Application No.: 15/838,260
`Reply dated October 10, 2019
`Response to Office Action ofJuly 11, 2019
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 1, 5, 7, and 9 have been amended, claim 6 has been canceled without prejudice
`
`or disclaimer. Accordingly, claims 1-5, 7-12 are currently pending in the Application, of which
`
`claim 1 is independent. Applicants appreciate the indication that claims 6-10 contain allowable
`
`subject matter.
`
`Applicants respectfully submit that the above amendments do not add new matter to the
`
`Application and are fully supported by the specification. Support for the amendments may be
`
`found at least in original claims 5 and 6.
`
`In view of the above amendments and the following Remarks, Applicants respectfully
`
`request reconsideration and timely withdrawal of the pending objections and rejections for the
`
`reasons discussed below.
`
`Rejections under 35 U. S. C. § 102
`
`Claims 1-5 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as allegedly being
`
`anticipated by US. Patent No. 6,189,960, issued to Mumura, et al. (“Mumura”). Applicants
`
`respectfully traverse this rejection for at least the following reasons.
`
`In order for a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) to be proper, a single reference must
`
`disclose every claimed feature. To be patentable, a claim need only recite a single novel
`
`feature that is not disclosed in the cited reference. Thus, the failure of a cited reference to
`
`disclose one or more claimed features renders the 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) rejection improper.
`
`Vlfithout conceding to the correctness of the Examiner’s rejection but to advance
`
`prosecution, claim 1 has been amended to recite, inter alia,
`
`the roof airbag cushion comprises a leading part configured to be
`inflated and deployed by the gas supplied from the inflator; and
`the leading part comprises:
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/838,260
`Reply dated October 10, 2019
`Response to Office Action ofJuly 11, 2019
`
`a first chamber portion configured to be deployed toward both
`sides from a gas introduction part;
`a second chamber portion connected with the first chamber
`portion, and configured to be deployed from the first chamber portion in
`a direction opposite to the gas introduction part;
`a third chamber portion connected with the second chamber
`potion, configured to be deployed from the second chamber portion in a
`direction facing the gas introduction part, and disposed inside the
`second chamber portion; and
`a fourth chamber portion connected with the third chamber
`potion, configured to be deployed from the third chamber portion in the
`direction opposite to the gas introduction part, and disposed inside the
`third chamber portion.
`
`This is to include substantially similar elements from original claim 6, which has been
`
`canceled, without prejudice or disclaimer. Applicants respectfully submits that these elements
`
`are not taught or fairly suggested by the asserted art.
`
`Accordingly, Applicants respectfully request withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)
`
`rejection of claim 1. Claims 2-5, and 11 depend from claim 1 and are allowable at least for this
`
`reason. Since none of the alleged prior art of record discloses or suggests all the features of
`
`the claimed subject matter, Applicants respectfully submit that independent claim 1, and all the
`
`claims that depend therefrom, are allowable.
`
`Rejections Under 35 U. S. C. § 103
`
`Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over
`
`Mumura in view of US. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0046159, applied for by
`
`Noguchi, et al. (“Noguchi”). Applicants respectfully traverse this rejection for at least the
`
`following reasons.
`
`Applicants respectfully submit that claim 1 is allowable over Mumura, and Noguchi fails
`
`to cure the deficiencies of Mumura noted above with regard to claim 1. Hence, claim 12 is
`
`allowable at least because they depend from an allowable claim 1.
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/838,260
`Reply dated October 10, 2019
`Response to Office Action ofJuly 11, 2019
`
`Accordingly, Applicants respectfully request withdrawal of the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection
`
`of claim 12.
`
`Allowable Subject Matter & Claim Objection
`
`Claims 6-10 were objected to for being dependent upon a rejecting base claim.
`
`Applicants appreciate the indication that claims 6-10 contain allowable subject matter.
`
`Claims 7-10 have not been amended into independent form because Applicants submit that
`
`claims 7-10 depend from an allowable base claim 1 and are allowable at least for this reason.
`
`Accordingly, Applicants submit that claims 7-10 are in condition for allowance.
`
`Other Matters
`
`In addition to the amendments mentioned above, claims 7 and 9 have been amended
`
`solely to maintain proper dependency. These amendments are not made to avoid prior art or
`
`narrow the claimed subject matter, and no change in claim scope is intended. Therefore,
`
`Applicants do not intend to relinquish any subject matter by these amendments.
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/838,260
`Reply dated October 10, 2019
`Response to Office Action ofJuly 11, 2019
`
`W
`
`A full and complete response has been made to the pending Office Action, and all of the
`
`stated objections and grounds for rejection have been overcome or rendered moot.
`
`Accordingly, all pending claims are allowable, and the Application is in condition for allowance.
`
`The Examiner is invited to contact Applicants’ undersigned representative at the number
`
`below if it would expedite prosecution. Prompt and favorable consideration of this Reply is
`
`respectfully requested.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`NVilliam L. Brooksl
`
`Vlfilliam L. Brooks
`
`Reg. No. 34,129
`
`Date: October 10, 2019
`
`CUSTOMER NUMBER: 58027
`
`HO. Park & Associates, PLC
`1894 Preston White Drive
`
`Reston, VA 20191
`Tel: 703-288-5105
`Fax: 703-288-5139
`
`CBK/LL/esp
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

Connectivity issues with tsdrapi.uspto.gov. Try again now (HTTP Error 429: ).

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket