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 Interpretation
The phrase “window winder” or “window regulator” covers at minimum the structure for moving the window up and down (e.g. a scissor mechanism or pivoting arm). The phrase may also include the motor driving the moving structure but does not have to, i.e. one of ordinary skill in the art would not know from the phrase “window winder” or “window lifter” alone whether the motor was included in the winder/regulator. The present disclosure does not say whether the window winder 3 includes the motor or not (i.e. whether there is one motor 5 or two motors 5 and a second winder motor), however, as the disclosure only recites one electric motor 5 for purposes of examination the window winder will be interpreted as just the moving structure (appears to be a pivoting arm in the figure) with the structure moved by motor 5.
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 9 and 10 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.
Regarding claim 9, the word "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the word are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 10 line 2 recites “a plurality of windows”. As claim 10 depends from claim 1 it is unclear if the plurality includes the window of claim 1 or not. Examiner notes claim 10 is directed to the combination of vehicle and opening system but is written to depend from the subcombination of the electrical system of claim 1 and such a dependency typically raises various antecedent issues, unlike an independent combination claim.
There is another antecedent issue with claim 1 line 3 with respect to “at least one electrical opening system”. The previous recitation was “said electrical opening system” so it should be “at least one of said electrical opening system”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 202147786 to Nakajima (hereinafter Nakajima) in view of DE 102015014055 to Li (hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 1, the electrical system is shown in Nakajima in the embodiments of figures 4a-5 (with generic features from figures 1a-1b) with
a window winder device (3) for moving a window (8) of a motor vehicle being raised and/or lowered;
an electrical control unit (main circuit 5) operatively connected to said window winder device (3) and configured in use to operate said window winder device (3) for raising and/or lowering said window (figure 4b for lowering, figure 4c for closing);
characterised in that it also comprises an emergency system comprising:
a window winder device electric motor (2) connectable to said window winder device (3) for controlling an automated lowering of said window (figure 5);
an auxiliary battery (11) configured to power said watertight electric motor (5);
an electric switch (embodiments figures 4a-5 switch 4 has both normal figures 4a-4c and emergency figure 5 functions, i.e. combined functions of 4 and 12 as further taught in page 4 of enclosed translation with respect to embodiment 2) for controlling said electrical system for opening a window (8) and configured for switching said electrical system to at least two operating configurations:
a first operating configuration (figures 4b-4c normal operation) wherein said electric switch (4) allows the operation of said window winder device (3) with the aid of said electrical control unit (5);
a second operating configuration (figure 5) wherein the electric switch (4) places said auxiliary battery (11) and said electric motor (2) in communication in such a way that said electric motor (2) commands by means of said window winder device (3) an automated lowering of said window (8).
However, while Nakajima is intended to be used in water crash situations as noted in the translated abstract, Nakajima is silent as to whether the motor, battery, and switch are watertight.
Watertight electrical components are shown in Li in figure 1 where electrical components (K) including a motor, switch, and energy storage (further taught page 2 of enclosed translation) are waterproof/watertight.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electrical system of Nakajima with the watertight components of Li because the watertight components facilitate window winder function during a vehicle water crash situation and thereby increase the safety of the occupants of the vehicle as taught on page 3 of the translation of Li.
Regarding claim 2, the switch (4) includes a third operating configuration (figure 4a) where the window winder device (3) is disconnected from electrical control unit (5) and motor (2) in Nakajima.
Regarding claim 4, Nakajima discloses the auxiliary battery (11) as smaller than the primary battery and as a small lightweight lithium ion batter in the description of the battery on page 3 of the enclosed translation. Although Nakajima does not disclose specific voltage and ampere range of the battery, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose the battery to be useful- i.e. to fit within the description of small lithium ion battery and be able to move the window winder device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to select or at least try the voltage and ampere range claimed as there are a finite number of battery options fitting the scope of Nakajima.
Regarding claim 5, the watertight electrical components (K) of Li include a cable and when provided to Nakajima, having window winder device (3), auxiliary battery (11), and window winder device (3) connected to switch (4), the watertight cable would connect the electrical components in Nakajima.
Regarding claim 9, the electrical control unit (5) includes a user interface device (switch 4 controls switching from electrical control unit 5 to auxiliary circuit 10 and is actuatable by a user) for controlling window winder device (3) for raising and or lowering (figures 4b-4c) the window (8) in Nakajima.
Regarding claim 10, the vehicle (figure 1a) includes a plurality of windows (figure 1a) and the electrical control system (see claim 1) is configured to control opening of window (8) of the plurality of windows in Nakajima.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima and Li as applied to claim 1 (as well as claims 2, 4, 5, 9, and 10) above, and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 3, Nakajima is silent as to whether the switch (4) is illuminated.
Examiner takes Official Notice that switches illuminated by lighting systems were old and well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electrical system of Nakajima, having the watertight components of Li, with the known illuminated switch because illuminated switches provided the benefit of improved visibility of the switch to the user and thus easier actuation of the switch.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima and Li as applied to claim 1 (as well as claims 2, 4, 5, 9, and 10) above, and further in view of US patent 7861460 to Costello (hereinafter Costello).
Regarding claim 6, when provided with the watertight electrical components including cables of Li, the cables would include first cable connecting (connection shown in figure 5) switch (4) and auxiliary battery (11), second cable connecting (connection shown in figures 1b and 4a-5) switch (4) and motor (2), and third cable connecting (connection shown in figure 1b) switch (4) and window winder device (3) in Nakajima.
However, Nakajima and Li are silent as to whether the cables are insulated/rubberized.
Insulated cables are shown in Costello in figures 1-6 where cable (36) connecting motor (28) and switch (34) and cable (44) connecting auxiliary battery (42) and motor (28 include insulation (44, rubber was known insulating material at the time so the broader insulating encompasses rubber).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electrical system of Nakajima, having the watertight components of Li, with the insulated cables of Costello because insulation provided the known benefit of insulating against water (as taught in Costello column 2 lines 54-55) in keeping with goal of the electrical system for use in water crashes of Nakajima.
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima, Li, and Costello as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Nakajima is silent as to whether the system includes a fuse/device for protecting against short-circuit.
Examiner takes Official Notice that short-circuit protection fuses were old and well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electrical system of Nakajima, having the watertight components of Li and the insulated cables of Costello, with the known short-circuit protection fuses because short-circuit protection fuses provided the known benefit of protecting electrical components from damage caused by overcurrent or short-circuiting by disconnecting the components and would be in keeping with the goal of Nakajima of the use of the electrical system in case of a water crash as water sometimes causes short circuits.
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 CATHERINE A KELLY whose telephone number is (571)270-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/CATHERINE A KELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619