Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/785,568

Component Arrangement and Method for Producing a Component Arrangement

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jun 15, 2022
Examiner
FERGUSON, MICHAEL P
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
OA Round
6 (Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
793 granted / 1253 resolved
+11.3% vs TC avg
Strong +74% interview lift
Without
With
+74.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1301
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§112
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1253 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1, Figures 1-1B, claims 14, 16, 17 and 26, in the reply filed on November 6, 2024 is acknowledged. Claims 18-25 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on November 6, 2024. 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, “during the pressing together at the two spot welds, one of the components [being] tilted in the direction of the other component” as claimed in claims 14 and 26 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 § 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 14, 16, 17 and 26 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 14 (lines 8-9) and claim 26 (11-12) each recite “during the pressing together at the two spot welds, one of the components is tilted in the direction of the other component”. It is unclear as to what is structurally defined by such limitations. It is unclear as whether such “tilting” of one component in the direction of the other component “during the pressing together at the two spot welds” defines an angularly tilted positioning between respective planar main body portions of the components; or whether such “tilting” is defined by flexing of a portion of a respective one of the flange section, component edge or protrusion of one of the components during the pressing together of the components; or whether such “tilting” is merely defined by an angular portion of a respective one of the flange section, component edge or protrusion of one of the components being angled toward the other component. Accordingly, one is unable to properly determine the metes and bounds or such claims. Claims 16 and 17 depend from claim 14 and are likewise rejected as being indefinite. 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. Claims 14, 16, 17 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bayerische Motoren Werke (WO 2017/167466) in view of Daimler (DE 10 2015 004 496) and Kanaguchi (US 2007/0245541). As to claim 14 as best understood, Bayerische Motoren Werke discloses a component arrangement, comprising: a first component 20 having a flange section 24; and a second component 30 having a component edge, which are arranged in an overlapping arrangement and are connected via a laser fillet weld 42, and are connected at two fixing positions arranged laterally offset with respect to the laser fillet weld (two laterally offset fixing positions are constituted by laterally offset clamping positions A; Figure 3 reprinted with annotations below), wherein: at least one protrusion 28 is provided on one of the components, which protrudes in a direction of the other component and is arranged and configured in such a way that, during the pressing together at the two fixing positions, one of the components is tilted in the direction of the other component (pressed oblique portions B,C of flange section 24 of first component 20 are angled toward second component 30, and flex during the pressing together of the components; thus the first component is tilted in the direction of the second component during the pressing together at fixing positions A; Figure 3), and when the first and second components are positioned correctly relative to one another and pressed together at the two fixing positions, the flange section of the first component is pressed obliquely in the region of the laser fillet weld (flange section 24 comprises pressed oblique portions B,C in the region of laser fillet weld 42; Figure 3), with a component edge 44 of the first component onto the second component, and relative to the laser fillet weld in the overlap region, the two fixing positions are both set back on opposite sides thereto (Figures 1-4). [AltContent: textbox (C)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (B)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (A)] PNG media_image1.png 117 505 media_image1.png Greyscale Bayerische Motoren Werke fails to disclose a component arrangement wherein the first and the second component are respectively connected to one another by a resistance spot weld at the two fixing positions; and wherein a continuous adhesive bonding region, in which the first and second components are adhesively bonded to one another, is formed at least between the two spot welds. Daimler teaches a component arrangement wherein first and second components 12,14 are respectively connected to one another by a pulsed laser spot weld 22,A at two fixing positions (Figure 2 reprinted below with annotations); and wherein a continuous adhesive bonding region 26, in which the first and second components are adhesively bonded to one another, is formed at least between the two spot welds; the spot welds and adhesive bonding providing for a more secure connection between the components prior to applying a laser seam weld 22,B between the component edge of the first component and the second component (Figures 2-3). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the component arrangement disclosed by Bayerische Motoren Werke wherein the two fixing positions comprise spot welds with adhesive bonding extending therebetween, as taught by Daimler, in order to provide for a more secure connection between the components prior to applying the laser seam weld between the component edge of the first component and the second component. [AltContent: textbox (B)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (A)][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image2.png 259 509 media_image2.png Greyscale Bayerische Motoren Werke as modified by Daimler fails to explicitly disclose a component arrangement wherein the first and second components are connected by a resistance spot weld at the two fixing positions. Daimler teaches a component arrangement wherein first and second components are connected by pulsed laser spot welds; instead of resistance spot welds. Kanaguchi teaches a component arrangement wherein first and second components 1,2 are respectively connected to one another by a resistance spot weld N at two fixing positions; and wherein a continuous adhesive bonding region 4, in which the first and second components are adhesively bonded to one another, is formed at least between the two fixing positions; the resistance spot welds providing for a quick secure connection between the components (Figures 4A-4D). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the component arrangement disclosed by Bayerische Motoren Werke as modified by Daimler wherein the two fixing positions comprise resistance spot welds, as taught by Kanaguchi, in order to provide for a quick secure connection between the components. Moreover, inasmuch as the references disclose pulsed laser spot welds and resistance spot welds as art recognized structural and functional equivalents, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the exercise art to substitute one for the other. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 301, 213 USPQ 532, 536 (CCPA 1982). As to claim 16, Bayerische Motoren Werke discloses a component arrangement wherein the at least one protrusion 28 is formed by the flange section 24 and the flange section is set obliquely relative to the surrounding first component 20, so that the component edge 44 of the flange section protrudes in the direction of the second component 30 (Figures 1-4). As to claim 17, Bayerische Motoren Werke discloses a component arrangement wherein the component edge 44 protrudes furthest in a central region of the flange section 24 (Figures 1-4). As to claim 26 as best understood, Bayerische Motoren Werke discloses a method for producing a component arrangement, comprising: accurately positioning a first component 20 and a second component 30 in an overlapping arrangement, wherein the first component comprises a flange section 24, and the second component has a component edge; pressing together and fixing the first and second components at least at two fixing positions (two laterally offset fixing positions are constituted by laterally offset clamping positions A; Figure 3), and wherein a protrusion 28 is provided on one of the components, which protrudes in a direction of the other component and is arranged and configured in such a way that, during the pressing together at the two fixing positions, one of the components is tilted in the direction of the other component (pressed oblique portions B,C of flange section 24 of first component 20 are angled toward second component 30, and flex during the pressing together of the components; thus the first component is tilted in the direction of the second component during the pressing together at fixing positions A; Figure 3), and when the first and second components are positioned correctly relative to one another and pressed together at the two fixing positions; and forming a laser fillet weld 42 between a component edge 44 of the first component and the second component, the flange section of the first component being pressed obliquely in a region of the laser fillet weld (flange section 24 comprises pressed oblique portions B,C in the region of laser fillet weld 42; Figure 3), with the component edge of the first component onto the second component, wherein relative to the laser fillet weld, the two fixing positions are both set back and on opposite sides thereto (Figures 1-4). Bayerische Motoren Werke fails to disclose a component arrangement wherein the first and second components are respectively connected to one another by a resistance spot weld at the two fixing positions, and wherein an adhesive arranged between the two components adhesively bonds the two components to one another in a continuous adhesive bonding region extending between the two fixing positions. Daimler teaches a component arrangement wherein first and second components 12,14 are respectively connected to one another by a pulsed laser spot weld 22,A at two fixing positions; and wherein a continuous adhesive bonding region 26, in which the first and second components are adhesively bonded to one another, is formed at least between the two fixing positions; the spot welds and adhesive bonding providing for a more secure connection between the components prior to applying a laser seam weld 22,B between the component edge of the first component and the second component (Figures 2-3). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the component arrangement disclosed by Bayerische Motoren Werke wherein the two fixing positions comprise spot welds with adhesive bonding extending therebetween, as taught by Daimler, in order to provide for a more secure connection between the components prior to applying the laser seam weld between the component edge of the first component and the second component. Bayerische Motoren Werke as modified by Daimler fails to explicitly disclose a component arrangement wherein the first and second components are connected by a resistance spot weld at the two fixing positions. Daimler teaches a component arrangement wherein first and second components are connected by pulsed laser spot welds; instead of resistance spot welds. Kanaguchi teaches a component arrangement wherein first and second components 1,2 are respectively connected to one another by a resistance spot weld N at two fixing positions; and wherein a continuous adhesive bonding region 4, in which the first and second components are adhesively bonded to one another, is formed at least between the two fixing positions; the resistance spot welds providing for a quick secure connection between the components (Figures 4A-4D). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the component arrangement disclosed by Bayerische Motoren Werke as modified by Daimler wherein the two fixing positions comprise resistance spot welds, as taught by Kanaguchi, in order to provide for a quick secure connection between the components. Moreover, inasmuch as the references disclose pulsed laser spot welds and resistance spot welds as art recognized structural and functional equivalents, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the exercise art to substitute one for the other. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 301, 213 USPQ 532, 536 (CCPA 1982). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed January 21, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As to claims 14 and 26, Attorney argues that: Bayerische Motoren Werke as modified by Daimler fails to disclose a component arrangement comprising at least one protrusion provided on one of the components, which protrudes in a direction of the other component and is arranged and configured in such a way that, during the pressing together at the two spot welds, one of the components is tilted in the direction of the other component. Examiner disagrees. As to claims 14 and 26 as best understood, Bayerische Motoren Werke discloses a component arrangement comprising at least one protrusion 28 provided on one of the components 20, which protrudes in a direction of the other component 30 and is arranged and configured in such a way that, during the pressing together at the two fixing positions A (Figure 3 reprinted with annotations above), one of the components is tilted in the direction of the other component (pressed oblique portions B,C of flange section 24 of first component 20 are angled toward second component 30, and flex during the pressing together of the components; thus the first component is tilted in the direction of the second component during the pressing together at fixing positions A; Figure 3). 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 MICHAEL P FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (10:00 am-7:00 pm 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, Anna Momper can be reached on (571)270-5788. 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. 01/31/26 /MICHAEL P FERGUSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 15, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 16, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 18, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 04, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jun 18, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 21, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 31, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601198
PANEL FOR A RACKABLE BARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595819
HINGE SYSTEM WITH ADJUSTABLE RESISTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584328
MODULAR FENCE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577980
FLOATING JOINT AND ULTRASONIC VIBRATION JOINING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577978
IMPROVED HINGE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+74.1%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1253 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month