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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention Group I in the reply filed on November 5, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that:
Applicant submits that independent claims 10 and 11 (respectively representative of Invention Group II and Invention Group Ill), recite at least the following features that are similar:
Claim 10 recites in part, "folding a first cushion portion toward an inflator disposed in a housing... and folding a second cushion portion toward the first cushion portion such that the second cushion portion covers the first cushion portion"; and
Claim 11 recites in part, "a cushion stored in the housing in a folded state".
That is, with regard to at least the above independent claims and claims depending therefrom, a search of Subclass B60R 21/237 will likely be required. Based on the common searches that would be required, at least Invention Group II and Invention Group III do not appear to have acquired a separate status in the art and there is no serious burden on the Examiner as required by MPEP § 803.02.
Accordingly, reconsideration and withdrawal of the Restriction Requirement is requested.
This is not found persuasive because even though the term "folded" is used in claim 11, a search of B60R 21/237 would not likely be necessary for claim 11, since no particular folding is claimed. Furthermore, applicant elected Invention Group I, so applicant’s arguments that restriction between Invention Groups II and III is improper have no bearing on the further prosecution of the application, since no arguments were made with respect to why restriction between Invention Group I and either or both of the other invention groups is improper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on November 5, 2025.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
References to specific claims (as in paragraph 0012) should not be made in the specification because claim numbers and/or claim dependencies may change during the prosecution of the application.
In paragraph 0017, line 1, “Aa” should be changed to --A--.
In paragraph 0021, line 3, “rear” should be changed to --a rear--.
In paragraph 0031, line 1, “disclosure” should be changed to --airbag device according to embodiments of the disclosure-- (like in paragraph 0106, line 1).
In paragraph 0034, line 1, “top” should be changed to --a top--.
In paragraph 0046, line 4, “top” should be changed to --a top--.
In paragraph 0061, line 1, “cushioning” should be changed to --cushion--.
In paragraph 0076, line 2, “obstacle or” should be deleted.
In paragraph 0094, line 5, “#” should be deleted.
In paragraph 0100, line 1, “#” should be deleted.
In paragraph 0106, line 5, “upwardly” should be changed to --upward--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 5 is 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.
Claim 5 is amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions, since “ahead of” could mean “in front of” or “earlier than”. “The USPTO, as the sole agency vested with the authority to grant exclusionary rights to inventors for patentable inventions, has a duty to guard the public against patents of ambiguous and vague scope.” Ex parte Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d 1207, 1211 (BPAI 2008) (precedential). According to current Patent Trial and Appeal Board precedent “[i]f a claim is amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions, the USPTO is justified in requiring the applicant to more precisely define the metes and bounds of the claimed invention by holding the claim unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as indefinite.” Ex parte Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d at 1211. In reaching its decision, the Board observed that the Federal Circuit has noted that a different standard for indefiniteness may be appropriate during the prosecution of patent claims, compared to the standard applied to claims in a granted patent. Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d at 1211 (citing Exxon Research and Engineering Co. v. U.S., 265 F.3d 1371, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (“If this case were before an examiner, the examiner might well be justified in demanding that the applicant more clearly define UL, and thereby remove any degree of ambiguity. However, we are faced with an issued patent that enjoys a presumption of validity.”)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukawatase et al. (JP 2009-190573 A). Fukawatase discloses an airbag device 80 comprising: a cushion 14 mounted on an instrument panel 12 and configured to inflate by injection of gas from an inflator 22 and deploy upwardly between the instrument panel and an occupant; a partition 40 provided in the cushion and configured to compartmentalize an interior of the cushion, the partition comprising a first opening (where vent body 82 connects to the partition 40 – see Fig. 11(B)) through which gas flows upon deployment of the inflator; and a vent (at 82) provided in the partition and configured to be in communication with the first opening to guide flow of gas. The cushion comprises: a first cushion portion 44 configured to deploy toward a front of the occupant; and a second cushion portion 42 configured to deploy at a rear of the first cushion portion to support the first cushion portion. Upon deployment of the airbag device, the internal pressure of the second cushion portion is greater than the internal pressure of the first cushion portion (paragraphs 0010, 0012, 0015-0017, 0019, 0021-0023, 0025, 0027, 0045-0048, 0062, 0074 and 0075). The second cushion portion is configured to deploy ahead of the first cushion portion (Figs. 9 and 10; paragraphs 0044, 0046, 0058, 0063 and 0072). The vent comprises: a vent body 82 extending from the partition toward the second cushion portion (Figs. 10 and 11(A)); and a second opening (at the lower end of the vent body 82, as shown in Figs. 9 and 11(B)) provided in an end of the vent body. A diameter of the second opening is smaller than a diameter of the first opening (Figs. 9 and 11(B)). A diameter of the vent body gradually decreases in a direction from the first opening to the second opening (Figs. 9 and 11(B)). A center axis of the first opening and a center axis of the second opening do not coincide with each other when the airbag is deployed as shown in Figs. 10 and 11(A) and/or prior to the airbag being deployed as shown in Figs. 9 and 11(B).
Claims 1-3, 5, 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeong et al. (KR 2017-0009576 A). Jeong discloses an airbag device 1 comprising: a cushion 10 mounted on an instrument panel 4 and configured to inflate by injection of gas from an inflator 2 and deploy upwardly between the instrument panel and an occupant 5; a partition (e.g., 21 or 22) provided in the cushion and configured to compartmentalize an interior of the cushion, the partition comprising a first opening (e.g., at 212 or 222 – see Fig. 2) through which gas flows upon deployment of the inflator; and a vent (at 30) provided in the partition and configured to be in communication with the first opening to guide flow of gas. The cushion comprises: a first cushion portion (e.g., at 12, 13 and 14; or at 13 and 14) configured to deploy toward a front of the occupant; and a second cushion portion (e.g., at 11; or at 11 and 12) configured to deploy at a rear of the first cushion portion to support the first cushion portion. The volume of the second cushion portion is smaller than the volume of the first cushion portion (Figs. 1-3 and 5). The second cushion portion is configured to deploy ahead of the first cushion portion (Figs. 1 and 2). The vent comprises: a vent body 30 extending from the partition (e.g., 22) toward the second cushion portion (Figs. 1-3 and 5); and a second opening (e.g., at 212 – see Fig. 2) provided in an end of the vent body. A center axis of the first opening and a center axis of the second opening do not coincide with each other when the airbag is deployed (Figs. 3 and 5).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH J FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)270-7802. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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 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.
/KEITH J FRISBY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614