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 .
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.
Claim16-30 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 claims (beginning with claim 16) reference “at least two positions.” Claim 16 recites the “at least one of the two positions” flowing air and being the “smallest flow cross-section.” Claim 19 recites “in the other position” (being other than that of claim 16), the flow cross-section is “greater than in the at least one position.” Claim 20 then recites “in the other position, the flow cross-section of the inlet opening is the smallest flow cross-section of the air path through which the air can flow.” This is unclear and confusing. The claims also recite a third position where the air flow path is “fluidically blocked.” Examiner understands that there are three positions, presumably one large opening, one small opening, and one closed position. However, the claims are contradictory and the limitations do not match up to support these three positions.
Claim 27 is unclear and confusing because it is not clear how the first and second cover parts are sealed with respect to one another in the at least one position AND in the other position. The disclosure / drawings do not support two positions where the two parts are sealed together. Therefore, the OR statement appears acceptable, but not “and/or.”
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.
Claim(s) 16-26 and 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ishikawa (US Pat. No. 4,457,558).
Regarding claim 16, Ishikawa discloses A motor vehicle, comprising: at least one heat exchanger (6) through which a fluid flows and around which air is flowable, wherein the fluid is to be temperature-controlled via the air; an air path through which the air is flowable and by which, to supply the heat exchanger with the air, the air is guided to the heat exchanger; and a bumper cover arranged on a front of the motor vehicle, wherein the bumper cover comprises a first cover part, which forms a first part of an external skin of the motor vehicle, and a second cover part, which forms a second part of the external skin and is pivotable relative to the first cover part between at least two positions, wherein in at least one of the two positions:(i) an inflow opening of the air path, into which the air from a surrounding environment of the motor vehicle is introducable via the inflow opening, is delimited upwards in a vehicle vertical direction through a partial area of the first cover part and downwards in the vehicle vertical direction through an end edge of the second cover part arranged below the partial area in the at least one of the two positions in the vehicle vertical direction, in each case directly; and(ii) the inflow opening has a flow cross-section through which the air is flowable, which in the at least one of the two positions is a smallest flow cross- section of the air path through which the air can flow (see annotated figs below as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
PNG
media_image1.png
748
693
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, Ishikawa discloses wherein the second cover part is pivotable relative to the first cover part between the two positions (at least figs 1 vs 2 or 2 vs 3) about a pivot axis (generally at 20, figs 1-3) extending in a transverse direction of the vehicle (figs 1-3).
Regarding claim 18, Ishikawa discloses wherein in the other position, the inflow opening is closed and the air path is fluidically blocked (at least fig 3 as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 19, Ishikawa discloses wherein, in the other position:(i) the inflow opening of the air path is delimited upwards in the vehicle vertical direction by the partial area of the first cover part and downwards in the vehicle vertical direction by the end edge of the second cover part arranged in the other position below the partial area in the vehicle vertical direction, in each case directly; and(ii) the flow cross-section of the inflow opening is greater than in the at least one position (at least figs 1-3 as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 20, Ishikawa discloses wherein in the other position, the flow cross-section of the inlet opening is the smallest flow cross-section of the air path through which the air can flow (at least figs 1-3 as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 21, Ishikawa discloses wherein the second cover part is pivotable relative to the first cover part into a third position, in which the inflow opening is closed and the air path is fluidically blocked (at least fig 3 as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 22, Ishikawa discloses wherein in the other position, the end edge of the second cover part, with the exception of ground contact elements of the motor vehicle, which can be supported on a ground via the ground contact elements in the vehicle vertical direction, is a lowest point of the motor vehicle when viewed downwards in the vehicle vertical direction (at least fig 2 as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 23, Ishikawa discloses wherein the second cover part is held on a crossmember of the motor vehicle so as to be pivotable relative to the first cover part and relative to the crossmember (at least figs 1-3, where the crossmember is a known element of such a motor vehicle).
Regarding claim 24, Ishikawa discloses further comprising: an actuator (generally at 16), by which the second cover part is driven and pivoted relative to the first cover part from the at least one position into the other position and/or from the other position into the at least one position (figs).
Regarding claim 25, Ishikawa discloses further comprising: a transmission and/or linkage (16a), via which the second cover part is moved by the actuator (figs).
Regarding claim 26, Ishikawa discloses wherein the transmission and/or linkage is self-locking (since it is locked by the actuator in the various positions).
Regarding claim 28, Ishikawa discloses further comprising: an open-loop or closed-loop control system which adjusts the positions of the second cover part as a function of an operating state of the motor vehicle (col 2, line 34 – col 3, line 22).
Regarding claim 29, Ishikawa discloses wherein the operating state comprises a speed of the motor vehicle (col 2, line 34 – col 3, line 22).
Regarding claim 30, Ishikawa discloses wherein stops are assigned to the second cover part, by which the movement of the second cover part into the positions is delimited (col 2, line 34 – col 3, line 22; stops assigned and affected by the control system).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Jeong (US Pat. No. 9,676,269).
Regarding claim 27, Ishikawa discloses the invention except for specifically pointing out further comprising: at least one seal, by which the first and second cover parts are sealed with respect to one another in the at least one position and/or in the other position.
However, at least Jeong discloses a vehicle active air flap that incorporates a rubber seal (at least col 5, lines 49-62).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the seal technique of Jeong with the mating parts of Ishikawa, since it would have improved the sealing aspect thereby preventing unwanted air flow through the mating surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB B MEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-3535. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-7.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
JACOB B. MEYER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3613
/JACOB B MEYER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
