DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on 07/02/2025, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a Non-Final Office Action on the merits in response to applicant’s filing from 07/02/2025.
Claims 10-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Priority
The application claims foreign priority to EP 24186262, filed on 07/03/2024. The priority is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/02/2025 and 08/01/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “eccentric adjusting device” (claim 10) and “eccentric disc” (claim 15) must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 10-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkic (DE 102013/015184), as cited by Applicant, in view of Steinel (DE 102017200675), as cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 10, Salkic discloses a control arm {1} for a wheel suspension in a motor vehicle {“This relates in particular to regions of the vehicle body in which forces and/or torques are introduced, that is to say… in the region of the wheel drives and/or chassis suspension” [0002]}, the control arm {1} comprising: a control arm body {2} having two side walls {two side walls of control arm body 2 (upper and lower sides in Fig. 2)}; and an elongated hole {1’ (Fig. 2)} in at least one side wall {side walls of control arm body 2 (Fig. 2)} of the two side walls {two side walls of control arm body 2}, the elongated hole {1’} configured to receive an adjusting device {“a fastening device (e.g. a screw) is inserted through the passage openings 1' of the strut 1 and connected to the vehicle body” [0036]}, wherein at least one wall section {central portion of 4 (Figs. 2, 4, 6)} of an inner wall {surface of 1+2 defining elongated hole 1’} of the elongated hole {1’} is configured by a reinforcing element {3: “In the embodiment with the two-part bushing 4 from FIG. 2, the force introduction element 3, which can be a metal strip, for example made of spring steel, extends between the two bushing parts 4 as far as the passage opening 1', as can also be seen from the longitudinal sectional view in FIG. 4 and the cross sectional view in FIG. 6” [0039]}, the reinforcing element {3} including a material {“steel” [0039]} with higher hardness than a material {“fiber composite plastic” [0035]} of the at least one side wall {side walls of control arm body 2 (Fig. 2)}, and the reinforcing element {3} is arranged in a recess {recess running through a central portion of 2+4 (Figs. 2, 4, 6)} in the at least one side wall {side walls of control arm body 2 (Fig. 2)} adjacent to the elongated hole {1’}.
However, Salkic does not explicitly disclose the adjusting device is an eccentric adjusting device.
Steinel teaches an elongated hole {7 (12): “The rear leg 10 has a recess 12 at the receptacles 7” [0020]} of a suspension side wall {10} configured to receive an eccentric adjusting device {13 (14+15): “The adjusting element 13 is formed by a fixing element 14, for example designed as a screw or bolt, and at least one eccentric element 15, for example designed as a disc” [0020]}.
In light of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control arm, as disclosed by Salkic, such that the adjusting device is an eccentric adjusting device, as taught by Steinel, “thus enabling precise and easy tracking adjustment” [0022].
Regarding claim 11, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. Salkic further discloses the reinforcing element {3: “force introduction element 3” [0035]} is press-fitted {form-fitted or force-fitted: “Within the passage openings, metallic bushes are arranged, which are in a form-fit or force-fit connection with the force introduction elements. The force introduction elements act as force transmission from the FRP into the bushings. The force introduction elements are arranged at least in the region of the bushings, but can also extend through the entire stiffening strut or extend along the entire strut length” [0009]} in the recess {recess running through a central portion of 2+4 (Figs. 2, 4, 6)}.
Regarding claim 12, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. Salkic further discloses the reinforcing element {3} extends along at least 80% of a length {100% of a length} of a longitudinal side of the elongated hole {1’ (Figs. 2, 4, 6)}.
Regarding claim 13, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. Salkic further discloses the reinforcing element {3} has a plurality of form-fitting surfaces {top and bottom surfaces of 3 (Figs. 2, 4, 6)} which interface correspondingly with a plurality of contact surfaces {top and bottom surfaces of the central recess of 2+4 (Figs. 2, 4, 6)} of the recess {recess running through a central portion of 2+4 (Figs. 2, 4, 6)}.
Regarding claim 14, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. Salkic further discloses at least one eccentric stop {two U-shaped sides of control arm body 2 (Figs. 2, 6)} in the at least one side wall {side walls of control arm body 2} at a distance from the elongated hole {1’}.
Regarding claim 15, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 14. Salkic further discloses the at least one eccentric stop {two U-shaped sides of control arm body 2 (Figs. 2, 6)} comprises a deformation {deformed empty space between the two U-shaped sides of control arm body 2} in the at least one side wall {side walls of control arm body 2}, the deformation {deformed empty space between the two U-shaped sides of control arm body 2} includes a support surface {inner surfaces facing elongated hole 1’ of the two U-shaped sides of control arm body 2 (Figs. 2, 6)} for an eccentric disc {15 (as modified by Steinel in the rejection of claim 1)} of the eccentric adjusting device {13 (14+15)}, and the support surface {inner surfaces facing elongated hole 1’ of the two U-shaped sides of control arm body 2 (Figs. 2, 6)} is aligned parallel to a longitudinal axis of the elongated hole {1’}.
However, Salkic does not explicitly disclose the support surface is aligned transversely to a longitudinal axis of the elongated hole.
Steinel teaches at least one eccentric stop {16 (eccentric due to the curvature of 20+21)} comprises a deformation {deformed empty space between the two stops 16 (Fig. 3b)} in the at least one side wall {10 (8)}, the deformation {deformed empty space between the two stops 16} includes a support surface {inner surfaces of 16 facing towards elongated hole 19 (Fig. 3b)} for an eccentric disc {15 (Fig. 2)} of the eccentric adjusting device {13 (14+15): “It is advantageously dimensioned such that the guide sections 16 and the eccentric element 15 have a sufficiently large contact area with each other, so that the forces occurring when adjusting the track can be transferred from the eccentric element 15 via the guide sections 16 into the receptacle 6, 7” [0025]}, and the support surface {inner surfaces of 16 facing towards elongated hole 19 (Fig. 3b)} is aligned transversely to a longitudinal axis {V direction (Fig. 3a)} of the elongated hole {19 (Figs. 3a-3b): “elongated hole 19” [0024]}.
In light of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control arm, as disclosed by Salkic and Steinel, such that control arm includes additional stops and support surfaces that are aligned transversely to a longitudinal axis of the elongated hole, as taught by Steinel, “thus enabling precise and easy tracking adjustment” [0022].
Regarding claim 17, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. Salkic further discloses the reinforcing element {3} comprises steel {“the force introduction element 3, which can be a metal strip, for example made of spring steel” [0039]}.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkic and Steinel as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Vingnesengen (US 20240174038).
Regarding claim 16, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. However, Salkic does not explicitly disclose the control arm body comprises aluminum or an aluminum alloy.
Vingnesengen teaches the control arm body {2 (of chassis component 1)} comprises aluminum or an aluminum alloy {“the chassis component is made of a light metal material, for example an aluminum alloy” [0022]}.
In light of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control arm, as disclosed by Salkic and Steinel, such that the control arm body comprises aluminum or an aluminum alloy, as taught by Vingnesengen, because “This reduces the weight of the chassis component, which has an advantageous effect on the driving characteristics and fuel consumption of the motor vehicle” [0022].
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkic and Steinel as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Fortmeier (US 2020/0247204).
Regarding claim 18, Salkic and Steinel disclose all the aspects of claim 10. However, Salkic does not explicitly disclose the reinforcing element comprises a surface coating.
Fortmeier teaches a steel component {1: “a motor vehicle control arm 1, according to the invention. It has a first and second profile 2, 3 made from a metallic material. The material is a steel alloy” [0065]} comprises a surface coating {“The steel sheet is advantageously provided with a zinc coating, which protects against corrosion” [0008]}.
In light of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control arm, as disclosed by Salkic and Steinel, such that the reinforcing element comprises a surface coating, as taught by Fortmeier, in order to protect “against corrosion” [0008].
Regarding claim 19, Salkic, Steinel and Fortmeier disclose all the aspects of claim 18. Salkic, as modified by Fortmeier in the rejection of claim 18, further discloses the surface coating comprises zinc {“a zinc coating” [0008]}.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkic, Steinel and Fortmeier as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Schoerner (DE 102008/055716).
Regarding claim 20, Salkic, Steinel, and Fortmeier disclose all the aspects of claim 18. However, Salkic does not explicitly disclose the surface coating comprises zinc flake coating.
Schoerner teaches the surface coating comprises zinc a flake coating {6: “zinc flake coating” [0029]}.
In light of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control arm, as disclosed by Salkic, Steinel and Fortmeier, such that the surface coating comprises a zinc flake coating, as taught by Schoerner, in order to provide “good corrosion protection” [0010].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel M Keck whose telephone number is (571)272-5947. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-4:00.
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 on (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.
/Daniel M. Keck/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614