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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4-11, & 13-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 6 & 9 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.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation states “… wherein each is further defined …” (ln 1-2) but is not clear what “each” is referring to. It appears applicant intended to replace the “raised features” limitations with “tabs” but did not introduce the “tabs” limitation. Examiner interprets claim to be referring to the “tabs” limitation.
Regarding claim 9, the claim is dependent on cancelled claim 3. A dependent claim cannot depend on a cancelled claim. Examiner interprets claim to be dependent on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 4-11, & 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terasawa (JP 2022090956 A) in view of Ito (US Patent 5,918,903 A), Olson (US Patent 1,963,800 A), & Boelstler (US Patent 6,142,525 A).
Regarding claim 1, the harness support bracket assembly of Terasawa teaches a mounting assembly for transportation and/or handling of an associated vehicle part (Fig 1), the mounting assembly comprising: an anchor plate (40) including a mounting aperture (44); a harness bracket (50) positioned atop the anchor plate relative to a height direction of the mounting assembly (Fig 2), the harness bracket includes a through hole (52) aligned with the mounting aperture (Fig 3); a fastener (60) extended through the through hole and the mounting aperture (Fig 1).
Terasawa does not teach raised features in direct contact with a fastener. However, the seat belt mounting member of Ito teaches at least three raised features (T) extended from an upper surface of a harness bracket and located adjacent the through hole (Fig 1A), the at least three raised features integral with the harness bracket (Fig 1A); the fastener in direct contact with the edge surface of each tab (Col. 17 In 33-38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the harness support bracket assembly of Terasawa by adding raised features adjacent to the through hole of the harness bracket to exhibit the effects of a washer and therefore, reduce parts (Col. 17 In 34-43).
The combination harness support bracket assembly does not teach raised features with cutouts and tabs cantilevered. However, the fastener locking plate of Olson teaches raised features defined by a tab (10) configured to have an edge surface (A) located above the upper surface (Fig 3), the harness bracket including at least three cutouts (Annotated Fig 1 below), each tab cantilevered into one of the cutouts with the edge surface of each tab extending along a length of the respective cutout in a radial direction relative to a center axis defined by the through hole (Fig 1, Fig 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly by replacing the raised features with the raised features of Olson to engage and lock the surface of the nut or screw to positively secure said parts (Pg 2, ln 10-20).
PNG
media_image1.png
283
343
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The combination harness support bracket assembly does not teach a tooth washer beneath the anchor plate. However, the seatbelt anchor assembly of Boelstler teaches a tooth washer (90) press fitted onto the fastener beneath the anchor plate to maintain positioning of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate (Fig 2; Col. 1 In 50-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly with a press fitted tooth washer to hold the bolt assembly together prior to installation (Col. 1 In 50-55).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Olson further teaches the edge surfaces (A) of the at least three tabs (10) define a contact plane (16) for the fastener (19, Fig 2; Fig 3; Pg 2, ln 2-7) that is extended parallel to the upper surface such that the at least three raised features prevent tilting of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate by contact of the fastener with the at least three raised features (Fig 3; Pg 1 ln 29-41).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Terasawa further teaches the fastener is a bolt (60; Fig 1). Olson additionally teaches the at least three raised features (14) are positioned to be inward of an outer edge of a fastener (Fig 2) so as to approximately evenly distribute an applied load of the fastener on the harness bracket (Fig 2; Pg 1, ln 10-20).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Olson further teaches each tab (10) is further defined by converging side surfaces extending to the edge surface (A, Fig 3; Side Surface A & B, Annotated Fig 4 below), and the edge surface (A) of each tab is in direct contact with the fastener (Fig 2; Pg 2 ln 12-15).
PNG
media_image2.png
237
492
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 6 as described above, Olson further teaches each tab (10) is configured to at least partially compress via an applied load of the fastener on the harness bracket (Fig 2; Pg 1, ln 10-20). The warped tabs project outside of the plane of the washer body and therefore compress when the fastener assembly is tightened.
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 7 as described above, Olson further teaches each tab (10) at least partially compresses onto the respective cutout (Fig 2, Fig 3).
Regarding claim 9, as best understood by the examiner, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Olson further teaches the at least three raised features are adapted to allow for free rotation of the fastener atop the at least three raised features (Pg 1, ln 48-53). When the fastener is not fully tightened into the assembly, the fastener must freely rotate across the raised features to allow for installation.
Regarding claim 10, the harness support bracket assembly of Terasawa teaches a harness bracket (50) for a mounting assembly for transportation and/or handling of a vehicle part (Fig 1), the mounting assembly includes an anchor plate (40) secured to the vehicle part, the harness bracket positioned atop the anchor plate (Fig 2), a fastener positioned atop the harness bracket and extended through the anchor plate and the harness bracket (Fig 1), the harness bracket comprising: a through hole for receipt of the fastener (52, Fig 2).
Terasawa does not teach a harness bracket with at least three standoff protrusions. However, the seat belt mounting member of Ito teaches at least three standoff protrusions (T) integrally formed on an upper surface of the harness bracket (Fig 1A) and located about the through hole for spacing the fastener from the upper surface (Fig 1A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the harness support bracket assembly of Terasawa by adding raised features adjacent to the through hole to exhibit the effects of a washer and therefore, reduce parts (Col. 17 In 34-43).
The combination harness support bracket assembly does not teach raised features with cutouts and tabs cantilevered. However, the fastener locking plate of Olson teaches each standoff protrusion includes an edge surface (A) located above the upper surface (Fig 3), the harness bracket including at least three cutouts (Annotated Fig 1 above), each standoff protrusion cantilevered into one of the cutouts with the edge surface (A) of each standoff protrusion extending along a length of the respective cutout in a radial direction relative to a center axis defined by the through hole (Fig 1, Fig 3), the edge surface of each standoff protrusion is adapted for direct contact with the fastener (Fig 2; Pg 2, ln 10-20). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly by replacing the raised features with the raised features of Olson to engage and lock the surface of the nut or screw to positively secure said parts (Pg 2, ln 10-20).
The combination does not teach a tooth washer beneath the anchor plate. However, the seatbelt anchor assembly of Boelstler teaches a tooth washer (90) press fitted onto the fastener beneath the anchor plate to maintain positioning of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate (Fig 2; Col. 1 In 50-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly with a press fitted tooth washer to hold the bolt assembly together prior to installation (Col. 1 In 50-55).
Regarding claim 11, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 10 as described above,
Olson further teaches at least three standoff protrusions (A) define a contact plane (16) for the fastener (19) that is extended parallel to the upper surface (Fig 3; Pg 1 ln 29-41).
Regarding claim 13, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 10 as described above, Olson further teaches each standoff protrusion is configured to at least partially compress via an applied load of the fastener on the harness bracket (Fig 2; Pg 1, ln 10-20). The warped tabs project outside of the plane of the washer body and therefore compress when the fastener assembly is tightened.
Regarding claim 14, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 13 as described above, Olson further teaches each standoff protrusion at least partially compresses into the respective cutout (Fig 2, Fig 3).
Regarding claim 15, the harness support bracket assembly of Terasawa teaches a method of assembling a mounting arrangement for transportation and/or handling of an associated vehicle part, the method comprising: providing an anchor plate (40) for connection to the associated vehicle part, the anchor plate including a mounting aperture (44, Fig 2); providing a harness bracket (50) including a through hole (52), and positioning the harness bracket atop the anchor plate relative to a height direction of the mounting arrangement with the through hole aligned with the mounting aperture (Fig 2), providing a fastener (60), and extending the fastener through the through hole and the mounting aperture (Fig 1).
Terasawa does not teach at least three standoff projections from the harness bracket. However, the seat belt mounting member of Ito teaches the harness bracket further includes at least three standoff projections (T) extended from an upper surface of the harness bracket and located adjacent the through hole (Fig 1A); wherein the fastener is in direct contact with the at least three standoff projections (Col. 17 In 33-38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the harness support bracket assembly of Terasawa by adding raised features adjacent to the through hole to exhibit the effects of a washer and therefore, reduce parts (Col. 17 In 34-43).
The combination harness support bracket assembly does not teach raised features with cutouts and tabs cantilevered. However, the fastener locking plate of Olson teaches each standoff projection having an edge surface (A) located above the upper surface (Fig 3), wherein the harness bracket further includes at least three cutouts (Annotated Fig 1 above), each standoff projection cantilevered into one of the cutouts with the edge surface of each standoff projection extending along a length of the respective cutout in a radial direction relative to a center axis defined by the through hole (Fig 1, Fig 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly by replacing the raised features with the raised features of Olson to engage and lock the surface of the nut or screw to positively secure said parts (Pg 2, ln 10-20).
The combination does not teach a tooth washer press fitted onto the fastener. However, the seatbelt anchor assembly of Boelstler teaches providing a tooth washer (90), and press fitting the tooth washer onto the fastener extended beneath the anchor plate to maintain positioning of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate (Fig 2; Col. 1 In 50-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly with a press fitted tooth washer to hold the bolt assembly together prior to installation (Col. 1 In 50-55).
Regarding claim 16, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 15 as described above, Olson further teaches defining a contact plane (16) by the edge surfaces (A) of the at least three standoff projections for the fastener (19, Fig 2; Fig 3, Pg 2, ln 2-7) that is extended parallel to the upper surface such that the at least three standoff projections prevent tilting of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate by contact of fastener with the at least three standoff projections (Fig 3; Pg 1 ln 29-41).
Regarding claim 17, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 15 as described above, Olson further teaches configuring each standoff protrusion to at least partially compress via an applied load of the fastener on the harness bracket. (Fig 2; Pg 1, ln 10-20). The warped tabs project outside of the plane of the washer body and therefore compress when the fastener assembly is tightened.
Regarding claim 18, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 15 as described above, Olson further teaches each standoff protrusion at least partially compresses or moves into the respective cutout (Fig 2, Fig 3).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terasawa, Ito, Olson, & Boelstler in view of Richter (PGPub US 2008/0296881 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, Boelstler further teaches the tooth washer is adapted to maintain the installed position of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate (Fig 2; Col. 1 In 50-55). The combination harness support bracket assembly does not teach an alignment tab. However, the interlocking anchorage seat belt assembly of Richter teaches the harness bracket (214) includes at least one alignment tab (244), and in an installed position of the harness bracket atop the anchor plate (Fig 3a) where the at least one alignment tab is engaged to an outer edge portion of the anchor plate (230; Fig 3a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to improve the combination harness support bracket assembly with at least one alignment tab to align the plates to allow for the receipt of the fastener ([0055] In 1-6).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent 142,709 A teaches a lock washer with cantilever tabs that extend only above the flat plate body.
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 RALPH D WILKINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6183. The examiner can normally be reached 8 - 4, M-Fr.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
/RALPH D WILKINSON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights