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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/28/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 line 3 “contact an opening edge” should be --contact with an opening edge--
Appropriate correction is required.
Applications filed after March 15th 2013
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 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.
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.
(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.
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ueda (EP 3015347; please see attached translation for reference to pages).
With regards to Claim 1, Ueda discloses an installation structure for a headlamp comprising: a headlamp including a lens [505] configured to emit irradiation light toward a front of a vehicle (see middle of page 9 and Figures 2 and 5); a lamp cover [232] having an opening [235] through which the lens [505] is exposed (see bottom of page 7 and middle of page 8 and Figure 2); and an elastic cover (comprising portion [231] with the elastic member, see bottom of page 18) configured to close a gap between the headlamp and the opening of the lamp cover (see top half of page 9 and bottom of page 18 and Figure 3), wherein the headlamp is configured to be moved with respect to the lamp cover to adjust an optical axis (see bottom of page 18), and wherein the elastic cover closes the gap between the headlamp and the opening of the lamp cover regardless of a direction of the optical axis of the headlamp (see bottom of page 18).
With regards to Claim 5, Ueda discloses the installation structure as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Ueda further discloses a vertical wall portion (comprising the portion at [238C], see Figure 5) protrudes from an upper portion of the elastic cover towards a vehicle upper side (see Figure 5), and the vertical wall portion is brought close to a rear surface of the lamp cover [232] toward the vehicle upper side (see Figure 4).
With regards to Claim 6, Ueda discloses the installation structure as discussed above with regards to Claim 5.
Ueda further discloses a lateral wall portion [237] protrudes from an upper portion of the elastic cover toward a vehicle rear side (see top half of page 10 and Figure 5), and the lateral wall portion [237] and the vertical wall portion [238C] form an installation space for at least one of wiring or a connector (see top of page 9 and top half of page 10; connectors are substantially installed in a space formed by lateral wall portion [237] and vertical wall portion [238C]).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda (EP 3015347; please see attached translation for reference to pages) in view of Tsutsui et al. (EP 2479090; please see attached translation for reference to pages).
With regards to Claim 2, Ueda discloses the installation structure as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Ueda further discloses the opening edge is positioned on the vehicle rear side of a front end of the headlamp (see Figure 13; the opening edge in the lamp cover [232] is substantially further toward the rear, shown as the direction [B] in Figure 13, than a front end of the headlamp at portion [503]).
Ueda does not disclose an opening edge of the lamp cover faces toward a vehicle rear side.
Tsutsui et al. teaches an opening edge of the lamp cover [52] faces toward a vehicle rear side (see bottom of page 2 and Figure 8; at portion [52B], the lamp cover [52] substantially faces toward a vehicle rear side).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lamp cover of Ueda to include an opening edge facing toward a vehicle rear side, as taught by Tsutsui et al. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide an enhanced drainage of rainwater (see Tsutsui et al. bottom of page 2).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda (EP 3015347; please see attached translation for reference to pages) in view of Hatano et al. (EP 4039568; please see attached translation for reference to pages).
With regards to Claim 3, Ueda discloses the installation structure as discussed above with regards to Claim 1.
Ueda does not explicitly disclose the elastic cover is provided with a pair of ribs configured to come into contact with an opening edge of the lamp cover in a vehicle width direction.
Hatano et al. teaches the cover is provided with a pair of ribs (comprising the ribs formed by at least surfaces [43L,43R], see bottom of page 10 and top of page 11) configured to come into contact with an opening edge of the lamp cover (comprising an edge of the opening formed by portions [25R,25L] into which at least the ribs and headlight unit [40] are disposed, see Figure 6) in a vehicle width direction (see bottom of page 10 and bottom of page 8 and Figure 6; at an end nearest the headlight unit [40], the pair of ribs substantially is configured to come into contact with an opening edge of the lamp cover formed at portions [25R,25L]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elastic cover of Ueda to be provided with a pair of ribs configured to come into contact with an opening edge of the lamp cover in a vehicle width direction, as taught by Hatano et al. One would have been motivated to do so in order to facilitate an adjustment of a headlight (see Hatano et al. bottom of page 9 and top of page 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 7 are 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:
With regards to Claim 4, the prior art of record fails to disclose or fairly suggest the pair of ribs are located inside the lamp cover, and come into contact with the opening edge of the lamp cover from an outer side in the vehicle width direction, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims from which it depends.
With regards to Claim 7, the prior art of record fails to disclose or fairly suggest a lateral wall portion protrudes from an upper portion of the elastic cover toward a vehicle rear side to cover the heat sink from above, and a plurality of heat dissipation holes are formed in the lateral wall portion, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim and claim from which it depends.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the prior art discussed in this action, the applicant is directed to form 892, and particularly the references Hugon (US 3,922,031), which discloses at least an installation structure for a headlamp including a headlamp with lens, a lamp cover, and an elastic cover closing an gap between the headlamp and lamp cover, and allowing movement of the headlamp relative the lamp cover while keeping the gap between the lamp cover and the headlamp closed, and Suzuki (JP 2013067339), which discloses a headlamp installation structure including a headlamp with lens and heat sink, a lamp cover, and a cover, the cover forming a part which covers the heat sink from above and allows for a path for heat dissipation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN KRYUKOVA whose telephone number is (571)272-3761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a.m. - 4p.m.
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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 5712727044. 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.
/ERIN KRYUKOVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875