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, the claimed elastic means of claim 17 and the claimed springs of claim 18 must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "11" and "23", as depicted in Fig 2, point to the same feature but been used to designate either the second inertial mass 11 or the support recess 23.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claimed first and second elastic means are not given reference characters which are also not depicted in the figures. Instant specification page 5, lines 17-24 states the first elastic means are not represented.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 17, lines 3 and 5, “first elastic means” and “second elastic means” is recited. It is US practice to introduce claim limitations with the article “a” and switch to the article “the” on all subsequent recitations, as done in claim 18. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to read “a first elastic means” and “a second elastic means”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 13, 14, 17, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Savant et al., US 8840156 B2 (hereinafter Savant).
Regarding claim 13, Savant teaches a vehicle door handle assembly (handle 1; Fig 1), comprising:
a rotatable lever (transmission lever 11; col 3, lines 56-61) configured to rotate around a first axis (second axis A) between a rest position (Fig 5a) and an active position (Fig 5c) for opening the vehicle door (col 3, lines 56-61); and
an inertial blocking mechanism (inertial system 9) comprising:
a first inertial mass (first inertial body 17) configured to rotate around a second axis (third axis B) between a rest position (Fig 5a) and an active position (Fig 5c) col 4, lines 29-33), wherein the first inertial mass is configured to block the rotation of the rotatable lever in its active position (Fig 5c depicts locking lug 21 of 17 blocking rotation of shoulder 23 of 11), the rotation of the first inertial mass being associated with a first predetermined acceleration (col 4, lines 46-48),
a second inertial mass (second inertial body 27) configured to rotate around the second axis between a rest position (Fig 6a) and an active position (Fib 6c; col 5, lines 7-12), wherein the first and the second inertial mass comprise an overlapping part (Fig 6a depicts protuberance 31 of 17 engages open sector 29 of 27; col 5, lines 13-16) so that the second inertial mass pushes the first inertial mass towards its active position when the second inertial mass is rotated towards its active position (movement from Fig 6a to Fig 6c depicts 27 pushing 17 towards it’s active position), the rotation of the second inertial mass being associated with a second predetermined acceleration higher than the first acceleration (col 5, lines 3-6),
a first stop (21) configured to stop the rotation of the first inertial mass when the first inertial mass is in its active position (Fig 5c), and
a second stop configured to stop the rotation of the second inertial mass when the second inertial mass is its active position (Fig 6c depicts the second stop to be the lower surface of 27 contacting housing 5).
Regarding claim 14, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13, wherein the first stop is configured to stop the rotation of the first inertial mass at a first predetermined angular position (Fig 2 and movement from Fig 5a to Fig 5c depict 21 stopping the rotation of 17 at a predetermined angular position) and the second stop (Fig 6c depicts the second stop to be the lower surface of 27 contacting housing 5) is configured to stop the rotation of the second inertial mass at a second predetermined angular position which is different than the first predetermined angular position (movement from Fig 6a to Fig 6c depicts the second stop stopping the rotation of 27 at a second predetermined angular position which is different from the first predetermined angular position).
Regarding claim 17, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13, wherein the inertial blocking mechanism (9) further comprises:
a (see claim interpretation under claim 17 Claim Objection) first elastic means (spring 19) for constraining the first inertial mass (17) in its rest position (Fig 5a; col 4, lines 7-12), and
a (see claim interpretation under claim 17 Claim Objection) second elastic means (spring 33) for constraining the second inertial mass (27) in its rest position (Fig 2; col 5, lines 17-23; Note; the position of 33 is different in Fig 2 and Figs 4;6).
Regarding claim 19, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13, wherein the inertial blocking mechanism (9) is reversible (col 5, lines 3-6 discusses and movement between Fig 6a and Fig 6b depicts movement of 9 to be reversible).
Regarding claim 20, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim13, wherein the inertial blocking mechanism (9) further comprises a flexible plate (resilient strip 35) configured to interact with a hook (projection 37) of the second inertial mass (27) to block the rotation of the second inertial mass when the second inertial mass is in the active position (Fig 6c depicts 37 interacting with 35 such that 27 is blocked from rotating).
Regarding claim 21, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13, wherein the first inertial mass (17) is configured to rotate when the undergone acceleration is larger than 2G (col 4, lines 46-48) and the second inertial mass (27) is configured to rotate when the undergone acceleration is larger than 25G (col 5, lines 4-6).
Regarding claim 24, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13, wherein the rotatable lever (11) is linked to a first end of a Bowden cable, the second end of the Bowden cable being linked to a door lock, the rotation of the rotatable lever towards the active position leading to a displacement of the Bowden cable and the blocking of the door lock in a closed position (col 4, lines 12-23 discusses the cable connection to 11 via a pulley and how it activates the lock).
Regarding claim 25, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13, further comprising a gripping handle (gripping lever 3) configured to be rotated by a user, the rotatable lever (11) and the gripping handle being rotatably coupled so that a rotation of the gripping handle leads to the rotation of the rotatable lever and conversely (col 3, lines 44-48; col 3, line 62-col 4, line 3; col 4, lines 8-12 discuss the rotation of 3 and its engagement with 11).
Regarding claim 26, Savant teaches a vehicle door (col 3, lines 32-33), comprising: the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 13.
Regarding claim 27, Savant teaches the vehicle door in accordance with claim 26, wherein the vehicle door is a side door (col 3, lines 32-33).
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 15, 16, 18, 22, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savant, US 8840156 B2.
Regarding claim 15, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 14, wherein the first inertial mass (17) comprises a pin (protuberance 31) extending towards the second inertial mass (27) and overlapping the first inertial mass (Fig 6a; col 5, lines 13-16; In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), the court the claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device, since the rearrangement of 31 to be located on 27 in order to engaged an open sector 29 rearranged to be on 17 would not modify the operation of 9, it would have been obvious to rearrange the engagement between 17 and 27).
Regarding claim 16, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 15, wherein the pin (31) of the second inertial mass (27) extends parallel to the second axis (B; Fig 6a depicts 31 extending parallel to B).
Regarding claim 18, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 17, wherein the first and the second elastic means (19; 33) are helicoidal springs (col 4, lines 7-12; col 5, lines 17-23) and wherein the first and the second inertial masses (17; 27) comprise a support recess (see Annotated excerpt Fig 2-Savant) configured to receive an end of the respectively first and second helicoidal springs in order to preload the first and the second helicoidal springs before assembly of the helicoidal springs on the vehicle door handle assembly (Annotated excerpt Fig 2-Savant depicts 19 and 33 being received into indentations in 17 and 17 thereby meeting the Merriam-Webster definition 3a of recess and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term).
Regarding claim 22, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 21, wherein the first inertial mass is configured to rotate when the undergone acceleration is 4G (col 4, lines 46-48 discusses 17 designed to pivot subjected to low acceleration with 15-20G as an example, instant specification page 3, lines 23-36 discusses 4G but does not assign any criticality to that magnitude, In re Bergen, 120 F.2d 329, 332, 49 USPQ 749, 751-52 (CCPA 1941), the court found that the overlapping endpoint of the prior art and claimed range was sufficient to support an obviousness rejection, particularly when there was no showing of criticality of the claimed range; therefore 17 is structurally capable of rotating when the undergone acceleration is 4G).
Regarding claim 23, Savant teaches the vehicle door handle assembly in accordance with claim 21, wherein the second inertial mass (27) is configured to rotate when the undergone acceleration is 31G (col 5, lines 3-6 discusses 27 designed to pivot subjected to high acceleration with 100G as an example, instant specification page 3, lines 23-36 discusses 31G but does not assign any criticality to that magnitude, In re Bergen, 120 F.2d 329, 332, 49 USPQ 749, 751-52 (CCPA 1941), the court found that the overlapping endpoint of the prior art and claimed range was sufficient to support an obviousness rejection, particularly when there was no showing of criticality of the claimed range; therefore 27 is structurally capable of rotating when the undergone acceleration is 31G).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following patents are cited to further show the state of the art for vehicle door handle assembly apparatus.
Puscas et al., US 8783742 B2, teaches a dual-member inertia-activated locking mechanism for a vehicle door handle assembly with two inertial masses..
Patel, US 8366159 B2, teaches a multi-lever bi-directional inertia catch mechanism with two inertial masses.
Kilian, EP 3015629 B1, teaches a motor vehicle door handle assembly with accident securing with two inertial masses.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN A TULLIA whose telephone number is (571)272-6434. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 ET.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached on (571)272-7376. 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.
/STEVEN A TULLIA/Examiner, Art Unit 3675