the pair of side frames, wherein both ends of the cross member portion in the left-right direction are fixed to the pair of side frames by the extension members.
Kawase teaches:
(Claim 5) further comprising: an extension member (Fig. 1 element 82) fixed to each of the pair of side frames, wherein both ends of the cross member portion in the left-right direction are fixed to the pair of side frames by the extension members.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, the structure of Caliskan to use extension members to fix the cross member portion to the side frame, as taught by Kawase, in order to have better impact energy absorption efficiency in side collisions of the vehicle. Caliskan already provides teaching of using different methods of attaching the cross member to the side frame. One of ordinary skill would be able to apply the attachment of Kawase to Caliskan and produce predictable results.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chodankar in view of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2020/0180698 to Lee et al.
Chodankar discloses:
The limitations of claim 2.
Chodankar does not disclose:
(Claim 4) wherein the battery cover is provided with a frame portion connected to the first cross member portion and the second cross member portion and extending in the front-rear direction, at a substantially central portion in the left-right direction.
Lee teaches:
(Claim 4) wherein the battery cover is provided with a frame portion (22) connected to the first cross member portion and the second cross member portion and extending in the front-rear direction (front element 15 and back element 15), at a substantially central portion in the left-right direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, the structure of Chodankar to have the tunnel taught by Lee in order to connect the center console to wiring while also providing better stiffness in crashes. The use of tunnels on the floor to connect to a center console is well-known in the art. Lee provides teaching that these tunnels can be connected to the cross-members. One of ordinary skill would be able to apply the teachings of Lee to Chodankar and produce predictable results.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chodankar in view of JP2023015307.
Chodankar discloses:
The limitations of claim 1.
Chodankar does not disclose:
(Claim 10) wherein the vehicle body frame further includes side sills fixed to the pair of side frames, and the cross member portion faces the side sills in the left-right direction.
‘307 teaches:
(Claim 10) wherein the vehicle body frame (Fig. 2) further includes side sills (3) fixed to the pair of side frames (2), and the cross member portion (4) faces the side sills in the left-right direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, the structure of Chodankar to include side sills fixed to the side frames and the ross member portion faces the side sills, as taught by ‘307, in order to provide more reinforcement in case of an accident.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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 prior art of record does not disclose nor render obvious the limitations of claims 7-9. Particularly in claim 7, the ends of the cross member portion and seat brackets being above the pair of side frames. Particularly in claim 8, a seat bracket to which the seat is attached at a central portion and a frame portion extending in the front-rear direction and connected to the seat bracket. Particularly in claim 9, side sills fixed to the pair of side frames and the cross member portion fixed to the pair of side frames and the side sills via extension members extending from both ends in the left-right direction. Caliskan and Chodankar are the closest prior art of record. Neither disclose nor render obvious the above limitations. It would not have been obvious to modify these art without improper hindsight reasoning as none of the prior art of record disclose nor render obvious these limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ogawa et al. (US 20250010923) discloses a vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY HANNON whose telephone number is (571)270-1943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-6.
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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571) 270-5565. 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 HANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights