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 .
This is a final Office action responsive to the reply filed on 05/12/2026.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 11, 12 and 18 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, line 1 “the heads” should be - - the first heads - -.
Claim 4, line 2 “first coupling protrusions” should be - - the first coupling protrusions - -.
Claim 4, line 2 “the head” should be - - the second head - -.
Claim 12, line 1 “the pair of the bases” should be - - the pair of bases - -.
Claim 12, line 2 “the pair of the fixing portions” should be - - the pair of fixing portions - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 and 7-20 are 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.
Claims 1, 7 and 18 recites the limitation "a predetermined width". The subject matter “a predetermined width” is not clear and is not properly described in the specification. However, for the purpose of this Office action, the examiner has considered that a predetermined width is any width.
Claims 2-5, 8-17, 19 and 20 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuma (US Patent No. 10,144,366), in view of Reinsberg (US Patent No. 3,586,220).
Regarding claim 1, Tuma discloses a fastener assembly for a vehicle, the fastener assembly comprising:
a first member coupled to a vehicle trim and comprising a first coupling protrusion on a surface of the first member directed toward a panel (see annotated Fig. 1); and
a second member coupled to the panel and comprising a second coupling protrusion on a surface of the second member directed toward the vehicle trim, the second coupling protrusion being coupled to the first coupling protrusion (see annotated Fig. 1),
wherein the first member and the second member are coupled to each other by coupling of the first coupling protrusion and the second coupling protrusion (see annotated Fig. 1).
Tuma does not disclose the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member.
However, Reinsberg teaches the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member (see Fig. 4 and annotated Fig. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second coupling protrusions from Tuma with wider first and second coupling protrusions as taught by Reinsberg in order to have a stronger interlocking mechanism between both members due to having a longer contact surface from each head.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Tuma in view of Reinsberg discloses, where wherein:
the first coupling protrusion comprises:
a first stem protruding from the first member (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg); and
a first head disposed at an end of the first stem and having a larger width than the first stem (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg); and
the second coupling protrusion comprises:
a second stem protruding from the second member (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg); and
a second head disposed at an end of the second stem and having a larger width than the second stem (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Tuma in view of Reinsberg discloses, wherein:
the first coupling protrusion comprises a plurality of first coupling protrusions arranged on the first member at predetermined intervals (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg); and
the second coupling protrusion comprises a plurality of second coupling protrusions arranged on the second member at intervals equal to the intervals at which the first coupling protrusions are arranged (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Tuma in view of Reinsberg discloses, wherein a gap between the heads of adjacent first coupling protrusions is smaller than a width of the head of each of the second coupling protrusions (see annotated Fig. 5 from Reinsberg).
Regarding claim 7, Tuma discloses a fastener assembly for a vehicle, the fastener assembly comprising:
a first member coupled to a vehicle trim and comprising a first coupling protrusion on a surface of the first member directed toward a panel (see annotated Fig. 1); and
a second member coupled to the panel (see annotated Fig. 1), the second member comprising:
a second coupling protrusion on a first surface of the second member directed toward the vehicle trim, the second coupling protrusion being coupled to the first coupling protrusion (see annotated Fig. 1),
wherein the first member and the second member are coupled to each other by coupling of the first coupling protrusion to the second coupling protrusion (see annotated Fig. 1); and
a fastening part on a second surface of the second member opposite the first surface of the second member, wherein the second member is coupled to an assembling hole in the panel by the fastening part (see annotated Fig. 1).
Tuma does not disclose the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member.
However, Reinsberg teaches the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member (see Fig. 4 and annotated Fig. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second coupling protrusions from Tuma with wider first and second coupling protrusions as taught by Reinsberg in order to have a stronger interlocking mechanism between both members due to having a longer contact surface from each head.
Regarding claim 8, Tuma discloses, wherein the fastening part comprises:
a base having a first end connected to the second member (see annotated Figs. 1 and 3); and
a fixing portion disposed at an outer portion of the base and directed toward an exterior of the second member (see annotated Figs. 1 and 3).
Regarding claim 9, Tuma discloses, wherein:
the fastening part comprises:
a pair of bases disposed to be horizontally symmetric, each of the bases having a first end connected to the second member (see annotated Figs. 1 and 3);
a pair of fixing portions disposed to be horizontally symmetric at outer portions of the pair of bases, respectively, wherein the fixing portions are directed toward an exterior of the second member (see annotated Figs. 1 and 3); and
the fastening part is configured to be elastically deformed while passing through the assembling hole, restored after passing through the assembling hole, and caught by a periphery of the assembling hole, such that the second member is fixed to the panel (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Tuma discloses, wherein the fastening part is elastically deformed in a plane parallel to the panel (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Tuma discloses, wherein the fastening part is elastically deformed to pass through the assembling hole or restored after passing through the assembling hole by the base rotating parallel to the panel around a portion connected to the second member (see annotated Figs. 1 and 3, and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 12, Tuma discloses, wherein the pair of the bases and the pair of the fixing portions are configured to pass through the assembling hole by rotating parallel to the panel in a direction of gathering together and are configured to be restored by rotating parallel to the panel after passing through the assembling hole (see annotated Figs. 1 and 3, and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 13, Tuma discloses, wherein the fastening part is downwardly inclined toward the second member toward two opposite ends of the second member (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Tuma further discloses, comprising a first stopper and a second stopper on the second member, wherein the first stopper and the second stopper are spaced apart from each other, and configured to restrict a movement of the second member after the fastening part is coupled to the assembling hole (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Tuma discloses, wherein the first stopper protrudes from the second member and is connected to an upper end of the fastening part, and wherein a width of the first stopper corresponds to a width of the assembling hole (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, Tuma discloses, wherein the second stopper protrudes from the second member at a position spaced apart from the first stopper at an interval (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Tuma further discloses, comprising:
a catching portion on the second stopper and extending from an upper end of the second stopper toward the first stopper (see annotated Fig. 1); and
a planar portion on one of the fixing portions, wherein the planar portion is parallel to the second member and positioned below the catching portion (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Tuma discloses a fastener assembly for a vehicle, the fastener assembly comprising:
a first member coupled to a vehicle trim and comprising a first coupling protrusion on a surface of the first member directed toward a panel (see annotated Fig. 1);
a second member coupled to the panel and comprising a second coupling protrusion on a surface of the second member directed toward the vehicle trim, the second coupling protrusion being coupled to the first coupling protrusion (see annotated Fig. 1),
wherein the first member and the second member are coupled to each other by coupling of the first coupling protrusion to the second coupling protrusion (see annotated Fig. 1); and
a sealing member fitted with a periphery of the first member or the second member and configured to seal a portion between the first member and the vehicle trim or a portion between the second member and the panel (see annotated Fig. 1).
Tuma does not disclose the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member.
However, Reinsberg teaches the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member (see Fig. 4 and annotated Fig. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second coupling protrusions from Tuma with wider first and second coupling protrusions as taught by Reinsberg in order to have a stronger interlocking mechanism between both members due to having a longer contact surface from each head.
Regarding claim 19, Tuma discloses, wherein the sealing member comprises:
a through-hole with which the periphery of the first member or the periphery of the second member is fitted (see annotated Fig. 1); and
a sealing portion extending from a portion where the through-hole is provided and configured to adjoin the vehicle trim or the panel (see annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 20, Tuma discloses, wherein the sealing member is fitted with the periphery of the second member and is configured to seal the portion between the second member and the panel (see annotated Fig. 1).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuma (US Patent No. 10,144,366), in view of Reinsberg (US Patent No. 3,586,220) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morris et al. (US Patent No. 9,429,176).
Regarding claim 5, Tuma discloses the claimed invention except for the first member comprises a plurality of fastening holes, and wherein the fastening holes are penetrated by ribs protruding from the vehicle trim.
However, Morris et al. teaches a member comprises a plurality of fastening holes (204), and wherein the fastening holes (204) are penetrated by ribs (106) protruding from the vehicle trim (see Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first member from Tuma with a plurality of fastening holes in order to mechanically secure the first member to the vehicle trim with ribs as taught by Morris et al.
PNG
media_image1.png
424
642
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
273
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
264
582
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7 and 8, filed 05/12/2026, with respect to the rejections of claim(s) 1, 7 and 18 under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in Tuma, in view of Reinsberg. Reinsberg teaches the first coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the first member, or the second coupling protrusion has a predetermined width along a length of the second member (see Fig. 4 and annotated Fig. 5).
Examiner’s Comment
In view of applicant’s amendments to the claims submitted in the reply filed on 05/12/2026, the claim rejections under 35 USC § 102 indicated in the prior Office action have been withdrawn.
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 LOUIS A MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-5388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jason W. San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/LOUIS A. MERCADO/
Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/SPE, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights