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 .
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, 2, 4, 5, 7-13, 15-18, 21, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Muteau et al. (US 2006/0008615).
Muteau et al., in reference to claim 1, discloses a device (1) for reinforcing a cavity including a carrier (1) with a length extending between a first end and a second end, as shown in Figure 3 and disclosed in paragraph [0004]. The carrier (1) includes one or more longitudinal structures, one or more transverse structures, and a secondary material disclosed as the “overmoulded material”, as disclosed in paragraph [0046]. The carrier (1) includes one or more rib structure (3) forming one or more reinforcement cavities (2), as shown in Figures 1-5. The carrier tapers along at least a portion of the length between the first and second ends. The longitudinal structures comprise a pair of longitudinal walls extending along the length of the carrier and defining a center section therebetween, as shown in Figure 3. The rib structures include reinforcing rib (6) extending between at least one outer edge of the carrier and at least one of the longitudinal walls, as shown in Figure 3. The reinforcing ribs are oriented at an angle relative to a longitudinal axis of the carrier, as shown in Figure 3. The center section includes one or more apertures extending from a first surface of the carrier to an opposing second surface of the carrier, as shown in Figure 3.
PNG
media_image1.png
442
762
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 2, the device (1) is configured to attach to the cavity with one or more mechanical fasteners (8) and the secondary material, as shown in Figures 3-5 and disclosed in paragraph [0028].
In reference to claim 4, the one or more mechanical fasteners (8) are located on the carrier, as shown in Figures 3-5.
In reference to claim 5, the carrier (1) has one or more attachment portions for accepting the one or more mechanical fasteners (8), as shown in Figures 3-5.
In reference to claim 7, at least one transverse structure at reference number (6) is free from secondary material, as shown in Figure 3.
In reference to claim 8, at least one longitudinal structure is coated with the secondary material, as shown in Figure 3.
In reference to claim 9, the transverse structures (3) are positioned to form one or more channels (4) on the carrier (1), as shown in Figure 1 and disclosed in paragraph [0045].
In reference to claim 10, the secondary material is guided by the one or more channels (4) to a desired location on the device (1), as shown in Figure 1 and disclosed in paragraph [0045].
In reference to claim 11, the carrier has a longitudinal profile, as shown in Figures 1-5.
In reference to claim 12, the carrier has a curved profile, as shown in Figures 6-9.
In reference to claim 13, the carrier includes one or more guides for locating the device into the cavity, as shown in Figures 1-5. The angled lower surfaces form the guides, as shown in Figures 1-5.
In reference to claim 15, the longitudinal wall is connected with one or more transverse ribs (3), as shown in Figure 3. The transverse ribs are the vertical portions of walls (3), as shown in Figure 1-3.
In reference to claim 16, the transverse walls are connected with longitudinal ribs, as shown in Figure 3. The transverse walls are the vertical portions of walls (3) and the longitudinal ribs are the horizontal portions of walls (3), as shown in Figure 3.
In reference to claim 17, the longitudinal walls and transverse walls form the reinforcement cavities (2), as shown in Figure 1.
In reference to claim 18, the longitudinal ribs and the transverse ribs form the reinforcement cavities (2), as shown in Figures 1-3. The transverse ribs are the vertical portions of walls (3) and the longitudinal ribs are the horizontal portions of walls (3), as shown in Figure 3.
In reference to claim 21, the holes (5) are through holes, as shown in Figure 2.
In reference to claim 35, the one or more apertures has a quadrilateral shape, as shown in Figure 3.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muteau et al. (US 2006/0008615) in view of Enderich et al. (US 2009/0152896).
Muteau et al. discloses the device has fasteners (8) connected through holes in walls of the cavity. The device is considered to be configured to be slid into the cavity since the device is placed within a hollow and requires fasteners to hold the device in place before activating the foam to fill the gap between the device and the vehicle component. However, Muteau et al. does not disclose the fasteners are placed through walls of the cavity from an outside of the device.
Enderich et al. teaches placing fasteners (16,17) through walls (1) of a cavity from an outside into the device, as shown in Figure 3 and disclosed in paragraph [0039].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the fasteners taught by Enderich et al. for the fasteners of Muteau et al., with a reasonable expectation for success, such that the fasteners are placed through walls of the cavity from an outside of the device to allow removal of the fasteners to reduce weight from the finished vehicle and allow reuse of the fasteners in the assembly process to reduce assembly costs.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muteau et al. (US 2006/0008615) in view of Richardson et al. (US 2018/0022397).
Muteau et al. does not disclose the raised center section.
Richardson et al. teaches providing a carrier with a raised center section raised relative to at least a portion of the carrier immediately adjacent to the center section, as shown in Figure 2.
PNG
media_image2.png
495
675
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the center section of Muteau et al. as a raised portion relative to immediately adjacent sections of the carrier, as taught by Richardson et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to provide additional reinforcement where needed to reduce strength and weight in other areas where it isn’t needed in an overall effort to reduce weight and cost.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muteau et al. (US 2006/0008615) in view of Shantz (US 2019/0382056).
Muteau et al. does not disclose mechanical fasteners extending from an end of the carrier.
Shantz teaches providing mechanical fasteners (18) at ends of a carrier (10), as shown in Figure 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to providing a mechanical fastener at the first end and second end of Muteau et al., as taught by Shantz, with a reasonable expectation for success to retain the carrier in the proper location during assembly
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has stated Muteau et al. does not disclose the newly claimed structure. The examiner disagrees for the reasons set forth in the rejection above.
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 GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 June 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights