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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/23/2026 has been entered.
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 limitations
“wherein one of the side airbag and the front airbag includes a main chamber with a sub chamber that protrudes from the main chamber entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag and the front airbag within the overlapping portion” recited in claim 1 last 5 lines; and
“wherein one of the side airbag and the front airbag includes a main chamber with a sub chamber that protrudes from the main chamber entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag and the front airbag within the overlapping portion” recited in claim 2 last 5 lines
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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
“wherein one of the side airbag and the front airbag includes a main chamber with a sub chamber that protrudes from the main chamber entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag and the front airbag within the overlapping portion” recited in claim 1 last 5 lines; and
“wherein one of the side airbag and the front airbag includes a main chamber with a sub chamber that protrudes from the main chamber entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag and the front airbag within the overlapping portion” recited in claim 2 last 5 lines
are not adequately disclosed in the Specification as originally filed and as such are considered to be new matter.
Applicant is invited to provide support for said limitations in the Specification as originally filed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-9, and 12-16 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.
In claim 1 last 5 lines, the limitation “wherein one of the side airbag and the front airbag includes a main chamber with a sub chamber that protrudes from the main chamber entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag and the front airbag within the overlapping portion” is not adequately disclosed in the Specification as originally filed and as such is considered to be new matter.
In claim 2 last 5 lines, the limitation “wherein one of the side airbag and the front airbag includes a main chamber with a sub chamber that protrudes from the main chamber entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag and the front airbag within the overlapping portion” is not adequately disclosed in the Specification as originally filed and as such is considered to be new matter.
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 1 and 5-9 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 claim 1 lines 8-10, the limitation “wherein when the side airbag is inflated and deployed and the front airbag is inflated and deployed are viewed from a lateral direction perpendicular to a front-rear direction of the vehicle” is unclear. Therefore, claim 1 is rendered indefinite. Examiner suggests changing said limitation to --wherein when the side airbag inflated and deployed and the front airbag inflated and deployed are viewed from a lateral direction perpendicular to a front-rear direction of the vehicle--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1, 2, 6, 9, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watamori et al. (DE 10 2015 214 729 A1), previously cited by Examiner.
Regarding claims 1, 6, and 9, Watamori et al. (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith) discloses
(claim 1) an airbag system 10 comprising:
a side airbag 42 inflated and deployed toward a front side of a vehicle 1 at a side portion on a vehicle width direction center side of a first seat (driver’s seat 7 rearward of steering wheel 8 - at least Fig. 1) of the vehicle 1;
a front airbag 23-25 inflated and deployed at a vehicle's front side of a second seat (passenger’s seat 7 - at least Fig. 1) provided adjacent to the first seat (driver’s seat 7 rearward of steering wheel 8 - at least Fig. 1) of the vehicle in a vehicle width direction; and
a control device 15 causing the front airbag 23-25 to be inflated and deployed together with the side airbag 42 at a time of a side collision of the vehicle,
wherein when the side airbag 42 is inflated and deployed and the front airbag
23-25 is inflated and deployed are viewed from a lateral direction perpendicular to a front-rear direction of the vehicle 1, a vehicle's front-side end portion of the side airbag 42 is positioned further toward the front side of the vehicle 1 than a vehicle's rear-side end portion of the front airbag 23-25 defining an overlapping portion at which the side airbag 42 and the front airbag 23-25 overlap each other in the front-rear direction of the vehicle 1, and wherein one of the side airbag 42 and the front airbag 23-25 includes a main chamber 24 with a sub chamber 25 that protrudes from the main chamber 24 entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber 25 including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag 42 and the front airbag 23-25 within the overlapping portion (as much as Applicant’s application; at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith);
(claim 6) wherein the front airbag 23-25 includes: the main chamber 24 inflated and deployed toward a vehicle's rear side; and the sub chamber 25 inflated and deployed so as to protrude from the main chamber 24 toward a center side in a vehicle's width direction;
PNG
media_image1.png
453
560
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(claim 9) wherein the front airbag 23-25 is a front airbag for a front passenger's seat 7 (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8).
Regarding claims 2, 13, and 16, Watamori et al. (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith) discloses
(claim 2) an airbag system 10 comprising:
a side airbag 42 inflated and deployed toward a front side of a vehicle 1 at a side portion on a vehicle width direction center side of a first seat (passenger’s seat 7 - at least Fig. 1) of the vehicle 1;
a front airbag 23-25 inflated and deployed at a vehicle's front side of a second seat (passenger’s seat 7 - at least Fig. 1) of the vehicle 1; and
a control device 15 causing the front airbag 23-25 to be inflated and deployed together with the side airbag 42 at a time of a side collision of the vehicle,
wherein when the side airbag 42 inflated and deployed and the front airbag
23-25 inflated and deployed are viewed from a lateral direction perpendicular to a front-rear direction of the vehicle 1, a vehicle's front-side end portion of the side airbag 42 is positioned further toward the front side of the vehicle 1 than a vehicle's rear-side end portion of the front airbag 23-25 defining an overlapping portion at which the side airbag 42 and the front airbag 23-25 overlap each other in the front-rear direction of the vehicle 1, and wherein one of the side airbag 42 and the front airbag 23-25 includes a main chamber 24 with a sub chamber 25 that protrudes from the main chamber 24 entirely within the overlapping portion and the sub chamber 25 including a contact region that contacts the other of the side airbag 42 and the front airbag 23-25 within the overlapping portion (as much as Applicant’s application; at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith);
(claim 13) wherein the front airbag 23-25 includes: the main chamber 24 inflated and deployed toward a vehicle's rear side; and the sub chamber 25 inflated and deployed so as to protrude from the main chamber 24 toward a center side in a vehicle's width direction;
(claim 16) wherein the front airbag 23-25 is a front airbag for a front passenger's seat 7 (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8).
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.
Claims 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watamori et al. (DE 10 2015 214 729 A1) in view of JP 2021-062818A, previously cited by Applicant.
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Watamori et al. (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith) discloses the claimed invention, wherein the side airbag 42 includes: a main chamber 42 inflated and deployed toward a vehicle's front side.
But Watamori et al. (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith) does not explicitly disclose a sub chamber inflated and deployed so as to protrude from the main chamber 42 toward a center side in a vehicle's width direction.
JP 2021-062818A (at least Figs. 1-4, 6) discloses that it is known in the art to provide a side airbag 10, 24, wherein the side airbag includes: a main chamber 28 inflated and deployed toward a vehicle's front side; and a sub chamber 30 inflated and deployed so as to protrude from the main chamber 28 toward a center side in a vehicle's width direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the side airbag of Watamori et al. with the sub chamber according to the teachings of JP 2021-062818A, in order to achieve the desirable result of facilitating occupant protection.
Regarding claims 7, 8, 14, and 15, Watamori et al. (at least Figs. 1, 2, 4A-8; also see annotated Fig. 4A attached herewith) discloses the claimed invention except for
(claims 7 and 14) wherein the side airbag 42 is provided with a first high-friction portion having a larger friction coefficient than a surface portion of a base fabric panel constituting the side airbag 42;
(claims 8 and 15) wherein the front airbag 23-25 is provided with a first
high-friction portion having a larger friction coefficient than a surface portion of a base fabric panel constituting the front airbag.
JP 2021-062818A (at least Figs. 1-4, 6) discloses that it is known in the art to provide
(claims 7 and 14) wherein the side airbag 10, 24 is provided with a first high-friction portion 38 having a larger friction coefficient than a surface portion 28 of a base fabric panel constituting the side airbag 10, 24.
PNG
media_image2.png
276
780
media_image2.png
Greyscale
JP 2021-062818A also disclose the following:
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the side airbag of Watamori et al. according to the teachings of JP 2021-062818A, in order to achieve the desirable result of facilitating occupant protection.
Further, regarding claims 8 and 15, given the teachings of JP 2021-062818A above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the front airbag of Watamori et al. according to the teachings of JP 2021-062818A, in order to achieve the desirable result of facilitating occupant protection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
PNG
media_image3.png
256
613
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues on page 10 of the REMARKS:
However, Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate with the claimed limitations. Further, it is the Examiner’s position that at least claims 1 and 2 are sufficiently broad that Watamori et al. (DE 10 2015 214 729 A1) is still applicable. See rejections above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSELYNN Y SLITERIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6675. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm EST.
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 D. 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.
/JOSELYNN Y SLITERIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights