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 .
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in France on 02/10/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the FR2301250 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “recess” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). “Recess” is not shown in Figure 8B. No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Para 0026: The first plastic material is 5 to 15 times more flexible than the second plastic material should be rewritten since all the claims (except claim 13) state that the second plastic material is more flexible than the first plastic.
In Para 0057: screw shaft 3 should be 13
In Para 0061: trim module 3 3 should be 3
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.
Claim 13 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.
Claim 13 states that “The trim panel according to claim 1, wherein the first plastic material is 5 to 15 times more flexible than the second plastic material.” This claim contradicts what is stated in claim 1. Claim 1 states that the “second plastic material [is] more flexible than the first plastic material. For the purposes of examination, the Office is interpreting the claim as “the second plastic material is 5 to 15 times more flexible than the first plastic material”.
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, 5-8, 10-12, 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bicego et al. (WO 2019130033 A).
Re Claim 1, Bicego et al. discloses, a trim panel for a motor vehicle (Abstract) characterized in that it comprises:
- at least one light transmission zone (Fig. 1, 110), made of a first plastic material suitable for a light transmission (Para 0037 – PMMA – polymethyl methacrylate), and
- at least one masking zone (Fig. 1, 120) adjacent to the at least one light transmission zone (as seen in Fig. 3 below) and made at least in part of a second plastic material (Para 0037, 0048 - opaque Polycarbonate / Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene mixture, which is also known by the acronym PC/ABS, or of opaque ABS) more flexible than the first plastic material (PC/ABS is more flexible than PMMA).
PNG
media_image1.png
765
715
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 of Bicego et al. (WO 2019130033 A)
Re Claim 2, Bicego et al. discloses the second plastic material is opaque to a visible light (Para 0048).
Re Claim 5, Bicego et al. discloses the at least one masking zone is more flexible than the at least one light transmission zone (Para 0048; the Young’s modulus for stiffness for PC/ABS is lower than that of PMMA).
Re Claim 6, Bicego et al. discloses the at least one masking zone is made entirely from the second plastic material (Para 0037, 0048).
Re Claim 7, Bicego et al. discloses the at least one masking zone is formed of at least two layers of materials:
- a first layer made from the first plastic material and located on an at least one outer face of the trim panel (see annotated Fig. 1 above), and
- a second layer made from the second material and located on an at least one inner face of the trim panel (see annotated Fig. 1 above).
Re Claim 8, Bicego et al. discloses the first layer is integral with the first plastic material forming the at least one light transmission zone (see annotated Fig. 1 above).
Re Claim 10, Bicego et al. discloses the at least one masking zone extends around an entire circumference of the at least one light transmission zone (see annotated Fig. 1 above; Para 0050).
Re Claim 11, Bicego et al. discloses the trim panel forms a housing (Fig. 1, 40), at least part of the at least one masking zone forms at least one wall of side walls of the housing, and the at least one light transmission zone forms at least part of a bottom of the housing (as seen in the annotated Fig. 1 above).
Re Claim 12, Bicego et al. discloses at least part of the at least one masking zone separates two light transmission zones (as seen in the annotated Fig. 1 above).
Re Claim 14, Bicego et al. a trim module for a motor vehicle characterized in that it comprises a trim panel (Fig. 1, 20), wherein the trim panel further comprises:
- at least one light transmission zone (Fig. 1, 110), made of a first plastic material suitable for a light transmission (Para 0037 – PMMA - polymethyl methacrylate), made at least in part of a second plastic material (Para 0037, 0048 - opaque Polycarbonate / Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene mixture, which is also known by the acronym PC/ABS, or of opaque ABS) more flexible than the first plastic material (PC/ABS is more flexible than PMMA).
Re Claim 15, Bicego et al. discloses a front face (Fig. 1, 10) of a motor vehicle comprising a trim panel, wherein the trim panel further comprises:
- at least one light transmission zone (Fig. 1, 110), made of a first plastic material suitable for a light transmission (Para 0037 – PMMA - polymethyl methacrylate),
- at least one masking zone (Fig. 1, 120) adjacent to the at least one light transmission zone and made at least in part of a second plastic material (Para 0037, 0048 - opaque Polycarbonate / Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene mixture, which is also known by the acronym PC/ABS, or of opaque ABS) more flexible than the first plastic material (PC/ABS is more flexible than PMMA).
Re Claim 16, Bicego et al. discloses a motor vehicle comprising a trim panel according to claim 1 (Abstract).
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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bicego et al. (WO 2019130033 A) in view of Birner et al. (US 20160059798 A1).
Re Claims 3 and 4, Bicego et al. teaches a trim panel for a motor vehicle characterized in that it comprises: - at least one light transmission zone, made of a first plastic material suitable for a light transmission, and - at least one masking zone adjacent to the at least one light transmission zone and made at least in part of a second plastic material more flexible than the first plastic material.
Re Claim 3, Bicego et al. fails to teach the second plastic material is semi-transparent, and re Claim 4, Bicego et al. fails to teach the second plastic material is translucent, wherein a light transmittance of the second plastic material is lower than the light transmittance of the first plastic material.
However, Birner et al., teaches the second plastic material is semi-transparent (Para 0007, covering may be designed in … partially translucent manner). Birner et al., also teaches that second plastic material is translucent, wherein a light transmittance of the second plastic material is lower than the light transmittance of the first plastic material. (Para 0007, covering may be designed in … a completely translucent … manner). Due to the Application not providing specificity or the difference in definition of the terms, “semi-transparent” and “translucent”, the Office is interpreting them as the same.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the masking zone made of the second plastic material disclosed by Bicego et al. with a semi-transparent or translucent material taught by Birner et al. with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would be more visually or optically-appealing and tidy design when adjacent to a transparent material (Para 0003, 0006).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. And the reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in Claim 13 (as interpreted by the Office) is the fact that the prior art of record, Bicego et al., has no teaching, motivation or suggestion to use materials that would suffice the flexibility range provided by the application.
The primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter in Claim 9 is the inclusion of a recess that reduces the thickness of the first layer and a portion of the second layer is arranged in the recess. Such a limitation, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claims, are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record. The closest prior art of record, Bicego et al., do not teach or suggest a recess in the layer as claimed. There is no suggestion or motivation in the prior art to make such a modification to the device of Bicego et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The cited references below all disclose motor vehicle trim panels.
Feid et al. (DE 10335876 B4) discloses a decorative trim panel arrangement that are formed in one piece. Feid et al. mentions various different coating for the housing and the decorative panel (not exclusive to plastic) but does not mention flexibility.
Schieder et al. (US 11577669 B2) discloses a trim panel for the purpose of different functions and made of a “plastic body”. However, Schieder et al. does not disclose a fully visible or clear light transmission zone.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASMINE J THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-8742. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at (571) 272-5109. 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.
/JASMINE JAMES THOMAS/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/VIVEK D KOPPIKAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3612
June 5, 2026
Prosecution Insights