DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 05/22/2026.
Claims 1-16 are currently pending and have been examined below.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/23/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2 of claim 5, “a slot provided to be received in a portion of the door panel” is objected and seems that it should read --a slot provided to receive a portion of the door panel--. Examiner notes that par. 64 discloses the slots 5a2 and 5b2 receives the portion 23 of the door panel. Additionally, figure 5 also shows the portion 23 received into slots 5a2 and 5b2.
In line 2 of claim 7, “receiving the slot” seems that it should read –received in the slot--.
Appropriate correction is required. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 14
Recitations such as “wherein the fixing means is a separate component from the door handle” discloses new matter for lacking sufficient support. None of the figures show the fixing means 4 as separate from the door handle 3. The side view in figure 5 seems to show the fixing means may be a separate component from the door handle due to the respective outlines of the fixing means and door handle, however this could simply be the side view of the figure showing different elevations of the door handle and fixing means.
Examiner now turns to the specification for support of the limitation; the closest disclosure can be located on par. 49 disclosing “the door handle equipped with the fixing means 4”, however this is not sufficient for supporting that the fixing means is separate from the door handle. As such the limitations in claim 14 disclose new matter.
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 1-2, 4-7, and 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harter et al. (US 9156335) (hereinafter “Harter”).
Claim 1
(Harter discloses) A door structure (figures 1-8) for a motor vehicle (Harter’s invention is directed to vehicle doors; abstract), comprising:
a door panel (14);
a door handle (10) arranged on a first side of the door panel (Annotated figure 6 below) to perform an opening/closing operation of the door structure (via 44);
fixing means (70) extending at least partially on a second side (Annotated figure 6 below) of the door panel opposite to the first side, wherein the fixing means comprises at least two longitudinal portions (72a and 72b; figure 3) each secured at a first end (top end) to the door handle, and at a second end (bottom end) to the door panel, the second end extending along a surface of the door panel (Annotated figure 6 below) and fixed to the surface of the door panel (Annotated figure 6 below; note that “to” was interpreted as --In a direction toward so as to reach—such that the second end is fixed towards the surface of the door panel); and
a reinforcement structure (52) configured to secure the at least two longitudinal portions to each other (figure 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
565
662
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 6
Claim 2
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the reinforcement structure comprises at least two lateral portions (Annotated figure 3 below) connected together by a central portion (Annotated figure 3 below), each lateral portion being configured to receive at least partially a corresponding one of longitudinal portions of the fixing means (Annotated figure 3 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
509
602
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3
Claim 4
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 2, wherein each lateral portion of the reinforcement structure comprises a reinforcing portion formed by a reinforcing bracket (Annotated figure 6 above) designed to sandwich a corresponding one of the longitudinal portions of the fixing means between said reinforcement structure and the door panel (Annotated figure 6 above).
Claim 5
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 2, wherein each lateral portion has a slot (Annotated figure 6 above) provided to be received in a portion of the door panel (for this claim, the door panel was interpreted as parts 16 and 14, and the slot is received in the door panel).
Claim 6
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 5, wherein the reinforcement structure allows access to an opening (74a and 74b) for attaching the longitudinal portions to the door panel if the reinforcement structure with the slots is attached on the portion of the door panel at a predetermined position (this was interpreted as functional language, and also that parts can be attached by way of other elements in between).
Claim 7
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 5, wherein the portion of the door panel receiving the slot of a corresponding one of the lateral portions corresponds to a portion of a contour of an opening of the door panel (Annotated figure 6 above).
Claim 9
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the reinforcement structure is in one piece (figure 6).
Claim 10
(Harter discloses) A vehicle (Harter’s invention is directed to vehicles; abstract) comprising the door structure according to Claim 1 (see rejection in claim 1 above).
Claim 11
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the surface of the door panel along which the second end extends is located on the second side of the door panel opposite to the first side and does not extend through the door panel (Annotated figure 6 above).
Claim 12
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the surface along which the second end extends is an inner surface of the door panel opposite to an outer surface of the door panel (see surface of the door panel in Annotated figure 6 above being an inner surface relative to the outer surface of the first side of the door panel).
Claim 13
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the reinforcement structure is located inside the door panel (figure 6).
Claim 14
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the fixing means is a separate component from the door handle, the fixing means being fixed to the door handle at the first end and to the door panel at the second end (figure 6).
Claim 15
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the longitudinal portions are fixed to the door panel by screwing or bolting (66; note that “fixed to” was interpreted with the broadest reasonable interpretation set forth in the rejection in claim 1 above).
Claim 16
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 1, wherein the second end of each of the longitudinal portions defines an opening (74a and 74b) such that the second end is fixed to the door panel by inserting a screw (66) into the opening (figure 6).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harter, as applied to claims 1-2, 4-7, and 9-16 above.
Claim 8
(Harter discloses) The door structure according to Claim 2.
The lateral portions and the central portions of Harter seem to show a U-shape arrangement, however if applicant believes that this is not true, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been no more than an obvious matter of engineering design choice, as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill to provide the lateral portions and central portion of the reinforcement structure to be U-shape for improving the fitting of the longitudinal portions with the corresponding lateral portions therefore it is more secure with the reinforcement structure and the door panel.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Harter et al. (US 9156335) teaches most of the limitations of claim 1.
However, claim 3 recites “each longitudinal portion of the fixing means is at least partially received through a ring of a corresponding one of the lateral portions of the reinforcement structure”. The interpreted lateral portions of the reinforcement structure have dedicated slots or receiving portions for receiving the corresponding longitudinal portions of the fixing means however they do not form a ring as required by the claims.
Examiner considered applying Walawender et al. (US 11554646) (hereinafter “Walawender”) as it has a longitudinal portion 70 that passes through an element (54) similar to applicant’s invention, however decided not to do the combination as the combination would require significant amount of hindsight from applicant’s invention with no significant improvement to Harter’s invention.
Lastly, further modifications such that any of the prior art meets the claim limitations would require hindsight and/or piecemeal rejection such that the examiner has found them unreasonable to apply.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment directed to the drawing objection has been considered and the objection was withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 05/22/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments directed to Benard and Kudoh were moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Benard and Kudoh for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding to applicant’s arguments directed to the second end being “NOT fixed to the door panel”, note that the claims do not require the second end to be directly fixed or directly connected to the door panel and “to” was given its broadest reasonable interpretation such that the prior art used in the rejection above reads into applicant’s claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/CATHERINE A KELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights