DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1, Figures 5a and 5c, claims 1-7, 9, 11 and 12, in the reply filed on February 13, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 10 and 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 February 13, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 20 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 20 (line 2) “wherein the blocking web” should recite –wherein the blocking web: --.
In claim 21 (line 2) “the face side” should recite –the closed axial face side--.
For the purpose of examining the application, it is assumed that appropriate correction has been made.
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 1-7, 9, 11, 12, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wells (US 11,644,058) in view of Meyers (US 9,441,660) and Stumpf et al. (US 7,815,988).
As to claim 1, Wells discloses a multipart socket-shaped glue-in retainer 2,3 which is fastenable in a component opening in an adhesive manner and which is configured in at least two parts due to an axial separation and thus in an opening manner in a radial direction, so that:
only before a gluing-in of the glue-in retainer in a component opening, a functional insert 19 is arrangeable in the glue-in retainer, and
after the gluing-in of the glue-in retainer in the component opening, the functional insert
the glue-in retainer includes a hollow-cylindrical receiving body 2,3 with a circumferential lateral area 9,10, a closed axial face side 7,8, and an open axial face side with a functional opening 13,14 which is provided opposite to the closed axial face side, wherein adjacent to the functional opening4 is arranged, extending radially outwardly with respect to the lateral area of the receiving body (Figures 1-5).
Wells fails to explicitly disclose a glue-in retainer comprising a circumferentially surrounding fastening collar extending radially outwardly with respect to the lateral area of the receiving body so that in use the fastening collar abuts a component surface while the remaining receiving body extends into the component opening.
Meyers teaches a glue-in retainer 200 comprising a circumferentially surrounding fastening collar 213 extending radially outwardly with respect to a lateral area of a receiving body 205 so that in use the fastening collar abuts a component surface while the remaining receiving body extends into a component opening; adhesive extending through holes 215 in the collar to more securely affix the retainer to the component and prevent relative rotation therebetween (Figures 2-4; C11 L63-67, C12 L58-63). 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 retainer disclosed by Wells to comprise a fastening collar which abuts a component surface while the remaining receiving body extends into the component opening, as taught by Meyers, in order to more securely affix the retainer to the component and prevent relative rotation therebetween.
Wells as modified by Meyers fails to disclose a glue-in retainer comprising a circumferentially surrounding web projecting in axial direction at the side of the fastening collar which faces the component so that the web delimits a channel at the component-facing side of the fastening collar in which adhesive is receivable.
Stumpf et al. teach a glue-in retainer comprising a circumferentially surrounding web 24 projecting in axial direction at the side of a fastening collar 20 which faces a component 42 so that the web delimits a channel 22 at the component-facing side of the fastening collar in which adhesive 30 is receivable; the circumferential web containing the adhesive between the collar and the component to more securely affix the retainer to the component (Figure 1). 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 glue-in retainer disclosed by Wells as modified by Meyers to comprise a circumferential web, as taught by Stumpf et al., in order to contain the adhesive between the collar and the component to more securely affix the retainer to the component.
As to claim 2, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer, the receiving body 2,3 of which is separated due to at least one axial cut in a longitudinal direction into two parts which are moveable relatively towards each other, wherein the parts are completely or partly releasable from one another (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 3, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer in which connecting surfaces of the parts 2,3 are provided along the axial cut which are arranged opposite to one another and comprise positioning aids 15,16 and/or connecting aids of the parts.
As to claim 4, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer in which the parts 2,3 which are arranged adjacent one another are movably connectable with one another via a film hinge and/or a snap-connection and/or plug connection 15,16 (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 5, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer in which the lateral area 9,10 comprises an outside which leads or guides the flow and is adapted to a guidance of a flowing adhesive and a functional inside with which the functional insert 19 is retainable in the closed receiving body 2,3 in a form-fit manner (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 6, Wells as modified by Meyers discloses a glue-in retainer in which the fastening collar 4 includes a number of irradiation sections 5 in which a thickness of the fastening collar in a longitudinal direction of the glue-in retainer 2,3 is reduced in order to provide the fastening collar in the irradiation sections such that it may be shone through with light (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 7, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer, the functional inside of which includes a circumferential retaining groove 6 which is capable of receiving a circumferential collar C of a functional insert 19 in terms of a width and a depth in order to hold the collar firmly or swimmingly/floatingly within the receiving cavity (Figure 2 [AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Z)]reprinted below with annotations; Figures 1-5).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (C)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (B)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (A)]
PNG
media_image1.png
294
501
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 9, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer comprising a functional insert 19, and the functional insert:
is a sleeve being closed on one side and having a circumferential collar 20 and an inner thread or a planar inner wall (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 11, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer in which the glue-in retainer 2,3 and/or the functional insert 19 consist(s) of a thermoplastic plastic material (C2 L51-56). Wells does not explicitly that the thermoplastic material has with a permanent usage temperature of at least 130oC. Wells does not disclose any structural or functional significance as to the specific thermoplastic material.
Applicant is reminded that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use, wherein there is no structural or functional significance disclosed as to the specific material of an element, is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). 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 glue-in retainer disclosed by Wells wherein the thermoplastic material has with a permanent usage temperature of at least 130oC, as Wells does not disclose any structural or functional significance as to the specific thermoplastic material, and as such selection of material is a design consideration within the skill of the art which would yield expected and predictable results.
As to claim 12, Wells discloses a component with a component opening in which a glue-in retainer 2,3 is glued in (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 20, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer wherein the glue-in retainer comprises a blocking web A within the receiving body 2,3 at the closed axial face side 7,8, wherein the blocking web:
is provided at an inside of the closed axial face side,
projects in axial direction Z from the inside of the closed axial face side (blocking web A projects in axial direction Z from inside of closed axial face side 7,8; Figure 2), and
is capable of being received in a blocking groove B of a functional insert 19 so that a relative rotation between the functional insert and the receiving body is prevented (Figures 1-5).
As to claim 21, Wells discloses a glue-in retainer wherein the blocking web A is arranged eccentrically with respect to the closed axial face 7,8 side and extends in radial direction (Figures 1-5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 22, Wells in view of Meyers and Stumpf et al. discloses the claimed glue-in retainer with the exception of wherein the fastening collar has a plurality of evenly distributed recesses at its side facing away from the component, wherein within the recesses, the thickness of the fastening collar in the direction of the longitudinal axis is reduced so much that a bottom of the recess is irradiatable with light.
There is no teaching or suggestion, absent the applicant’s own disclosure, for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the glue-in retainer disclosed by Wells in view of Meyers and Stumpf et al. to have the above mentioned elemental features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
03/20/26
/MICHAEL P FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619