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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Examiner suggests adding the side sill and/or the reinforcement into the title.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-21 are objected to because of the following informalities. Examiner suggests the changes below:
“a front-rear direction” be changed to --the vehicle front-rear direction-- (claim 1, lines 11-12), since this feature has already been claimed;
“a vehicle-width-direction” be changed to --the vehicle-width-direction-- (claim 1, line 13), since this feature has already been claimed;
“of a vehicle” be changed to --of the vehicle-- (claims 2-21, line 1), since this feature has already been claimed;
“the sub-reinforcement portion” be changed to --the sub-reinforcement-- (claim 12, line 3);
“an up-down direction” be changed to --the up-down direction-- (claim 13, line 4), since this feature has already been claimed;
“wherein the upper wall and the lower wall” be changed to --wherein the upper wall and the lower wall of the side sill inner portion-- (claim 13, lines 14-15), so as to differentiate the upper and lower walls of the side sill inner portion from previously claimed upper and lower walls of the side sill outer portion;
“the upper wall” be changed to --the upper wall of the side sill inner portion-- (claim 13, lines 18-19), so as to differentiate the upper wall of the side sill inner portion from previously claimed upper wall of the side sill outer portion;
“the lower wall” be changed to --the lower wall of the side sill inner portion-- (claim 13, line 19), so as to differentiate the lower wall of the side sill inner portion from previously claimed lower wall of the side sill outer portion;
“the upper flange portion and the lower flange portion” be changed to --the upper flange portion and the lower flange portion of the side sill inner portion-- (claim 13, lines 20-21), so as to differentiate flange portions of the side sill inner portion from previously claimed flange portions of the side sill outer portion;
“the upper wall” be changed to --the upper wall of the side sill inner portion-- (claim 13, line 21), so as to differentiate the upper wall of the side sill inner portion from previously claimed upper wall of the side sill outer portion;
“the lower wall” be changed to --the lower wall of the side sill inner portion-- (claim 13, line 22), so as to differentiate the lower wall of the side sill inner portion from previously claimed lower wall of the side sill outer portion;
“a side collision” be changed to --the side collision-- (claim 19, line 3), since this feature has already been claimed;
“an outer side” be changed to --the outer side-- (claim 19, line 4), since this feature has already been claimed.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 13-15 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.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the side wall of the side sill on the vehicle-width-direction outer side" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --a side wall of the side sill on the vehicle-width-direction outer side--.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the end portion of the upper wall" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --an end portion of the upper wall--.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the end portion of the lower wall" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --an end portion of the lower wall--.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the side wall of the side sill on the vehicle-width-direction inner side" in lines 17-18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --a side wall of the side sill on the vehicle-width-direction inner side--.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the end portion of the upper wall" in lines 18-19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --an end portion of the upper wall of the side sill inner portion--.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the end portion of the lower wall" in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --an end portion of the lower wall of the side sill inner portion--.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 7, 8, and 12-21 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of copending Application No. 19/036,270 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-19 of copending Application No. 19/036,270 read on and include all limitations of claims 1, 7, 8, and 12-21 of the present application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 9-11 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 allowable subject matter of claim 2 is details of the side sill inner portion including a facing wall that faces the sub-reinforcement and includes a corner portion bent toward an interior of the closed cross-section, with the deformation promoting portion including the corner portion, in combination with other features of preceding claim 1. Kanemori et al. (US 9701345 B2), Lee et al. (US 20250187667 A1), and Maeda et al. (US 20250206379 A1) disclose a lower vehicle-body structure comprising a side sill with a closed cross-section and including side sill inner and outer portions, and a hat-shaped main reinforcement and a sub-reinforcement disposed in the closed cross-section, but do not disclose the side sill inner portion includes a deformation promoting portion to be deformed towards an interior of the closed cross-section in a side collision of the vehicle in such a way as to be brought into contact with the sub-reinforcement from an outer side in the up-down direction, or a facing wall that faces the sub-reinforcement and includes a corner portion bent toward an interior of the closed cross-section with the deformation promoting portion including the corner portion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The remaining cited prior art discloses a lower vehicle-body structure comprising a side sill with a closed cross-section and including side sill inner and outer portions, and a hat-shaped main reinforcement disposed in the closed cross-section.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA FREEDMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2442. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at 571-270-5985. 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.
/LAURA FREEDMAN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3614
