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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application.
Claims 1-20 are original.
Claims 1-20 are rejected herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of the date of this action, an information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 01/30/2024 and reviewed by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 1-2 regarding 35 USC 112, filed 08/03/2026, with respect to claims 9-16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection under 35 USC 112(b) and 35 USC 112(d) of claims 9 and 10-16 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 08/03/2026 with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument wherein “…an aperture in a reflector 24 that receives a light bulb 62; element 70 is a channel in an adjustment clip 64; and element 74 are opposing shoulders that define an open end 72 of the adjustment clip 64…. However, the clip 64 is not part of any vehicle body structure…” The Examiner asserts that the claimed vehicle body structure is reasonably interpreted to encompass structures attached to the vehicle. Accordingly, the Applicant’s argument that the adjustment clip 64 is not part of any vehicle body structure is not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument wherein “…Leathley’s aiming-screw 28 does not cut into a bore surface nor does it cooperate with an insert…. The Examiner maintains that paragraph [0017] expressly identifies that fastener 28 is a self-tapping screw. A self-tapping screw is understood to form thread in the material into which it is driven. Accordingly, because Leathley’s teaches threads that cut into the bore surface, it is not necessary for Leathley to additionally disclose the alternative arrangement in which the fastener to cooperates with an insert.
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 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 pre-AIA 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Leathley (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20050002200).
Regarding claim 1, Leathley teaches an assembly comprising:
a housing (22) having an internal bore (84) defined by a bore surface (internal surface of 86);
a fastener (28) insertable within the internal bore;
a receiving portion (74) within a vehicle body structure (60, 70) that has an opening (opening receiving lower portion of 28) that is aligned with the internal bore; and
wherein the fastener includes threads (threads at 82) that cut into the bore surface as the fastener is rotated relative to the housing to secure the housing to the vehicle body structure via the receiving portion [0017; lines 1-6], or
wherein the fastener cooperates with an insert positioned within the internal bore to secure the housing to the vehicle body structure via the receiving portion.
Regarding claim 10, Leathley teaches the fastener includes threads that cut into the bore surface [0017; lines 1-5].
Regarding claim 17, Leathley teaches a method comprising:
inserting a fastener (28) into an internal bore (84) in a housing (22), wherein the internal bore is defined by a bore surface (internal surface of 84);
providing a receiving portion (74) with a vehicle body structure (60, 70) such that an opening (opening receiving lower portion of 28) in the receiving portion is aligned with the internal bore; and cutting into the bore surface with external threads on the fastener as the fastener is rotated relative to the housing to secure the housing to the vehicle body structure via the receiving portion [0017; lines 1-6], or
positioning an insert with in the internal bore to cooperate with the fastener to secure the housing to the vehicle body structure via the receiving portion.
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 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 2-8, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leathley (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20050002200) in view of Chalvet (U.S. Pat. No. 20240240659 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Leathley teaches the internal bore comprises a threaded bore (with threads of 84). However, Leathley is silent to disclose the insert.
Chalvet teaches the insert (Chalvet; Fig. 43; element 7) comprises a threaded outer surface that threadably engages the threaded bore (Chalvet; bore of A) via a threaded interface such that rotation of the fastener causes the insert to rotate until a head of the insert abuts against the body structure.
Leathley and Chalvet are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. providing a structure for supporting an object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the invention of Leathley having the fastening configuration as disclosed by Chalvet such that the insert engages with the threaded bore via the threaded interface such that rotation of the fastener causes the insert to rotate until a head of the insert abuts against the vehicle body structure. The motivation would have been to provide appropriate spacing between the components.
Regarding claim 3, Leathley as modified teaches the insert (Chalvet; 7) comprises an inner surface that defines an insert bore that extends from the head to a distal end of the insert, and wherein the insert includes a plurality of thread grabbers (Fig. 41; near annotation 50) that extend radially inward from the inner surface to engage outer threads on the fastener.
Regarding claim 4, Leathley as modified teaches the head of the insert (Chalvet; 7) is in an initial position that is spaced from the vehicle body structure by a gap, and wherein the fastener engages the plurality of thread grabbers causing the insert to rotate via the threaded interface between the insert and the housing to move the insert to a final position where the gap is eliminated and the head of the insert abuts against the vehicle body structure (see Chalvet; Figs. 41-45 for configuration).
Regarding claim 5, Leathley as modified teaches the receiving portion comprises a receiving fastener (Chalvet; B), and wherein when the insert (Chalvet; 7) is in the final position, the fastener is rotated through the insert such that a distal end of the fastener is received within the opening of the receiving fastener to secure the housing to the vehicle body structure [capable].
Regarding claim 6, Leathley as modified teaches the insert (Chalvet; 7) comprises an inner surface that defines an insert bore that extends from the head to a distal end of the insert, and wherein the fastener (28) comprises a self-threading fastener that cuts into the inner surface to rotate the insert relative to the housing [0017; lines 1-5].
Regarding claim 7, Leathley as modified teaches the receiving portion comprises a receiving fastener (Chalvet; B), and wherein the head of the insert (Chalvet; 7) is in an initial position that is spaced from the vehicle body structure by a gap, and wherein the self-threading fastener rotates the insert to a final position where the gap is eliminated and the head of the insert abuts against the vehicle body structure, and wherein the fastener rotates through the insert such that a distal end of the fastener extends outwardly of the insert (capable see Figs. 41-45 for configuration).
Regarding claim 8, Leathley as modified teaches the insert (Chalvet; B) includes a first anti-rotation feature (lower surface of 7) that cooperates with a second anti-rotation feature (lower surface of B) on the housing to prevent rotation of the insert out of the housing in a first condition, and wherein, in a second condition, a rotational force of the fastener within the insert overrides the first and second anti-rotation features to attach the housing to the vehicle body structure (see Chalvet; Fig. 43 and 45 for configuration).
Regarding claim 18, Leathley as modified with respect to claim 2, teaches positioning the insert (Chalvet; 7) with in the internal bore (Leathley; 84), and wherein the internal bore comprises a threaded bore and wherein the insert comprises a threaded outer surface that threadably engages the threaded bore via a threaded interface, and including rotating the fastener to cause the insert to rotate until a head of the insert abuts against the vehicle body structure.
Regarding claim 19, Leathley as modified teaches the insert (Chalvet; 7) comprises an inner surface that defines an insert bore that extends from the head to a distal end of the insert, and wherein: the insert includes a plurality of thread grabbers (Chalvet; near annotation 50) that extend radially inward from the inner surface to engage outer threads on the fastener, or the fastener comprises a self-threading fastener [Leathley; 0017; lines 1-7].
Claims 11-12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leathley (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20050002200) in view of Schindehotte (U.S. Pat. No. 632024).
Regarding claim 11, Leathley teaches the fastener extends from a head to a distal end, and wherein the fastener comprises a first body portion (top portion of 28) extending from the head and a second body portion (lower portion of 28) extending from the first body portion to the distal end, wherein the first body portion is defined by a first diameter and the second body portion is defined by a second diameter that is less than the first diameter. However, Leathley is silent to disclose the threads comprise a first set of threads formed on the first body portion and a second set of threads formed on the second body portion. Schindehotte teaches the threads comprise a first set of threads formed on the first body portion and a second set of threads formed on the second body portion (Schindehotte; 2, 3).
Leathley and Schindehotte are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. providing a structure for supporting/fastening an object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the fastener of Leathley having the first and second threaded diameter. The motivation would have been to provide differential fastening.
Regarding claim 12, Leathley as modified teaches the receiving portion comprises a receiving fastener (Schindehotte; 10), and wherein the first set of threads cut into the bore surface and the second set of threads threadably engage the opening in the receiving fastener as the fastener is rotated within the internal bore.
Regarding claim 20, Leathley as modified teaches The method of claim 17, wherein the receiving portion comprises a receiving fastener (Schindehotte; 10), and including cutting into the bore surface with external threads on the fastener as the fastener is rotated relative to the housing to secure the housing to the vehicle body structure via the receiving fastener [Leathley; 0017; lines 1-5].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 13-16 would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MUHAMMAD IJAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am-10:00 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728227. 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.
MUHAMMAD IJAZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3631
/Muhammad Ijaz/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
