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 Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed on 1/23/2026 has been entered.
The objection to the drawing has been withdrawn.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Claims 2 and 3 are as previously presented.
Claims 4 and 5 have been added.
Claims 1-5 are still pending in this application, with claims 1 and 5 being independent.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 necessitate new grounds of rejection.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 01/23/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okumura et al. (US Publication 20170352938) hereafter referred to as Okumura in view of Kobayashi et al. (US Publication 20230291089) hereafter referred to as Kobayashi.
Regarding claim 1, Okumura teaches a vehicle exterior component ([0020]) comprising a decorative body (21), a heater (35) which includes a heater wire arranged in an up-down portion with fold-back portions connecting adjacent ends of the linear portions such that all of the linear portions are connected into one and that the distance between wire portions should be 3 mm to 20 mm or more preferably from 5 mm to 15 mm ([0046]), and a second heater wire portion that extends horizontally.
Though Okumura teaches the required second heater wire portion that extends horizontally, it is on the lower side of the first heater wire portion. Therefore, Okumura does not teach a second heater wire portion extending on the upper side of the first heater wire portion or that the interval between it and the fold-back portion adjacent to the second heater wire portion is set to between 2 mm and 7 mm.
As the purpose of a heater is to melt snow and the capabilities of the heater is a function of the distance between adjacent wire portions, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the distance between the wires from 3 mm to 20 mm (Okumura, [0046]) be equal to the distance between the second heater wire portion and the fold-back portion adjacent to it as they are both heater wire portions and Okumara already discloses a distance range (3 mm and 20 mm) between adjacent wire portions for the purpose of effectively melting snow. The distance from 3 mm to 20 mm at least partially falls within the claimed range of between 2 mm and 7 mm.
Kobayashi teaches a heating element (2) for a vehicle mounted radar device consisting of a heater wire (21) arranged in a pattern (Figure 2) where a first heater wire portion being the up down parallel lines of equal length and the connections between them (Figure 2), where there is a second heater wire portion extending in the horizontal direction above the first heater wire portion (Figure 2) in order to melt snow (Abstract).
As evidenced by Okumura and Kobayashi, placing the second heater wire either above or below the first wire portion and having equal or differing lengths was known to one of ordinary skill in the art and produces the anticipated result of melting snow. Since applicant has not disclosed any criticality between the upper and lower locations of the second heater wire portion, or between the rectangular shape and oval shape, and because Okumura and Kobayashi have identified both locations and shapes as equally feasible, the location of the second heater wire portion relative to the first heater wire portion and the comparative length of the up down linear portions of the heater wire appear to be nothing more than an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to ensure that the entire heater wire section covered the entire area to be heated in order to melt snow from the area. It has been held that shifting the location of parts with no change to the function of the device is within the level of one or ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Okumura teaches foldback portions having a semicircular shape with the diameter equal to the interval between the linear portions (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Okumura teaches that the distance between the wire sections from 3 mm to 20 mm (Okumura, [0046]) which anticipates the distance of 7mm or less.
Regarding claim 4 the modified device of Okumura according to claim 1, teaches that the second heater wire portion is above the linear portion so the fold back portions adjacent to the second heater wire portion are connecting the upper ends of the linear portions.
Regarding claim 5, Okumura teaches a vehicle exterior component ([0020]) comprising a decorative body (21), a heater (35) which includes a heater wire arranged in an up-down portion with fold-back portions connecting adjacent ends of the linear portions such that all of the linear portions are connected into one and that the distance between wire portions should be 3 mm to 20 mm or more preferably from 5 mm to 15 mm ([0046]), and a second heater wire portion that extends horizontally.
Though Okumura teaches the required second heater wire portion that extends horizontally, it is on the lower side of the first heater wire portion. Therefore, Okumura does not teach a second heater wire portion extending on the upper side of the first heater wire portion, that the fold-back portion adjacent to the second heater wire portion connect upper ends of adjacent ones, that those foldback portions adjacent to the second heater wire portion are located at the same height of the linear portions or that the interval between it and the fold-back portion adjacent to the second heater wire portion is set to between 2 mm and 7 mm.
As the purpose of a heater is to melt snow and the capabilities of the heater is a function of the distance between adjacent wire portions, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the distance between the wires from 3 mm to 20 mm (Okumura, [0046]) be equal to the distance between the second heater wire portion and the fold-back portion adjacent to it as they are both heater wire portions and Okumara already discloses a distance range (3 mm and 20 mm) between adjacent wire portions for the purpose of effectively melting snow. The distance from 3 mm to 20 mm at least partially falls within the claimed range of between 2 mm and 7 mm.
Kobayashi teaches a heating element (2) for a vehicle mounted radar device consisting of a heater wire (21) arranged in a pattern (Figure 2) where a first heater wire portion being the up down parallel lines and the fold-back portions between them (Figure 2) and a second heater wire portion extending in the horizontal direction above the first heater wire portion (Figure 2), where the fold-back portions adjacent to the second heater wire portion connect upper ends of adjacent ones of the linear portions (Figure 2), are located at the same height (Figure 2) in order to melt snow (Abstract).
As evidenced by Okumura and Kobayashi, placing the second heater wire either above or below the first wire portion and having equal or differing lengths was known to one of ordinary skill in the art and produces the anticipated result of melting snow. Since applicant has not disclosed any criticality between the upper and lower locations of the second heater wire portion, or between the rectangular shape and oval shape, and because Okumura and Kobayashi have identified both locations and shapes as equally feasible, the location of the second heater wire portion relative to the first heater wire portion and the comparative length of the up down linear portions of the heater wire appear to be nothing more than an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to ensure that the entire heater wire section covered the entire area to be heated in order to melt snow from the area. It has been held that shifting the location of parts with no change to the function of the device is within the level of one or ordinary skill in the art.
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 any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument as the action no longer states that Okomura discloses the distance of the interval between the narrowest part of the second heater wire portion and the fold-back portion adjacent to the heater wire portion.
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 Drew J Mitchum whose telephone number is (571)272-5610. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30.
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, Edward F Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. 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.
/D.J.M./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights