DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuroda et al. (JP 2014076728 A).
Regarding claim 1, Kuroda et al. discloses “A vehicle (10; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) front structure comprising: a vehicle front region (22; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) in which an intake opening (28; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) is formed at a side end portion of air introduced into the vehicle; and a guide (26; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) configured to guide an internal flow of air introduced from the intake opening to the discharge opening (30; Kuroda et al. Fig 1), the guide having an inner guide surface (34; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) disposed on an inner side, in a vehicle width direction, of the guide and an outer guide surface (36; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) disposed on an outer side, in the vehicle width direction, of the guide, wherein at least one of the inner guide surface and the outer guide surface is disposed only in part between the inlet opening (36; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) and the discharge opening in a direction along the internal flow.”
With respect to claim 2, Kuroda et al. discloses “The vehicle front structure according to claim 1, wherein the discharge opening (30; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) has an elongated shape (30; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) extending along a front edge of a wheel house opening (18; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) in the vehicle side region.”
In reference to claim 3, Kuroda et al. discloses “The vehicle front structure according to claim 2, wherein the guide (26; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) is configured to guide the internal flow (A; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) so that the air discharged from the discharge opening (30; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) flows rearwardly along a vehicle side surface (12; Kuroda et al. Fig 2).”
Regarding claim 4, Kuroda et al. discloses “The vehicle front structure according to claim 1, wherein the outer guide surface has a restricting portion (36; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) designed to guide the internal flow of air (A; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) so as not to flow toward a protruding structure (30B; Kuroda et al. Fig 1) provided on the backside of a surface member constituting a part of an outer surface (22; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) of the vehicle body.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuroda et al. (JP 2014076728 A) in view of Aoyanagi et al. (US 20220153357 A1).
Kuroda et al. teaches an intake opening (28; Kuroda et al. Fig 2) in the vehicle front region (22; Kuroda et al. Fig 2).
Kuroda et al. does not teach a dam structure at the peripheral edge of the opening.
However, Aoyanagi et al. teaches an air dam structure (41; Aoyanagi et al Fig 2) at the edge of an intake opening (10; Aoyanagi et al Fig 2) on a vehicle front region (3; Aoyanagi et al Fig 2).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the dam structure of Aoyanagi et al. with the front structure of Kuroda et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for reducing drag.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nishiura (US 20160144905 A1) teaches a duct with an extruded outer surface, but was not disposed on a vehicle front structure.
Parry-Williams et al. (US-11230328-B2) teaches a vehicle front structure duct that directs airflows to the rearward direction along the vehicle side structure, but does not teach the inner and outer surface features.
Aoyanagi et al. (US 12233957 B2) teaches a vehicle front structure duct that directs airflows to the rearward direction along the vehicle side structure, but does not teach the inner and outer surface features.
Katsukura et al. (JP 2021062641 A) teaches a vehicle front structure duct that directs airflows to the rearward direction along the vehicle side structure with the inner and outer surface features depicted in the claimed invention.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL ROBERT DIGIOVANNANTONIO whose telephone number is (571)272-4526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 a.m. to 5 p.m..
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 5712705500. 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.
/D.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights