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 Objections
Claim(s) 13 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “the ventilation channel is in fluid communication with the ventilation space, so that [[the]] a gas enters the ventilation space through the ventilation channel”. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 13-14 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kossakovski (US-10370020-B2).
With regards to claim 13, Kossakovski discloses a handle assembly (2 Figure 2), comprising:
a base (housing of flow guide 30, Figure 3), defining a base cavity (shown Figure 7); and
a handle (5 Figure 2) being arranged in the base cavity, and a ventilation space (26 Figure 3) is provided between the base and an outer periphery of the handle (Col. 2 Line 62 – Col. 3 Line 2);
wherein the base comprises a peripheral wall (31 Figure 5) arranged around the outer periphery of the handle (32’ Figure 5) and a bottom wall (left wall, Figure 5) arranged on an inner side of the handle, the bottom wall of the base is provided with a ventilation channel (22 Figure 3), and the ventilation channel is in fluid communication with the ventilation space, so that the gas enters the ventilation space through the ventilation channel (Col. 2 Line 62 – Col. 3 Line 2).
With regards to claim 14, Kossakovski discloses the handle assembly according to claim 13, further comprising:
a flow guide component (30 Figure 5) arranged in the base cavity, at least partially extending into the ventilation space (26 Figure 3), and surrounding at least part of the outer periphery of the handle (5 Figure 2); and
wherein the flow guide component defines a flow guide cavity and has an inlet and at least one first outlet, the inlet and the at least one first outlet are in communication with the flow guide cavity, and the first outlet is located in the ventilation space (Col. 11 Lines 4-28);
wherein the inlet is in communication with the ventilation channel (22 Figure 3), and the at least one first outlet is arranged toward the ventilation space, so that the gas ejected from the ventilation channel is capable of entering the ventilation space through the flow guide component (Col. 11 Lines 4-28).
With regards to claim 18, Kossakovski discloses the handle assembly according to claim 13, wherein the gas (delivered by 21, Figure 4) originates from an air-conditioning system of a vehicle (Col. 10 Lines 55-58) or (interpreted as requiring only one of associated limitations) an air pump independent of the air-conditioning system of the vehicle.
With regards to claim 19, Kossakovski discloses the handle assembly according to claim 14, further comprising:
a heating component (17 Figure 2) being arranged in the flow guide cavity (of flow guide component 30, Figure 5) and configured to heat the gas in the flow guide cavity (26 Figure 3).
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) 1-9 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kossakovski in view of Grover (US-20220372798-A1). All citations refer to the Kossakovski reference unless otherwise noted.
With regards to claim 1, Kossakovski discloses a handle system (2 Figure 2), comprising:
a base (housing of flow guide 30, Figure 3) defining a base cavity (shown Figure 7);
a handle (5 Figure 2) arranged in the base cavity, and a ventilation space (26 Figure 3) is provided between the base and an outer periphery of the handle (Col. 2 Line 62 – Col. 3 Line 2); and
an anti-freeze control unit (15 Figure 2) configured to (interpreted as a statement of intended use, Kossakovski’s device is capable of performing the claimed function) allow a gas to enter the ventilation space, so as to prevent the handle from being frozen (Col. 5 Lines 1-24).
Kossakovski is silent on the sensing of environmental information that determines whether freezing will occur.
However, Grover teaches a related temperature control unit (300 Figure 10) for a vehicle component (10 Figure 10) using temperature and/or humidity sensors to determine the plausibility of the presence of a layer of ice (Para. 0037). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Grover’s sensors with Kossakovski’s anti-freeze control unit, such that the anti-freeze control unit is configured to allow a gas to enter the ventilation space according to environmental information that determines whether freezing will occur, with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to add Grover’s sensors to allow passive maintenance of a user’s preferred environmental conditions.
With regards to claim 2, Kossakovski discloses the handle system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a humidity sensor (Para. 0037 – Grover) being in communication connection with the anti-freeze control unit (15 Figure 2) and configured to measure a humidity of air where the handle (5 Figure 2) is located; and
a temperature sensor (Para. 0037 – Grover) being in communication connection with the anti-freeze control unit and configured to measure a temperature of the air where the handle is located.
With regards to claim 3, Kossakovski in view of Grover teaches the handle system according to claim 1, further comprising:
a gas delivery device (21 Figure 3) being in communication connection with the anti-freeze control unit (15 Figure 2) and configured to deliver a gas into the ventilation space (26 Figure 3), wherein the anti-freeze control unit is configured to control activation and deactivation of the gas delivery device (Col. 2 Line 62 – Col. 3 Line 11).
With regards to claim 4, Kossakovski discloses the handle system according to claim 3, wherein the gas delivery device (21 Figure 4) is an air-conditioning device of a vehicle (Col. 10 Lines 55-58) or (interpreted as requiring only one of associated limitations) an air pump independent of the air-conditioning device of the vehicle.
With regards to claim 5, Kossakovski discloses the handle system according to claim 4, wherein the gas delivery device (21 Figure 4) is configured to (interpreted as a statement of intended use, Kossakoski’s device is capable of performing the claimed function) be activated at predetermined time intervals to deliver gas to a space at the outer periphery of the handle (5 Figure 2).
With regards to claim 6, Kossakovski discloses the handle system according to claim 5, further comprising:
a heating component (17 Figure 2) being in communication connection with the anti-freeze control unit (15 Figure 2) and configured to heat the gas (Col. 12 Lines 29-42), so that the heated gas enters the ventilation space (26 Figure 3).
With regards to claim 7, Kossakovski discloses the handle system according to claim 1, wherein the environmental information on whether freezing will occur comprises a humidity of air where the handle (5 Figure 2) is located, rain or snowfall for that day from weather forecast, and a temperature of the air where the handle is located (Para. 0037 – Grover).
With regards to claim 8, Kossakovski in view of Grover teaches the handle system according to claim 1, wherein the base (housing of flow guide 30, Figure 3) comprises a peripheral wall arranged around the outer periphery of the handle (5 Figure 2) and a bottom wall (left wall, Figure 5) arranged on an inner side of the handle, the bottom wall of the base is provided with a ventilation channel (22 Figure 3), and the ventilation channel is in fluid communication with the ventilation space (26 Figure 3), so that the gas enters the ventilation space through the ventilation channel (Col. 2 Line 62 – Col. 3 Line 2).
With regards to claim 9, Kossakovski in view of Grover teaches the handle system according to claim 8, further comprising:
a flow guide component (30 Figure 5) arranged in the base cavity, at least partially extending into the ventilation space (26 Figure 3), and surrounding at least part of the outer periphery of the handle (5 Figure 2); and
wherein the flow guide component defines a flow guide cavity and has an inlet and at least one first outlet, the inlet and the at least one first outlet are in communication with the flow guide cavity, and the first outlet is located in the ventilation space (Col. 11 Lines 4-28);
wherein the inlet is in communication with the ventilation channel (22 Figure 3), and the at least one first outlet is arranged toward the ventilation space, so that the gas ejected from the ventilation channel is capable of entering the ventilation space through the flow guide component (Col. 11 Lines 4-28).
With regards to claim 20, Grover discloses an anti-freeze method for a handle, the anti-freeze method comprising:
a step S01 of acquiring environmental information that determines whether freezing will occur (Para. 0037);
a step S02 of determining whether the handle will be frozen according to the environmental information that determines whether freezing will occur (Para. 0037).
Grover is silent on a step S03 of ventilating.
However, Kossakovski teaches ventilating a space at an outer periphery of the handle, so as to prevent the handle from being frozen, when it is determined that the handle will be frozen (Col. 2 Line 62 – Col. 3 Line 11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Kossakovski’s ventilation means as an alternative to Grover’s mechanical means when it is determined that the handle will be frozen according to the environmental information that determines whether freezing will occur, a space at an outer periphery of the handle, so as to prevent the handle from being frozen, with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to use such a method to maintain operability of a handle in freezing conditions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 and 15-17 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Although the references of record show some features similar to those of applicant's device, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the claimed invention. With regards to claims 10 and 15, Kossakovski teaches a device satisfying the preceding claims. However, the prior art does not teach wherein the handle has an outer handle surface, and the at least one first outlet surrounds at least part of the outer periphery of the handle and is configured such that a ventilation direction of the first outlet is perpendicular to the outer handle surface, so that the gas blown out from the first outlet moves substantially perpendicular to the outer handle surface. Therefore, such an arrangement is not taught by the prior art, nor can the Examiner can find teaching or motivation to suggest such a modification to one of ordinary skill in the art without fundamentally altering the principles of operation of the device or otherwise relying upon the benefit of impermissible hindsight reasoning.
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20260001514-A1: Applicant’s copending application.
US-10879897-B2: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-20240102867-A1: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-11634062-B1: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-8884191-B2: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-20110121599-A1: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-12326017-B2: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-11697952-B2: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
US-11674338-B2: A related vehicle handle arrangement.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noah Horowitz, whose telephone number is (571)272-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00AM - 7:00 PM.
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, Kristina Fulton, can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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.
/NOAH HOROWITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights