DETAILED ACTION
The following action is in response to application 18/932,338 filed on October 30, 2024.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada (JP2010125980A from IDS; see annotated Fig. 13 below for clarity).
PNG
media_image1.png
362
741
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 1, Yamada teaches a window structure of a vehicle, comprising: a window frame member 21/22/25 having an opening portion penetrating in a vehicle longitudinal direction and a peripheral edge portion enclosing the opening portion and provided at a front part of the vehicle; a window member 10F covering the opening portion and piled on the peripheral edge portion of the window frame member, the window member being transparent or translucent; and an adhesive agent 12 applied to the peripheral edge portion of the window frame member along an entire circumference of the peripheral edge portion so as to adhere the window member to the peripheral edge portion of the window frame member (paragraph 18), wherein said peripheral edge portion of the window frame member comprises a pair of first portions which include a right-and-left corner portions positioned at a lower side of the peripheral edge portion and at both sides (Fig. 13), in a vehicle width direction, thereof and respective portions continuous to said pair of corner portions, and a second portion which is positioned between said pair of first portions (Fig. 13), said adhesive agent comprises a first adhesive agent 12b and a second adhesive agent 12a having a greater loss coefficient than said first adhesive agent (Fig. 10; paragraph 32), said second adhesive agent is provided to adhere said window member to said window frame member at said pair of first portions (Fig. 13)and/or said second portion, and said first adhesive agent is provided to adhere said window member to said window frame member at a portion except said portion where the window member is adhered to the window frame member by said second adhesive agent (Fig. 13).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takezoe (EP3530507A1 from IDS). With regard to claim 2, Yamada teaches the structure, but lacks the specific teaching wherein a width of said second adhesive agent is greater than that of said first adhesive agent. Takezoe teaches a similar window structure comprising: a window frame 2, an adhesive 18 located between a window 3 and the window frame, wherein the adhesive at a pair of first portions 16 at the corners of a lower portion of a window 3 have a greater width than the adhesive elsewhere (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify Yamada to employ a width of said second adhesive agent is greater than that of said first adhesive agent in view of Takezoe with reasonable expectation for success in order to increase adhesin force in the corner regions (paragraph 20) as well as further improve handling stability, ride comfort and quietness (paragraph 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-20 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 fails to show or render obvious the window structure as claimed, and particularly wherein said second adhesive agent is applied to both of said pair of first portions and said second portion, and including the remaining structure of claim 3. Yamada teaches of either using the second adhesive 12a along the entire periphery of the window (paragraph 49) or just the corners (first portions). Yamada teaches that the use of the first adhesive with a smaller loss coefficient is desired in the second portion. Claims 4-5 depends upon claim 3. The present invention also particularly includes the window structure wherein said second adhesive agent is applied only to said pair of first portions, and including the remaining structures of claims 6 and 10, respectively. Although Yamada teaches using the second adhesive 12a at ALL the corners of the window, applicant claims the first portions are a pair (two) of lower corner areas and that the first adhesive is ONLY at the lower corner portions. This is distinct from the teaching of Yamada. Claims 13-14 depend upon claim 6. Claims 19-20 depend upon claim 10. The present invention also particularly includes the window structure wherein said second adhesive agent is applied only to said second portion, and including the remaining structure of claims 7 and 11, respectively. Yamada teaches of either using the second adhesive 12a around the entire perimeter of the window (paragraph 49) or only the corners (the first portions). This claim is distinct from the teaching of Yamada. Claims 15-16 depend upon claim 7. The present invention also particularly includes the window structure wherein said second adhesive agent is applied to both of said pair of first portions and said second portion. Yamada teaches of either using the second adhesive 12a around the entire perimeter of the window (paragraph 49) or only the corners (the first portions). Although using the second adhesive around the entire perimeter would encompass the first and second portions, there would be no first adhesive. This claim is distinct from Yamada. Claims 17-18 depend upon claim 8. The present invention also particularly includes the window structure wherein said first adhesive agent and said second adhesive agent are applied such that an end portion of an application area of the first adhesive agent and an end portion of an application area of said second adhesive agent overlap each other partially, and including the remaining structure of claims 9 and 12, respectively. Although cited references DE102019120097A1 and JP2009012604A teach of overlapping adhesives (55/54 for DE ‘097 and @38 for JP ‘604), these overlaps are of the same type of adhesive and not two distinct adhesives.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Altdorf (GB2080867A) has been cited to show a similar window structure comprising: a window frame 9, a window member 1, a second polymeric adhesive 10 (page 1, line 81) that is located only at the lower portion of the window, and a different first adhesive 4 located at the portions of the window that do not have the second adhesive.
Burkhardt (US 5620794) has been cited to show a similar window structure comprising: a window frame 114, a window member 110, and overlapping adhesives 312/313 (that are the same type of adhesive).
Nakagawa (US 20250196593) has been cited to show a similar window structure with the same inventors and assignee, which does not have double patenting issues.
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
Submission of your response by facsimile transmission is encouraged. The central facsimile number is (571) 273-8300. Recognizing the fact that reducing cycle time in the processing and examination of patent applications will effectively increase a patent's term, it is to your benefit to submit responses by facsimile transmission whenever permissible. Such submission will place the response directly in our examining group's hands and will eliminate Post Office processing and delivery time as well as the PTO's mail room processing and delivery time. For a complete list of correspondence not permitted by facsimile transmission, see MPEP 502.01. In general, most responses and/or amendments not requiring a fee, as well as those requiring a fee but charging such fee to a deposit account, can be submitted by facsimile transmission. Responses requiring a fee which applicant is paying by check should not be submitting by facsimile transmission separately from the check.
Responses submitted by facsimile transmission should include a Certificate of Transmission (MPEP 512). The following is an example of the format the certification might take:
I hereby certify that this correspondence is being facsimile transmitted to the Patent and Trademark Office (Fax No. (571) 273-8300) on ____________ (Date)
Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate: _____________________________________
_____________________________________
(Signature)
If your response is submitted by facsimile transmission, you are hereby reminded that the original should be retained as evidence of authenticity (37 CFR 1.4 and MPEP 502.02). Please do not separately mail the original or another copy unless required by the Patent and Trademark Office. Submission of the original response or a follow-up copy of the response after your response has been transmitted by facsimile will only cause further unnecessary delays in the processing of your application; duplicate responses where fees are charged to a deposit account may result in those fees being charged twice.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROGER L PANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 05:30-16:00.
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, Jacob Scott can be reached at 571-270-3415. 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.
/ROGER L PANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
/ROGER L. PANG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3655B
July 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights