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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a front edge of a floor portion (claim 1 and in paragraph [0031]) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112
(pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In paragraph [0037], “The dash panel component 32 is attached to the partition wall portion 16D by an attachment member (not shown). That is, in the present embodiment, the main part of the dash panel 10B of the vehicle body 10 is constituted by the partition wall portion 16D and the dash panel component 32. A brake pedal 36 constituting a part of the "brake device 34" is attached to the dash panel component 32.”
Regarding claim 2, “dash panel component” (lines 3-5) is indefinite.
What is dash panel component 32 of the dash panel 10B? See same deficiency in claim 3 (line 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.
Claim 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over
Goto et al. US 9688309 B2.
The applied reference has a common applicant with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claim 1, Goto et al. discloses a vehicle body (vehicle body front part 14 shown in Figure 1) comprising: a vehicle body component
(plate body 40 shown in Figure 2) being a metal casting (“since the plate body 40 is made of a sheet metal, compared with the case in which the plate body 40 is manufactured by die cast” in column 8, lines 60-65), wherein the vehicle body component (plate body 40 shown in Figure 2) includes an upper component portion (cowl 32 shown in Figure 1) that extends in a vehicle width direction (shown in Figure 1) and supports a windshield glass (definition of cowl: the part of a motor vehicle that supports the windshield and houses the dashboard), a lower component portion (area near the lower portion of front pillars 30 shown in Figure 1) that extends in the vehicle width direction (inherent that the area near the lower portion of front pillar 30 extends in the vehicle width direction) and is arranged along a front edge of a floor portion to support the floor portion (inherent that the area near the lower portion of front pillar 30 is arranged along a front edge of a floor portion to support the floor (shown in Figure 1)), a pair of side component portions (front pillars 30 shown in Figure 1) that constitutes a part of a front pillar on a vehicle lower side (shown n Figure 1), the side component portions (front pillars 30 shown in Figure 1) connecting the upper component portion (cowl 32 shown in Figure 1) and the lower component portion (area near the lower portion of front pillars 30 shown in Figure 1), and being each provided with a suspension support portion (upper end part of the sustower 12 shown in Figure 1) that supports a part of a suspension (in column 5, lines 30-45), and a partition wall portion (dash panel 34 shown in Figure 1) integrated with the upper component portion (cowl 32 shown in Figure 1), the lower component portion (area near the lower portion of front pillars 30 shown in Figure 1), and each of the side component portions (front pillars 30 shown in Figure 1), the partition wall portion (dash panel 34 shown in Figure 1) partitioning a vehicle cabin (cabin 18 shown in Figure 1) and a power unit room (engine compartment 16 shown in Figure 1).
Claims 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over
Goto et al. US 9688309 B2 in view of EP 0253159 B1 and JP 2014201084 A.
Goto et al., as understood, discloses the vehicle body (vehicle body front part 14 shown in Figure 1).
However, Goto et al. does not show wherein a penetration portion penetrated in a vehicle front-rear direction is provided on the partition wall portion, and the penetration portion is blocked by a dash panel component, and wherein a part of a brake device is attached to the dash panel component
(claim 2); and wherein the dash panel component is made of resin (claim 3).
EP 0253159 B1 teaches a penetration portion (preassembled structural unit 27 shown in Figures 3 and 4) penetrated in a vehicle front-rear direction is provided on the partition wall portion (substructure 22 shown in Figures 3 and 4), and the penetration portion (preassembled structural unit 27 shown in Figures 3 and 4) is blocked by a dash panel component (instrument panel 10 shown in Figures 3 and 4); and dashboards disclosed in FIGS. 1 and 2, which are provided for a motor vehicle, in particular for a car, are each designated 10; they consist of a material suitable for the shape shown, e.g. a multilayer plastic material.
JP 2014201084 A teaches on the dash panel (2) and the cowl upper panel (3), a pair of left and right pedal brackets (6 and 7) that rotatably support the clutch pedal (4) and the brake pedal (5) for vehicle operation are mounted side by side with a space in the vehicle width direction shown in Figure 1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the partition portion of Goto et al. wherein a penetration portion penetrated in a vehicle front-rear direction is provided on the partition wall portion, and the penetration portion is blocked by a dash panel component made of plastic, as taught by
EP 0253159 B1, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide a preassembled structural unit for the crockpit area of the motor vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the vehicle body of Goto et al. wherein a part of a brake device is attached to the dash panel component, as taught by JP 2014201084 A, with a reasonable expectation of success for vehicle operation.
Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over
Goto et al. US 9688309 B2 in view of CN 105383570 A.
Regarding claim 4, Goto et al. discloses the vehicle body (vehicle body front part 14 shown in Figure 1) according to claim 1, further comprising a
front-rear direction skeleton portion (front side member 20 shown in Figure 1) that extends in a vehicle front-rear direction (shown in Figure 1) and is attached at a vehicle lower side of the suspension support portion (sustower 12 shown in Figure 1) with respect to a front surface of the partition wall portion (dash panel 34 shown in Figure 1) on a vehicle front side, but does not show wherein a reinforcing rib portion is provided on a back surface of the partition wall portion on a vehicle rear side, the reinforcing rib portion protruding from the back surface to the vehicle rear side and extending from the front-rear direction skeleton portion when viewed from the vehicle front-rear direction.
CN 105383570 A teaches as illustrated in FIG. 1, reinforcing member (62) is formed with ridges (72), when viewed from the vehicle front, the strips extending along the vehicle body width direction, each of the ridges (72) protruding toward the vehicle body front side, and the part (64) from the main body of the vehicle body width direction extends to the flange (70) of the vehicle body width direction outer side end.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the partition wall portion of Goto et al. with ridges, as taught by CN 105383570 A, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to ensure that energy absorption is effectively absorbed.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US 20150314811 A1 discloses a vehicle body front structure for automobile.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Lori Lyjak whose telephone number is
571-272-6658. The Examiner can normally be reached from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. EST Monday through Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
/Lori Lyjak/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612B
Prosecution Insights