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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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 1-5 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boettcher (US7469957B1), henceforth referred to as Boettcher, in view of Buse (DE-102018110519-A1), henceforth referred to as Buse.
Regarding claim 1, Boettcher discloses a vehicle crash structure comprising: a longitudinal energy absorption member (Annotated Figure 5: longitudinal energy absorption member), and a load bearing element; wherein the load bearing element comprises a first end a second end (Annotated Figure 5: load bearing element comprises first and second ends) , a first load bearing arm and a second load bearing arm (Figure 5: side branch 30 comprises a first load bearing arm, and center branch 31 comprises a second load bearing arm), the first load bearing arm and the second load bearing arm each extending between the first end and the second end of the load bearing element (Annotated Figure 5: branches 30 and 31 extend between first and second ends of load bearing element), wherein the first end of the load bearing element is attached to one end of the longitudinal energy absorption member (Annotated Figure 5: first end of load bearing element is attached to one end of the longitudinal energy absorption member), and the second end of the load bearing element is attached to a cross member of a vehicle body structure (Figure 4 and Annotated Figure 5: second end of load bearing element is attached to cross member 50), and the first load bearing arm and the second load bearing arm diverge from the first end of the load bearing element (Annotated Figure 5: branches 30 and 31 diverge from the first end of the load bearing element), and each of the first load bearing arm and the second load bearing arm attach to the cross member of the vehicle body (Figures 4 and 5: branches 30 and 31 attach to cross member 50), wherein the longitudinal energy absorption member and the load bearing element together define a load path for a longitudinal load occurring during a crash event (Annotated Figure 5 and Figure 8: energy load paths 90 and 88 extend through the longitudinal energy absorption member and load bearing element), and wherein the first load bearing arm defines a first diverging portion of the load path and the second load bearing arm defines a second diverging portion of the load path (Figures 5 and 8: branches 30 and 31 define diverging portions of load paths 90 and 88).
PNG
media_image1.png
686
1076
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Boettcher does not teach a bulkhead panel. Buse discloses the cross member disposed between a bulkhead panel of the vehicle body structure and the longitudinal energy absorption member (Figures 4 and 5: crossmember 10 with center area 14 is disposed between bulkhead wall 26 and longitudinal member 34). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Boettcher with the bulkhead of Buse in order to improve vehicle rigidity and crash behavior (Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 2, Boettcher discloses the load bearing element is attached to the cross member of the vehicle body structure (Figure 4 and Annotated Figure 5: second end of load bearing element is attached to cross member 50).
However, Boettcher does not teach the space being used to accommodate a part of a battery. Buse discloses the first load bearing arm and the second load bearing arm of the load bearing element define a space between the longitudinal energy absorption member and the cross member of the vehicle body structure for accommodating a part of a traction battery and/or power electronics (Figures 4 and 5: crossmember 10 of battery box 1 is disposed between first load bearing arm 36 and second load bearing arm 38). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Boettcher with the battery of Buse in order to restrict area available for batteries as little as possible (Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 3, Boettcher as modified discloses the longitudinal energy absorption member has a longitudinal axis (Annotated Figure 5: longitudinal energy absorption member comprises a longitudinal axis), the first diverging portion of the load path extends from the first end of the load bearing element at a first non-zero angle relative to the longitudinal axis of the longitudinal energy absorption member, and the second diverging portion of the load path extends from the first end of the load bearing element at a second non-zero angle relative to the longitudinal axis of the longitudinal energy absorption member (Figures 5 and 8: branches 30 and 31 with corresponding load paths 88 and 90 extend at respective first and second non-zero angles relative to the longitudinal axis).
Regarding claim 4, Boettcher as modified discloses the first diverging portion of the load path extends from the first end of the load bearing element in a first direction and the second diverging portion of the load path extends from the first end of the load bearing element in a second direction, and wherein the first direction is different to the second direction (Figures 5 and 8: branches 30 and 31 with corresponding load paths 88 and 90 extend in different directions).
Regarding claim 5, Boettcher and Buse do not teach specific angles. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Boettcher and Buse to have first and second angles between 10-60 degrees, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device , the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst,. Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Boettcher and Buse would not operate differently with the claimed angle, as the crash structure would perform similarly in dissipating energy. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating “In an embodiment, the first non-zero angle may be between 10 degrees and 60 degrees. The second non-zero angle may be between 10 degrees and 60 degrees” (Paragraph [0031]).
Regarding claim 9, Boettcher discloses the cross member (Figures 4 and 5: crossmember 50), and wherein the second end of the load bearing element is attached to the cross member (Figure 4 and Annotated Figure 5: second end of load bearing element is attached to cross member 50).
Regarding claim 10, Buse further discloses the cross member and the bulkhead panel forms part of a bulkhead assembly (Figures 4 and 5: crossmember 10 and bulkhead wall 26 form a bulkhead assembly).
Regarding claim 11, Boettcher as modified discloses the vehicle crash structure is a first vehicle crash structure, and wherein the vehicle body structure comprises a second vehicle crash structure according to claim 1 (Figure 5: left and right vehicle crash structures formed by respective left and right longitudinal members and respective left and right branches 30 and 31).
Regarding claim 12, Boettcher as modified discloses the first vehicle crash structure is configured for mounting on a first side of a vehicle and the second vehicle crash structure is configured for mounting on a second side of a vehicle (Figure 5: left and right vehicle crash structures formed by respective left and right longitudinal members and respective left and right branches 30 and 31).
Regarding claim 13, Boettcher as modified discloses the first vehicle crash structure and second vehicle crash structure together define an upper load path and wherein the vehicle body structure comprises a lower load structure defining a lower load path (Figure 8: vehicle crash structure forms and upper load path, and side sills 20 form a second load structure defining a lower load path for side impact loads).
Regarding claim 14, Boettcher as modified discloses a vehicle comprising the vehicle body structure according to claim 9 (Claim 1: "A floor frame for an automotive vehicle").
Regarding claim 15, Boettcher as modified discloses the vehicle body structure is provided at a front portion of the vehicle and/or at a rear portion of the vehicle (Figure 5: vehicle body structure provided at the front of the vehicle).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boettcher and Buse as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Lecomte (EP-3392521-A1), henceforth referred to as Lecomte.
Regarding claim 6, Boettcher and Buse do not teach different longitudinal stiffnesses. Lecomte discloses the load bearing element has a first longitudinal stiffness, and the longitudinal energy absorption member has a second longitudinal stiffness, wherein the first longitudinal stiffness is greater than the second longitudinal stiffness (Paragraph [0070]: "The preformed crushing absorbing tube in turns 7b (longitudinal energy absorption member) which can be placed upstream of the internal profile allows absorbing lower-intensity shocks, constituting with the shock absorbing member constituted by the horizontal part 5b2 (load bearing element) and the profile 6b a shock absorbing device with several shock levels, the preformed crushing absorbing tube in turns 7b absorbing shocks up to a certain threshold, the shock absorbing member constituted by the horizontal part 5 b 2 and the profile 6 b absorbing shocks above the threshold"). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the frame of Boettcher and Buse with the longitudinal stiffnesses of Lecomte in order to "absorb shocks of greater magnitude" (Paragraph [0071]).
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boettcher and Buse as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Schulze (DE102006004045A1), henceforth referred to as Schulze.
Regarding claim 7, neither Boettcher nor Buse teaches a support leg. Schulze discloses the load bearing element comprises a support leg, and wherein a first end of the support leg is attached to the first end of the load bearing element (Figure 2: third carrier arm 37 is attached to the first end of the load bearing element), and a second end of the support leg is attached to the cross member of the vehicle body structure (Figure 2: second end of third carrier arm 37 is attached to crossmember 39). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the crash structure of Boettcher and Buse with the support leg of Schulze in order to improve passenger footwell protection (Paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 8, Schulze further discloses the support leg defines a third diverging portion of the load path formed by the longitudinal energy absorption member and the load bearing element (Figure 2: third carrier arm 37 defines a third diverging portion of load path II).
Cited Prior Art not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes Yamada (US-20170088183-A1), which discloses a vehicle front crash absorption structure.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J O'NEILL whose telephone number is (571)272-4752. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 7AM-4PM.
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.
/MATTHEW JAMES O'NEILL/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights