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
1. 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 limitation, “wherein the body is formed so as to cover an entire surface of the wheel” as recited in claim 8, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The drawings appear to show the wheel cover disposed only over the air holes of the wheel.
2. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters “11”, "13", "131", and “132” in Fig. 1 have both been used to designate the same element (i.e., tire “12”).
3. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
· Fig. 13: “144A”; “144B”; “144C”; “144D”
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
4. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
5. Claim 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
· The limitation “the body is formed so as to cover an entire surface of the wheel” as recited in claim 8 is not described by the specification.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-10 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.
· The limitation “in a region in which the engaging portion relatively moves with respect to the engaged portion, the engaged portion is provided so as to extend to relatively approach the engaging portion” as recited in claim 1 is indefinite because it is unclear what structural relationship is required by the phrase “extend to relatively approach the engaging portion”. Specifically, the claim does not define what constitutes the claimed “region” or specify the direction, reference point, or manner by which the engaged portion is required to relatively approach the engaged portion.
· Claims 8, 9, and 10 are indefinite because the claims include multiple recitations of the same element without clarity as to whether the recited elements refer to the same element previously set forth in the claim or to an additional element. Please note the following: “a state”.
· Claim 8 is indefinite because it is unclear what is encompassed by the recitation “to cover an entire surface of the wheel”. Note that, as shown in Fig. 1, the wheel cover does not appear to cover the entire surface of the wheel, as at least the spoke portions of the wheel remain uncovered. Therefore, it is unclear whether “the entire surface of the wheel” is intended to include spoke portions or only the portions, i.e., air holes, of the wheel covered by the wheel cover as illustrated in Fig. 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
10. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura (US7147289B2).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura discloses a vehicle wheel structure (Fig. 1) comprising: a wheel 1 configured to support a tire (Lines 25-27 of col. 6) and be assembled to a vehicle (It is inherent that the wheel including the tire is assembled to a vehicle; Lines 25-27 of col. 6); and a wheel attachment member 10 configured to be attached to the wheel 1, wherein: the wheel attachment member 10 includes a body 11, and an engaging portion (Refer to the engaging portion in the below annotated Fig. 5) provided at the body 11; the wheel 1 has an engaged portion (Refer to the engaged portion in the below annotated Fig. 5) provided so as to extend to engage with the engaging portion (Refer to the annotated Fig. 5 below); and in a state where the engaging portion and the engaged portion are engaged with each other to attach the wheel attachment member 10 to the wheel 1 (Figs. 5(a)-5(c)), in a region (Refer to the circle noted by dash lines in the below annotated Fig. 5) in which the engaging portion relatively moves with respect to the engaged portion, the engaged portion is provided so as to extend to relatively approach the engaging portion (As best understood, Nakamura discloses this limitation as shown in Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
415
719
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 5 of Nakamura
Regarding claim 2, Nakamura discloses the engaged portion is provided at a spoke (The claimed spoke corresponds to the area between the openings of disc; refer to the below annotated Fig. 1; Lines 40-44 of col. 3), the spoke coupling a hub mounting portion (Refer to the hub mounting portion in the below annotated Fig. 1) to a rim 3, the hub mounting portion being assembled to a hub (Since a "hub" is a portion of a wheel that is attached to an axle, the axle-mounting hole 4 will be attached to a hub. Accordingly, the hub is implicitly shown in Fig. 1) of the vehicle at a center side (Fig. 1) of the wheel 1, the rim 3 supporting the tire (Lines 25-27 of col. 6) at an outer peripheral side of the wheel 1 (Fig. 1); and the engaging portion is engaged with the engaged portions respectively provided at the adjacent two spokes in a circumferential direction of the wheel 1 (Figs. 1(a) and 1(c); refer to the below annotated Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image2.png
479
583
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 1 of Nakamura
PNG
media_image3.png
433
767
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 5 of Nakamura
Regarding claim 3, Nakamura discloses the engaged portions respectively provided at the adjacent two spokes are provided at the spokes so as to extend parallel to each other from the hub mounting portion side toward the rim 3 side (Refer to the engaged portions identified by the dash-line circles in the below annotated Figs. 4(a) and 4(b); The engaged portions can be seen that the engaged portions extend parallel to each other; Note that the hub mounting portion is implicitly shown in the below annotated Figs. 4(a) and 4(b)).
PNG
media_image4.png
614
400
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Figs. 4(a) and 4(b) of Nakamura
Regarding claim 4, Nakamura discloses the engaged portions respectively provided at the adjacent two spokes (Refer to the engaged portions and spokes in the below annotated Fig. 1(c)) are provided at the spokes so as to extend to approach each other in the circumferential direction of the wheel from the hub mounting portion side (The hub mounting portion is implicitly shown at the center in the annotated Fig. 1(c) below) toward the rim 3 side (As shown in Figs. 1(c), each engaged portion has an arcuate configuration such that the opposing portions of the engaged portions face and approach each other and the engaged portions are provided in the circumferential direction of the wheel. Accordingly, the limitation is met).
PNG
media_image5.png
475
689
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 1(c) of Nakamura
Regarding claim 5, Nakamura discloses the engaging portion has a supporting portion (12 “engagement member”; Figs. 5(a)-5(c) and Figs. 6(a)-6(b)) provided upright from the body 11, and an engaging hook (18 “a claw-shaped disc-locking portion”) that is supported by the supporting portion 12 (Lines 24-27 of col. 2) and engaged with the engaged portion (Figs. 5(a)-5(c)).
Regarding claim 6, Nakamura discloses the engaging portion has an urging member (25 “retainer”; Figs. 5(a)) that urges the supporting portion 12 and the engaging hook 18 against reaction force acting from the engaged portion in a circumferential direction of the wheel 1 in a state where the engaging hook 18 is engaged with the engaged portion (Lines 6-16 of col. 8 and lines 11-22 of col. 9; As described in the reference, the urging member 25 biases the supporting portion 12 away from each other and biases the engaging hook 18 toward the peripheral portion 7 of the disc opening 6, thereby increasing the locking force. Thus, the urging member 25 urges the supporting portion 12 and the engaging hook 18 against the reaction force generated by the engaged peripheral portion 7 of the disc opening 6).
Regarding claim 7, Nakamura discloses the wheel attachment member 10 is molded from a resin material (Lines 49-54 of col. 6).
Regarding claim 8, Nakamura discloses the body 11 is formed so as to cover an entire surface of the wheel 1 (As best understood, Nakamura meets this limitation; Figs. 1(c), 4(a), and 4(b)), corresponding to an outer side of the vehicle, in a state attached to the wheel 1 (Lines 8-10 of col. 7; Further, when the cover is mounted onto the road wheel as disclosed, the surface of the wheel cover body that covers the wheel disc and the wheel rim inherently defines the outer side of the vehicle-facing wheel surface).
Regarding claim 9, Nakamura discloses the body 11 has a plurality of body forming members (The body 11 includes a plurality of circumferentially arranged portions as shown in Fig. 1(c) which correspond to the claimed body forming members; refer to the body forming member in the below annotated Fig. 1(c); Note that the claim language does not require the plurality of body forming members to be separate components from one another), and a coupling portion (Refer to the coupling portion in the below annotated Fig. 1(c) or the bridge portions 19 as shown in Figs. 1(c), 5(a), and 6 interconnect adjacent circumferentially arranged portions of the body 11 in the circumferential direction of the wheel 1 and therefore correspond to the claimed coupling portion; Lines 8-25 of col. 7; Lines 6-16 of col. 8) that couples the body forming members in a circumferential direction of the wheel in a state attached to the wheel 1 (Refer to the annotated Fig. 1(c) below).
PNG
media_image6.png
472
649
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 1(c) of Nakamura
Regarding claim 10, Nakamura discloses the coupling portion couples the plurality of body forming members at a central part of the wheel (Refer to the central part of the wheel in the below annotated Fig. 4; As shown in Figs. 1(c) and 4, Nakamura discloses the coupling portion coupling the plurality of body forming members at a central portion of the wheel cover, which corresponds to a central part of the wheel when attached thereto, thereby meeting the limitation; Note that the claim language does not require the coupling portion of the wheel cover to be physically connected to the central part of the wheel) in a state attached to the wheel 1.
PNG
media_image7.png
616
755
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 4(a) of Nakamura
10. Claims 1 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Fattouche (US11254160B2).
Regarding claim 1, Fattouche discloses a vehicle wheel structure (Fig. 1B) comprising: a wheel configured to support a tire and be assembled to a vehicle (As shown in Fig. 1B, Fattouche discloses a wheel including a tire and be mounted to a vehicle 10); and a wheel attachment member 310 (Fig. 7B) configured to be attached to the wheel (Figs. 8A and 8B; Although the wheel cover embodiment relied upon above is not shown in Figs. 8A and 8B, these figures are provided for illustrative purposes to show the corresponding portions of the wheel with which the portions of the wheel cover engage), wherein: the wheel attachment member 310 includes a body, and an engaging portion 76b provided at the body (Refer to the body and engaging portion in the below annotated Fig. 7B); the wheel has an engaged portion (Refer to the engaged portion in the below annotated Fig. 6) provided so as to extend to engage with the engaging portion (Although there is no figure showing the embodiment of Fig. 7B installed on the wheel, Fig. 6 illustrates how the hook portion, i.e., the engaging portion, of the wheel cover is installed on the wheel in the same manner as the embodiment of Fig. 7B); and in a state where the engaging portion and the engaged portion are engaged with each other to attach the wheel attachment member to the wheel (Refer to the annotated Figs. 6 and 7B below; Figs. 8A and 8B), in a region in which the engaging portion relatively moves with respect to the engaged portion, the engaged portion is provided so as to extend to relatively approach the engaging portion (As best understood, Fattouche discloses this limitation in view of Figs. 6, 7B, 8A, and 8B).
PNG
media_image8.png
552
619
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 6 of Fattouche
PNG
media_image9.png
562
489
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 7B of Fattouche
Regarding claim 8, Fattouche discloses the body is formed so as to cover an entire surface of the wheel, corresponding to an outer side of the vehicle, in a state attached to the wheel (Figs. 8A and 12A).
Regarding claim 9, Fattouche discloses the body has a plurality of body forming members (Refer to the circles noted by dash lines in the below annotated Fig. 8A), and a coupling portion (Refer to the coupling portion in the below annotated Fig. 8A) that couples the body forming members in a circumferential direction of the wheel in a state attached to the wheel (Refer to the annotated Fig. 8A below).
PNG
media_image10.png
498
718
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 8A of Fattouche
Regarding claim 10, Fattouche discloses the coupling portion couples the plurality of body forming members at a central part of the wheel in a state attached to the wheel (Refer to the coupling portion and body forming member in the annotated Fig. 8A above; As shown in the annotated Fig. 8A above, Fattouche discloses the coupling portion coupling the plurality of body forming members at a central portion of the wheel cover, which corresponds to a central part of the wheel when attached thereto, thereby meeting the limitation).
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references disclose a wheel cover for a wheel and engagement structures for attaching the wheel cover to the wheel.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAEKWON (TAE) CHOI whose telephone number is (571) 272-5805. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9 am to 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel (Joe) Morano, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-6684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/TAEKWON CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights