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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 3, 2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lebsak et al. (US 2019/0145135 A1), hereinafter "Lebsak".
Regarding claim 1, Lebsak discloses a latch device (latch assembly 16, ¶[0058], figs. 2-18) for a front hood (“closure panel, configured as a decklid (or ‘hood’) 12”, ¶[0057], fig. 1), which is capable of meshing with a striker provided in the front hood of a vehicle (“latch assembly 16 is … secured to a structural portion of vehicle body 11 adjacent to the front compartment and is configured to releasably engage a striker 22 mounted to an underside of decklid 12”, ¶[0057]) and performing opening and closing control of the front hood (“providing closure latch assembly 16 with a power release function and a power cinch function”, ¶[0057]), the latch device comprising:
a latch (ratchet 40) configured to mesh with the striker (striker 22) when the front hood is in a closed state (“striker 22 is shown captured/retained within striker guide channel 46 of ratchet 40”, ¶[0065], figs. 3A-B) and biased by a biasing member in a direction in which the latch is to be released from meshing with the striker (“cinch lever 90 located by cinch lever biasing member 97 in a first or ‘home’ position”, ¶[0065], fig. 3A);
a primary pawl (pawl 42) configured to engage with the latch to maintain the front hood at a full-close position when the latch meshing with the striker is arranged at a predetermined primary latch position (“ratchet 40 held in its primary striker capture position by pawl 42 when pawl 42 is located in its ratchet holding position due to pawl latch lug 56 engaging primary latch shoulder 48 on ratchet 40”, ¶[0060], figs. 2A-B);
a secondary pawl (safety pawl 142) configured to engage with the latch to maintain the front hood at a half-engaged position when the latch released from an engaged state with the primary pawl is arranged at a predetermined secondary latch position (“a blocker lug 162 on safety pawl 142 engages secondary latch shoulder 49 on ratchet 40, thereby mechanically holding ratchet 40 in its secondary striker capture position”, ¶[0070], figs. 8A-C);
a motor (“power actuator 38 is intended to be configured to include, in this non-limiting example, an electric motor”, ¶[0058], figs. 2A-B); and
a driving force transmission member (drive cam 60 comprising cam pawl release lever 64, ¶[0061], figs. 2A-B) configured to operate by driving the motor and capable of releasing the engaged state between the latch and the primary pawl and an engaged state between the latch and the secondary pawl, wherein the latch device is configured to perform, by driving the motor, a power release function of releasing the engaged state between the latch and the primary pawl (“initial driven rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction causes a first pawl trigger lug 116 formed on drive cam pawl release lever 64 to engage pawl release lug 58 on pawl 42 [and] causes pawl 42 to begin moving from its ratchet holding position toward its ratchet releasing position”, ¶[0066], figs. 6A-B) and the engaged state between the latch and the secondary pawl using the driving force transmission member to switch the front hood from the full-close position to a full-open position (“continued driven rotation of drive cam 60 in its actuation direction from its pawl released position toward a third or ‘safety pawl released’ position causes a second pawl trigger lug 164 on drive cam pawl release lever 64 to engage pawl release lug 58 on pawl 42 [and] results in movement of safety pawl 142 from its ratchet blocked position into its ratchet unblocked position”, ¶[0071]), and
a closer component mounting portion (drive cam pivot post 68 and cinch lever drive post 172) is provided between the driving force transmission member and the latch (configuration best shown in fig. 8A), the closer component mounting portion being capable of mounting a closer component thereon (“drive cam cinch lever 66 … connected in a ‘stacked’ arrangement for common rotation about a drive cam pivot post 68”, ¶[0061]) that allows the latch device to perform, by driving the motor, a closer function of moving the front hood from the half-engaged position to the full-close position (“slightly further rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction toward a seventh or ‘second stage cinch end’ position … causes drive cam cinch lever 66 to continue movement of the components of latch cinch mechanism 36 such that … driven cinching movement of ratchet 40 causes ratchet 40 to act on and move striker 22 which, in turn, causes decklid 12 to move from its cinched position toward its fully-closed position”, ¶[0078]).
Regarding claim 2, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 1, further comprising:
the closer component (latch cinch mechanism 36 comprising drive cam cinch lever 66, fig. 2A) removably mounted on the closer component mounting portion (drive cam pivot post 68 and cinch lever drive post 172), wherein the latch device is configured to perform the power release function (“initial driven rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction causes a first pawl trigger lug 116 formed on drive cam pawl release lever 64 to engage pawl release lug 58 on pawl 42 [and] causes pawl 42 to begin moving from its ratchet holding position toward its ratchet releasing position”, ¶[0066], figs. 6A-B) and the closer function (“slightly further rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction toward a seventh or ‘second stage cinch end’ position … causes drive cam cinch lever 66 to continue movement of the components of latch cinch mechanism 36 such that … driven cinching movement of ratchet 40 causes ratchet 40 to act on and move striker 22 which, in turn, causes decklid 12 to move from its cinched position toward its fully-closed position”, ¶[0078]).
Regarding claim 4, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 1, further comprising:
a housing accommodating the motor (“latch assembly 16 also includes a frame plate and cover plate configured to define a latch housing (not shown) which supports each of the above-noted mechanisms and power actuator 38”, ¶[0058]), wherein the closer component mounting portion (drive cam pivot post 68 and cinch lever drive post 172) overlaps with a surface having a maximum projected area among surfaces of the housing (based on the layout of the components, the surface of the housing with the maximum projected area would be the front and rear plan views best shown in figs. 9A-B; drive cam pivot post 68 and cinch lever drive post 172 overlap such surface).
Regarding claim 5, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 4, wherein when the closer component (latch cinch mechanism 36 comprising drive cam cinch lever 66) is mounted on the closer component mounting portion (drive cam pivot post 68 and cinch lever drive post 172), the entire closer component overlaps with the surface having the maximum projected area among the surfaces of the housing (as the housing is cited in ¶[0058] to include each of the latch assembly 16 mechanisms, the entire latch cinch mechanism 36 overlaps with the surface having the maximum projected area described relevant to claim 4).
Regarding claim 6, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 2, wherein the closer component (latch cinch mechanism 36) includes a link member (drive cam cinch lever 66) provided on the driving force transmission member (drive cam 60) and configured to press the latch from the secondary latch position toward the primary latch position by driving the motor (“slightly further rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction toward a seventh or ‘second stage cinch end’ position … causes drive cam cinch lever 66 to continue movement of the components of latch cinch mechanism 36 such that … driven cinching movement of ratchet 40 causes ratchet 40 to act on and move striker 22 which, in turn, causes decklid 12 to move from its cinched position toward its fully-closed position”, ¶[0078], figs. 13A-B).
Regarding claim 7, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 6, further comprising:
an emergency lever configured to release an engaged state between the link member and the latch when an operation force for an emergency is input thereto (“Decklid 12 may be manually released via operation of a release handle 14 located within a passenger compartment 20 of vehicle 10 and which functions to actuate a latch release mechanism associated with a closure latch assembly 16 for releasing decklid 12”, ¶[0057], fig. 1).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebsak as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hörschgen (DE 102021118349 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 1, wherein the closer function is a function of moving the front hood from the half-engaged position to the full-close position by driving the motor (further rotation of drive cam 60 causing decklid 12 to move from its cinched position toward its fully-closed position, as described relevant to claim 1). Although Lebsak recites “one or more latch sensors 39” and “positional signals indicative of the position of various components” in ¶[0058], Lebsak is silent regarding sensors configured to detect positions of primary and secondary pawls. Hörschgen teaches a motor vehicle lock (¶[0001], figs. 1-6) for vehicle doors including hoods (“term ‘motor vehicle door’ … includes in particular side doors, rear doors, tailgates, trunk lids or hoods.”, ¶[0002]),
wherein the closer function is a function of moving the front hood from the half-engaged position to the full-close position by driving the motor (“closing aid lever 13, by means of which the lock latch 5 in the mounted state can be adjusted in a closing aid process in its closing direction, in particular from a pre-closing position to a main closing position”, ¶[0031]) based on a detection result of a first sensor configured to detect a position of the primary pawl (“a second sensor [is assigned] to the first locking pawl for detecting the locking pawl position of the first locking pawl”, ¶[0023]) and a detection result of a second sensor configured to detect a position of the secondary pawl (“a third sensor is assigned to another of the locking pawls”, ¶[0023]), and the latch device further comprises a sensor mounting portion capable of mounting the first sensor and the second sensor thereon (“sensors are arranged on or at a motor vehicle lock housing of the motor vehicle lock”, ¶[0055]; second sensor 35 and third sensor 36 shown in fig. 2).
Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the sensors from Hörschgen with the latch device disclosed by Lebsak. The motivation would have been to improve “operational reliability” by limiting actuation of separate drive arrangements based on specific position information obtained from sensors (Hörschgen, ¶[0054]). The combination would predictably achieve the desired result.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lebsak as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Lebsak discloses the latch device for a front hood according to claim 1, comprising a closer and power release specification having the power release function (“initial driven rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction causes a first pawl trigger lug 116 formed on drive cam pawl release lever 64 to engage pawl release lug 58 on pawl 42 [and] causes pawl 42 to begin moving from its ratchet holding position toward its ratchet releasing position”, ¶[0066], figs. 6A-B) and the closer function (“slightly further rotation of drive cam 60 in the actuation direction toward a seventh or ‘second stage cinch end’ position … causes drive cam cinch lever 66 to continue movement of the components of latch cinch mechanism 36 such that … driven cinching movement of ratchet 40 causes ratchet 40 to act on and move striker 22 which, in turn, causes decklid 12 to move from its cinched position toward its fully-closed position”, ¶[0078]). Changing the latch device to a power release specification only having the power release function entails only the elimination of the power closer feature. Based on legal precedence (In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7), omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired. Therefore, removal of the power closer function and associated elements is obvious when a power closer function is not desired.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional art of record relates to latch devices having features such as motorized operation, dual-stage closing, a secondary pawl, emergency release, and position sensors relevant to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI whose telephone number is (571)272-9530. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 AM-5 PM.
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303) 297-4337. 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.
/MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI/Examiner, Art Unit 3613
/JAMES A SHRIVER II/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights