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 § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10, 13-14, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fesina et al. (RU 2490150 C1).
Regarding Claim 1, Fesina et al. (RU 2490150 C1) discloses an automotive noise attenuating trim part of a vehicle (Fig. 1,12; Para. 0078,0100) comprising: a porous layer; at least one closed container integrated into the porous layer (Porous layer 22 with dead-end cavity/integrated container 3 formed directly into porous layer 22; Para. 0076,0167; Fig. 12), the at least one closed container comprising a film having an outer surface configured to contact a vibrating surface of the vehicle (Film 5 with outer surface contacts vibrating surface 6 of vehicle; Para. 0164,0166,173; Fig. 12), wherein the at least one closed container is partly filled with loose particles configured to selectively contact an inner surface of the film that is opposite the outer surface (Container 3 is partly filled with particles 4 contacting inner surface of 5; Para. 0169. Structure of film prevents spillage of particles is the particles being loose; Para. 0088; Fig. 12).
Regarding Claim 2, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, whereby the at least one closed container is in the form of a vessel part that defines a void volume interconnected the film (Fig. 12: See container 3 in a rectangular form of a vessel part with voids interconnected with film 5. Voids around particles 4; Para. 0176).
Regarding Claim 4, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, whereby the total volume of the loose particles in the at least one closed container is less than 90% (Satisfied by particles 4 not exceeding 30% of the volume of container 3; Para. 0177; Fig. 12).
Regarding Claim 10, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, whereby the porous layer comprises up to 30 closed containers (In Fig. 12: Four containers of 3).
Regarding Claim 13, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, further comprising one or more additional layers on a surface of the porous layer opposite a surface configured to contact the vibrating surface of the vehicle (Layers 1 and 7 on top surface of porous layer 22 opposite surface 5 contacting vibrating surface 6; Para. 0168,0171,0173; Fig. 12).
Regarding Claim 14, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 13, whereby the at least one or more additional layers is at least one of a foam layer, a felt layer, a film layer, a foil layer, a thermoplastic elastomeric layer with a high filler content, and a decorative layer (Layers 7 is a decorative layer; Para. 0168; Fig. 12).
Regarding Claim 16, Fesina et al. discloses a method of using the noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1 as an inner dash, an outer dash, a battery lid silencer, a battery enclosure insulator, and/or as a carpet system (Outer layer 7 is carpeting; Para. 0168; Fig. 12), wherein the porous layer is the layer in contact with a vibrating body panel when the part is installed in the vehicle (Fig. 12: See porous layer 22 contacting vibrating panel 6 through 5; Para. 0164,0173)
Regarding Claim 17, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, wherein the film is configured to transfer vibrational energy from the vibrating surface to the loose particles inside the at least one closed container (Vibrating surface transfers energy to film 6 and then to particles 4 within container 3; Para. 0173; Fig. 12).
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.
Claim(s) 5-8 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fesina et al. (RU 2490150 C1).
Regarding Claim 5, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1. Fesina et al fails to explicitly disclose whereby the loose particles (4; Fig. 12) have a median size between 20μm and 1250μm. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of reducing size, since it has been held that discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the Art. In re Boesch, 61 7 F .2d 2 72, 20 5 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 6, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, whereby the loose particles are made of at least one of the materials selected from the group consisting of inert minerals, metals, ceramic materials, elastomeric materials, and polymeric materials (Used material of 4:rubber is an elastomeric; plastic, polyethylene, polypropylene and are polymeric; Para. 0163).
Regarding Claim 7, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1, wherein the at least one closed container comprises a plurality of closed containers (4 containers 3 shown in Fig. 12). Fesina et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the total weight of the particles in one closed container is less than 100 grams. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of being lightweight, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 8, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim according to claim 1. Fesina et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the film (5; Fig. 12) has a thickness between 10μm and 1 mm. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of reducing space, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 19, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1. Fesina et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the film (Film 5 of 2 attached to vibrating surface 6 with adhesives, a mechanical bond; Para. 0171; Fig. 12) is not mechanically bonded to the vibrating surface of the vehicle. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of being “obvious to try” by choosing from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions of mechanically bonded or not mechanically bonded, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 9,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fesina et al. (RU 2490150 C1) in view of McCorry et al. (US 5,851,626)
Regarding Claim 9, Fesina et al. discloses a noise attenuating trim part according to claim 2. Fesina et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the vessel part includes an edge (Containers 3 with edge formed by 22 towards 5; Fig. 12) with a protruding flange having a width of at least 1mm. However, McCorry et al. (US 5,851,626) teaches wherein the vessel part includes an edge with a protruding flange (See A in Examiner Annotated McCorry Fig. 3 formed by 38; Col. 3, Lines65-67; Col. 4, Lines 1-10). McCorry et al. and Fesina et al. are in similar fields comprising vehicle noise reducing panels. Modifying Fesina et al. with teachings of McCorry et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the vessel part includes an edge with a protruding flange for the purpose of restricting movement of the porous in vertical or angled areas (McCorry: Col. 4, Lines 4-10).
Fesina et al. as modified by McCorry et al. fails to explicitly disclose a protruding flange (See A in Examiner Annotated McCorry Fig. 3 formed by 38; Col. 3, Lines65-67; Col. 4, Lines 1-10) having a width of at least 1mm. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of ensuring a bonded edge of the vessel, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
PNG
media_image1.png
404
997
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated McCorry Fig. 3
Regarding Claim 18, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1. Fesina et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the film is deformable and configured to adapt to an uneven shape of the vibrating surface of the vehicle. However, McCorry et al. (US 5,851,626) teaches wherein the film is deformable and configured to adapt to an uneven shape of the vibrating surface of the vehicle (McCorry: Films 28/30 of 26 create compressible pockets 32 positioned against uneven shape of surface 40 of vehicle; Col. 3, Lines 24-40; Col. 4, Lines 1-10; Fig. 4). McCorry et al. and Fesina et al. are in similar fields comprising vehicle noise reducing panels. Modifying Fesina et al. with teachings of McCorry et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the film is deformable and configured to adapt to an uneven shape of the vibrating surface of the vehicle for the purpose of decoupling and vibrational energy dissipation vertical or angled walls of the vehicle (McCorry: Col. 4, Lines 5-10)
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fesina et al. (RU 2490150 C1) in view of Lee et al. (WO 2019/079695)
Regarding Claim 11, Fesina et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 1. Fesina et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the porous layer (22; Fig. 12) is one of an open cell foam layer or a fibrous felt layer. However, Lee et al. (WO 2019/079695) discloses wherein the porous layer is one of an open cell foam layer or a fibrous felt layer (Lee: Fig. 4’s porous layer 404 can be nonwoven, with fibers physically bonded by heat and pressure describes felting; Pg. 7, Lines 13-31; Pg. 9, Lines 1-16). Lee et al. and Fesina et al. are in similar fields comprising acoustic articles. Modifying Fesina et al. with teachings of Lee et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the porous layer is one of an open cell foam layer or a fibrous felt layer for the purpose of being commonly used materials with acoustic applications, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding Claim 12, Fesina et al. as modified by Lee et al. discloses the automotive noise attenuating trim part according to claim 11, whereby the fibrous felt layer comprises fibers and/or filaments, and further comprises a thermoset or thermoplastic binder (Lee: Binder fibers include listed polymeric fibers; Pg. 12, Lines 15-22. Listed polymeric fibers: thermoset is polyurethane and thermoplastic is polyethylene, polypropylene, polyamide, with elastomeric polymers known as either thermoset/thermoplastic; Pg. 8, Lines 11-16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-21 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding Claim 20, the prior art fails to teach or suggest alone or in combination the invention in the newly claimed combination. The prior art fails to disclose a noise attenuating trim part of a vehicle comprising a porous layer having a plurality of recess; a plurality of containers inserted into the plurality of recesses, wherein the plurality of containers are filled with loose particles, and wherein the wherein the plurality of recesses are spaced such that portions of the porous layer are configured to contact a vibrating surface.
Claim 21 is allowed due to it dependency upon claim 20.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER B OLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3041. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am -4:00pm.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571)270-7938. 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.
/JENNIFER B OLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights