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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 01/26/2026 are acknowledged and accepted. No Claims are amended, no Claims are canceled/withdrawn, Claims 4-6 have been added, and Claims 1-6 remain pending in the application.
The drawing objection in reference to character 22 has been withdrawn pursuant to the newly filed replacement drawing.
The drawing objections in regards to Figs. 2-7 are maintained as figures 2-7 do not enhance the readers understanding and clarity of the device since they are not illustrated with any identifiers or corresponding part numbers.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the Remarks of 01/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 paragraph 1 on the Remarks, Applicant asserts that Budish does not disclose a pair of compartments separated by a rigid base. The Office disagrees with this assertion. Applicant further specifies the definition of ‘compartment’ to add clarification on the meaning of the claimed compartment such that ‘a compartment’ must have “an interior space.” Budish shows in the cross section view of Fig. 4 “an interior space” between the flat mirror 18 and the back plate. See annotated Figure 1 below for a detailed depiction of said compartment.
Applicant further asserts that the two compartments of Budish are not separated by a rigid base. The Office disagrees with this assertion. The language of claim 1 is as follows: “a rigid base separating the first compartment and the second compartment.” When this limitation is interpreted under the broadest interpretation, the rigid base can be mapped to any rigid structure that exists on any plane in between the two compartments. The claim language does not preclude the idea that the rigid base is not touching both the first compartment and the second compartment as illustrated by Budish. Furthermore, the plane at which the rigid base “separates” the two compartments can be seen in annotated Figure 2 below. Figure 2 shows that the rigid base 24 extends onto the sides of the mirror 24 and therefore the rigid base separates the two compartments. See below for a detailed rejection of claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
524
535
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated Fig. 4 of Budish
PNG
media_image2.png
304
575
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2: Annotated Fig. 1 of Budish
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(b) because they are incomplete. 37 CFR 1.83(b) reads as follows:
When the invention consists of an improvement on an old machine the drawing must when possible exhibit, in one or more views, the improved portion itself, disconnected from the old structure, and also in another view, so much only of the old structure as will suffice to show the connection of the invention therewith.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In the present case, Figs. 2-7 are photographs of the invention without corresponding part identifiers. The Office strongly suggests the use of illustrated drawings rather than photographs of the invention. In the instant case, figures 2-7 do not enhance the readers understanding and clarity of the device since they are not illustrated with any identifiers or corresponding part numbers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Budish (US 4111532 A), previously cited.
Regarding claim 1, Budish teaches in Figs. 1-3: a temporary side view mirror assembly for a motor vehicle (“A temporary rear view mirror which is adapted for removable mounting on existing side view mirrors”; [abstract]), the assembly comprising:
a housing (“temporary side view mirror 10”; col 3 line 22), the housing having a first compartment having an exterior wall (interior space between 24 and 23, see annotated Figure 1 above) and a second compartment (“casing 20 which fits down over and at least partially encloses the housing 14 of the existing rear view mirror 12”; col 3 lines 22-25), a rigid base (“back plate 24”; col 3 lines 27-31, see annotated Figure 2 above) separating the first compartment (interior space between 24 and 23, see annotated Figure 1 above) and the second compartment (20), a universal or ball joint mounted to the rigid base (“back plate 24 which is pivotally mounted on the outer end of the arm 22 in a suitable manner for adjusting the field of vision, such as by a conventional universal ball and socket arrangement 26”; col 3 lines 27-31), the joint (26) having a member (22) extending to the exterior wall of the first compartment (“arm 22 carrying the temporary mirror 23 is rigidly affixed on the outer side wall 97 of the upper casing section 90”; col 5 lines 46-48), a mirror (23) mounted to the member (22) (“arm 22 carrying the temporary mirror 23”; col 5 line 46), such that the orientation of the mirror (23) relative to the rigid base (24) is adapted for adjustment by a user (“back plate 24 which is pivotally mounted on the outer end of the arm 22 in a suitable manner for adjusting the field of vision”; col 3 lines 27-30), the second compartment (20) being adapted to be positioned over a damaged exterior side view motor vehicle mirror (“arranged to completely cover the mirror portion of the existing side view mirror assembly”; col 1 lines 63-65), and means for securing the housing (14) to the damaged exterior side view motor vehicle mirror (“a stationary housing 14 supported on a support post 16 which is suitably secured to the front door panel 17 of the automobile and a flat mirror 18 mounted inside the housing 14 in a conventional manner for relative pivotal movement to adjust the field of vision alongside and behind the automobile”; col 3 lines 9-15).
Regarding claim 4, Budish teaches in Figs. 1-3: a temporary side view mirror assembly for a motor vehicle (“A temporary rear view mirror which is adapted for removable mounting on existing side view mirrors”; [abstract]), the assembly comprising:
a housing (“temporary side view mirror 10”; col 3 line 22), the housing having a first compartment having an exterior wall (interior space between 24 and 23, see annotated Figure 1 above) and a second compartment (“casing 20 which fits down over and at least partially encloses the housing 14 of the existing rear view mirror 12”; col 3 lines 22-25), a rigid base (“back plate 24”; col 3 lines 27-31, see annotated Figure 2 above) separating the first compartment (interior space between 24 and 23, see annotated Figure 1 above) and the second compartment (20), a universal or ball joint mounted to the rigid base (“back plate 24 which is pivotally mounted on the outer end of the arm 22 in a suitable manner for adjusting the field of vision, such as by a conventional universal ball and socket arrangement 26”; col 3 lines 27-31), the joint (26) having a member (22) extending to the exterior wall of the first compartment (“arm 22 carrying the temporary mirror 23 is rigidly affixed on the outer side wall 97 of the upper casing section 90”; col 5 lines 46-48), a mirror (23) mounted to the member (22) (“arm 22 carrying the temporary mirror 23”; col 5 line 46), such that the orientation of the mirror (23) relative to the rigid base (24) is adapted for adjustment by a user (“back plate 24 which is pivotally mounted on the outer end of the arm 22 in a suitable manner for adjusting the field of vision”; col 3 lines 27-30), the second compartment (20) being adapted to be positioned over a damaged exterior side view motor vehicle mirror (“arranged to completely cover the mirror portion of the existing side view mirror assembly”; col 1 lines 63-65).
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.
Claim 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Budish (US 4111532 A), as in independent claims 1 and 4, and further in view of Cornelius (WO-2015028308-A1), previously cited.
Regarding claim 2, Budish teaches in Figs. 1-3 the temporary side view mirror assembly of claim 1. Budish fails to explicitly teach: the housing comprises a fabric material.
However, in a related invention in the field of side view mirror adaptations, Cornelius teaches in Figs. 1-2: the housing comprises a fabric material (“the cover is made of an elastic material that allows the cover to be pulled over the exterior mirror and then adapts to the contours of the exterior mirror”; [0021]).
Furthermore, Cornelius teaches this configuration such that “It is also advantageous to use a stretchable or elastic and at the same time durable material for the object so that it can be optimally adapted to the existing shape of the exterior mirror (A)” (Cornelius, [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Budish in view of Cornelius to provide a device in which the housing comprises a fabric material, for the purpose of using a stretchable or elastic for the object so that it can be optimally adapted to the existing shape of the exterior mirror (Cornelius, [0034]).
Regarding claim 5, Budish teaches in Figs. 1-3 the temporary side view mirror assembly of claim 4. Budish fails to explicitly teach: the housing comprises a fabric material.
However, in a related invention in the field of side view mirror adaptations, Cornelius teaches in Figs. 1-2: the housing comprises a fabric material (“the cover is made of an elastic material that allows the cover to be pulled over the exterior mirror and then adapts to the contours of the exterior mirror”; [0021]).
Furthermore, Cornelius teaches this configuration such that “It is also advantageous to use a stretchable or elastic and at the same time durable material for the object so that it can be optimally adapted to the existing shape of the exterior mirror (A)” (Cornelius, [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Budish in view of Cornelius to provide a device in which the housing comprises a fabric material, for the purpose of using a stretchable or elastic for the object so that it can be optimally adapted to the existing shape of the exterior mirror (Cornelius, [0034]).
Claims 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Budish (US 4111532 A), as in independent claims 1 and 4, and further in view of Berger (US 20040190167 A1), previously cited.
Regarding claim 3, Budish teaches in Figs. 1-3 the temporary side view mirror assembly of claim 1. Budish fails to explicitly teach: the means for securing the side view mirror assembly comprises at least one strap.
However, in a related invention in the field of vehicle mirror assemblies, Berger teaches in Fig. 2: the means for securing the side view mirror assembly comprises at least one strap (“The assembly 6 includes a base plate 22, fastening strap 24, universal ball joint 26, and mirror housing 28 that holds a reflective mirror 30”; [0038], “The mirror assembly also includes at least one fastening strap extending from the base plate”; [0016]).
Furthermore, Berger teaches this configuration such that “Straps having buckles are sewn onto the back of the mirror assembly. The straps are sufficiently long enough to encircle the rear seat. The ends of the straps are fastened together on the backside of the rear seat to secure the mirror assembly in place. However, this assembly cannot be easily adjusted” (Berger, [0005]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Budish to incorporate the teachings of Berger to provide a device in which the means for securing the side view mirror assembly comprises at least one strap, for the purpose of securing the mirror assembly onto an object (Berger, [0005]).
Regarding claim 6, Budish teaches in Figs. 1-3 the temporary side view mirror assembly of claim 4. Budish fails to explicitly teach: the means for securing the side view mirror assembly comprises at least one strap.
However, in a related invention in the field of vehicle mirror assemblies, Berger teaches in Fig. 2: the means for securing the side view mirror assembly comprises at least one strap (“The assembly 6 includes a base plate 22, fastening strap 24, universal ball joint 26, and mirror housing 28 that holds a reflective mirror 30”; [0038], “The mirror assembly also includes at least one fastening strap extending from the base plate”; [0016]).
Furthermore, Berger teaches this configuration such that “Straps having buckles are sewn onto the back of the mirror assembly. The straps are sufficiently long enough to encircle the rear seat. The ends of the straps are fastened together on the backside of the rear seat to secure the mirror assembly in place. However, this assembly cannot be easily adjusted” (Berger, [0005]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Budish to incorporate the teachings of Berger to provide a device in which the means for securing the side view mirror assembly comprises at least one strap, for the purpose of securing the mirror assembly onto an object (Berger, [0005]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 6325121 B1: fabric side view mirror cover
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 RUBY L KAUFFMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1738. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am - 5pm 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, Thomas Pham can be reached at (571) 272-3689. 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.
/RUBY L KAUFFMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/THOMAS K PHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872