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 .
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.
Claims 8 and 9 are 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 8: “that achieves an aperture effect” in line 3 is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear as to what an aperture effect is or what this limitation in the claim actually requires.
Claim 9: the limitation "such that a thermal compensation of the location of the plastic part is achieved relative to the environment”. It is unclear as to what “a thermal compensation of the location” is and what this limitation is attempting to require. Examiner also notes that “the environment” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Naumann (WO2018/167195A1, please refer to US2020/011520A1, both recited on the IDS filed 12/6/2021, which is being utilized by the Examiner as an English language translation of the WO document for the below cited sections).
Re Clm 1: Naumann discloses a housing for a lighting device and a method for connecting a luminously efficacious plastic part (“structural part” made from a plastic) with a metal housing part (“metal component” that forms “a holder of the structural part”) of a lighting device of a vehicle, wherein the method comprises:
generating a microstructure (8) in a joining surface (top) of the metal component, and having undercuts (19) with respect to the joining surface;
softening a plastic material of the plastic part in an area that is complementary to the joining surface of the metal component with an introduction of heat (placing the plastic cover part onto the housing part such that the support edge and a cover edge of the plastic cover part are in contact with each other with a gravity pressure force; heating the support edge such that the cover edge partially melts and plastic material of the cover edge flows into the microstructure undercuts in order to fill them forming corresponding protrusions);
pressing the structural part and the metal component together with a pressure force such that a portion of the softened plastic material penetrates the undercuts of the microstructure (softened plastic is forced into the undercuts and reads on “pressing”; Examiner further notes that a pressure force, i.e. via gravity, exists between the plastic and metal parts);
cooling the softened plastic material of the structural part thereby forming a new strength of the softened plastic material of the plastic part (partially melted plastic is cured, as disclosed).
Re Clm 2: Naumann discloses that a laser can be used for heating the support edge (Paragraph 0011) thereby reading upon the claimed “laser irradiation” and hence anticipating instant claim 2.
Re Clm 3 Naumann discloses wherein material tongues of the softened plastic material, which penetrate the microstructure, are formed when pressing together the structural part and the metal component via which a form fit and/or a force fit is/are formed with the metal component (see form fit in figs).
Re Clm 4: Naumann discloses a joining surface having the undercuts (19)/microstructure is a same size or smaller than a contact surface between the structural part and the metal component (Figs. 1-5).
Re Clm 5: Naumann discloses (fig 5) a single joining surface or multiple individually separately formed joining surfaces having the undercuts/microstructure formed on a contact surface between the structural part and metal component (Figs. 1-5). Re Clm 6: Naumann discloses wherein the metal component is formed with the aid of an Mg alloy, an Al alloy, a Zn alloy or an Fe alloy, and is manufactured by at least one of a die casting method, an extrusion method, a forging method, a machining manufacturing process or a stamping/bending method. Examiner notes Naumann discloses that the depressions in the support edge of the metal housing part can be formed by means of a laser reading upon the broadly claimed “a machining manufacturing process” and hence anticipating instant claim 6.
Re Clm 7: Naumann discloses wherein the luminously efficacious plastic part is designed such that it is irradiated or through-irradiated during an operation of the lighting device by at least one light beam generated by a light source in the lighting device, and/or the plastic part is designed as a reflector, a light conducting body, a thick-walled optical element or a primary optical element. Examiner notes that the resulting explosion-proof housing can accommodate electrical equipment, in particular indicator lights (Paragraph 0009) or a signal lamp (Paragraph 0024), or can be used for a light-emitting diode (as discussed in Paragraphs 0024 and 0034).
Re Clm 8 (as best understood): Naumann discloses wherein a holder of plastic part is formed with the metal component, and/or the metal component has a diaphragm edge that achieves an aperture effect.. Examiner notes that as best understood, the figures show a “holder” portion of the plastic part is formed with the metal component.
Re Clms 9 (as best understood) and 10: Naumann discloses that in “order to able to compensate for possibly different temperature expansions of these materials, depressions and protrusions can interlock with play in the longitudinal direction” (Paragraph 0022) and that, as shown in the figures, in “the longitudinal direction 11, the grooves 22 are filled by corresponding groove protrusions 23 of the protrusions 9, while corresponding grooves (see FIG. 6) at ends of the depressions 8 are unfilled in the longitudinal direction 11 in order to provide a play 13 between depressions 8 and protrusions 9” such that “[p]ossible different expansions of housing part 2 and cover part 5 at varying temperatures due to the different materials can thereby be compensated” (Paragraph 0038), thereby reading upon the claimed “thermal compensation” limitations of instant claim 9 as well as the “compensating for tolerances” limitations of instant claim 10, and given that Naumann specifically discloses that during the heating step, “it is possible for the depressions not to be filled completely by the respective protrusions 9 in the longitudinal direction 11 at ends of the depressions 8, which provides the corresponding play 13 according to FIG. 6” (Paragraph 0049).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Re Clm 1: Applicant argues on page 7 of the response that there is no disclosure in Naumann of pressing the plastic and metal parts together with a pressure force to cause the softened plastic to flow into the microstructure of the metal part. Examiner disagrees and notes that it is disclose that the plastic part is positioned on top of the metal part. There exists a gravitational force that presses the plastic part onto the metal part, such that a portion of the softened plastic material penetrates the undercuts of the microstructure.
Re Clm 10: Applicant argues on the bottom of page 7 and top of page 8 of the response that Naumann fails to disclose the claimed control to compensate for tolerances. Examiner disagrees and firstly notes that the claim language does not require any “control” or “controlling” of a location of the plastic part. Examiner also notes that the pressing of the plastic part to the metal part does happen by locating the plastic part in a compensating position on or at the metal component to compensate for tolerances (as noted in paragraph 0038).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 JONATHAN PETER MASINICK whose telephone number is (571)270-3060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8a-5p EST.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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.
/JONATHAN P MASINICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678