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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/18/2026 has been entered. The Applicant amended independent claim 9. Claims 9-18 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on August 18, 2026, regarding the rejection of amended claim 9, have been fully considered but are unpersuasive. These arguments are directed to newly amended claim limitations that were not previously in the claim and were not rejected under the prior art. Because a new ground of rejection has been applied—which was necessitated by the amendments—the applicants’ prior arguments are now moot.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 9, 12-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura (JP-H08216782, of record) and further in view of Uken et al. (US 9346403).
Regarding claim 9, Kimura teaches a rear view mirror arrangement for a vehicle (refer to JP H08216782), comprising: a mirror element (mirror body 22, [abstract] see caption Fig. A, [Fig. 6] below); a housing (housing 21, [abstract]) that accommodates the mirror element (accommodates mirror body 22, see caption Fig. A below), wherein the housing has an inner surface (inner surface of 21, see caption Fig. A), on which at least one fastening extension is formed (fastening with adhesives 30 is formed on inner surface, see caption Fig. A, where the at least one fastening extension (30) comprises a surface that is at least one of dome-shaped, rib-shaped, a sliding platform, or a retainer (caption Fig. A shows retainer 30), and the mirror element is directly connected to the housing at the at least one fastening extension (mirror 22 is directly connected to the 21 at the at least one 30, see caption Fig. A), where a rear side of the mirror element that faces the inner surface of the housing (see caption Fig. A) directly connects to the at least one fastening extension (a rear side of 22 that faces the inner surface of the housing 21 directly connects to the at least one 30; caption Fig. A); and a support element of mirror (mirror main body 4 into the holding element, caption Fig. A).
PNG
media_image1.png
281
385
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A
Kimura doesn’t explicitly teach a support element materially bonded with the mirror element, where the support element which is supported on the housing for support of the mirror element at least in some portions, wherein the mirror element is connected to the support element and the support element does not obstruct the direct connection between the rear side of the mirror element and the at least one fastening extension; wherein the support element comprises a plastic or metallic material; and wherein the support element is less than 1mm in thickness.
Kimura and Uken are related as they both teaches rearview mirror.
Uken teaches a support element (bezel or cover element 377 may partially overlap a perimeter region of the front surface of the mirror substrate 317, [C-35, L-26-28], [C-35, L-31-35], Fig. 40) materially bonded with the mirror element (377 is bonded with attaching element 378 disposed at the inner region of the curved element, element 377 comprises a thin element that is curved to provide a curved or rounded outer perimeter region around the mirror substrate 317 [C-35, L-31-36], Fig. 40 ), where the support element is supported on the housing for support of the mirror element at least in some portions, (bezel element 377 comprises a thin element that is curved to provide a curved or rounded outer perimeter region around the mirror substrate 317, a filler element or attaching element disposed at the inner region of the curved element for attaching the bezel element to the mirror casing, [C-35, L-31-37]), wherein the mirror element is connected to the support element (The bezel element 377 may comprise a molded polymeric or plastic element or a stamped metallic material, or may be over molded with selected features. The bezel element overlaps a perimeter region of the generally planar front surface of the mirror substrate and may be adhered to the front surface of the mirror substrate, [C-35, L-37-42]) and the support element does not obstruct the direct connection between the rear side of the mirror element and the at least one fastening extension (see fastening extension 30 of Kimura in Fig. 5 which is near the middle of the RVM and Uken shows support element 377 near the end of the mirror substrate, and therefore does not obstruct); wherein the support element comprises a plastic or metallic material (element 377 may comprise a molded polymeric or plastic element or a stamped metallic material, or may be overmolded with selected features, [C-35, L-38]); and wherein the support element is less than 1mm in thickness (element 377 comprises a thin, such as about 0.4 mm thick or thereabouts, [C-35, L-31-32]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror arrangement of Kimura to include a support element materially bonded with the mirror element, where the support element which is supported on the housing for support of the mirror element at least in some portions, wherein the mirror element is connected to the support element and the support element does not obstruct the direct connection between the rear side of the mirror element and the at least one fastening extension; wherein the support element comprises a plastic or metallic material; and wherein the support element is less than 1mm in thickness, as taught by Uken for the predictable advantage of providing a nearly flush appearance to a person viewing the mirror assembly and to finish via any suitable manner to provide the desired appearance and texture, as Uken disclosed in [C-35, L-43-48].
Regarding claim 12, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), wherein the connection between the support element (33) and the rear side of the mirror element (22) is formed over an entire surface area of the rear side at least in some portions (Fig. 5 shows connection between the 33 and the rear side of the 22 is formed over an entire surface area of the rear side at least in some portions).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), wherein the support element has at least one recess located in a connecting portion of, in each case, the connection of the rear side of the mirror element to the at least one fastening extension (Figs. 5 and 6 show that the 33 has at least one recess located in a connecting portion of, in each case, the connection of the rear side of 22 to the at least one 30/26).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), wherein the support element (foam body 33) is formed to be non-self-supporting (foam is non-self-supporting, its light weight and bends).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), wherein the support element 33 has a stiffening rib structure (Fig. 8 shows two rib structure in two sides, and any pressure from 22 will increases the rigidity and structural integrity of foam).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), A vehicle comprising at least one rear view mirror arrangement according to claim 9. (PURPOSE: To provide a vehicular room mirror preventing vibration without interposing a rubber cushion, [abstract]).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), wherein the support element is connected in an installed state in a positive locking manner to the housing (Fig7. 5, 6 and 7, support element 33 is in a positive locking manner to the housing 21, Fig. 7 shows it can’t move due to adhesive 30 is filled in the openings 34 when connected).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 10-11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura in view of Uken, as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Lang et al. (DE 102009047919, of record).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 9 (see above), wherein the support element (33) is plate-shaped at least in some portions (Figs. 5 and 6 show 33 is plate-shaped at least in some portions)
Kimura doesn’t explicitly teach support element has an edge portion which projects at least in some portions beyond an edge of the mirror element so that the support element is supported on the inner surface of the housing.
Kimura and Lang are related as rear-view mirror.
Lang teaches support element (carrier plate 8) has an edge portion which projects at least in some portions beyond an edge of the mirror element so that the support element is supported on the inner surface of the housing (Fig. 4 shows carrier plate 8 has an edge portion which projects at least in some portions beyond an edge of the mirror element 10 so that the support element 8 is supported on the inner surface of the housing 4., see Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror arrangement of Kimura to include the support element has an edge portion which projects at least in some portions beyond an edge of the mirror element so that the support element is supported on the inner surface of the housing as taught by Lang for the predictable advantage holding the mirror in a secured and stable position as shown in Fig 4 of Lang.
Regarding claim 11, modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 10 (see above). Lang further teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement, wherein the edge portion of the support element has a conical shape (lower edge portion of the support element 8 has a conical shape to firmly sit in a groove, which is an extension of the housing, for securing the mirror from any movement, See Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 17, modified Kimura teaches the rear-view mirror arrangement according to claim 10 (see above). Lang further teaches, wherein an edge region of the mirror element (mirror 10) is not in contact with the housing (housing 4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. (i) Courbon et al. (US 20070053087), (ii) Lang et al. (US 20220317413, hereinafter Lang’413), (iii) Guttenberger et al. (US 20020063978).
The difference between the applied art used for the rejection and the disclosure of the instant application is that, although the prior art of record teaches a support element, their physical structures differ.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAHMAN ABDUR whose telephone number is (571)270-0438. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 5:30.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/R.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
