Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/520,489

COMPONENT FOR VEHICLE INTERIOR

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 27, 2023
Examiner
SCHIFFMAN, BENJAMIN A
Art Unit
1742
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Shanghai Yanfeng Jinqiao Automotive Trim Systems Co. Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
590 granted / 910 resolved
At TC average
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
935
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
§103
56.9%
+16.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 910 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 March 2026, amending claims 1, 3, 7, and 20, has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata et al. (US 10,456,966 B2) in view of Reese (DE 10 2008 046 602 A1). Iwata discloses a method of producing a hollow molded body 10, equated with the claimed structure, in a mold 16 comprising a cavity A using a floating core 18, equated with the claimed projectile element (title/abstract; FIG. 1-15) comprising the steps of: (a) providing the mold 16 with the cavity A; (c) providing the projectile element 18 at the cavity A; (d) providing resin 14 into the cavity A; (e) providing water into the cavity A to push the projectile element 18 through and into resin 14 in the cavity A (5:64-6:8); (f) pushing the projectile element 18 through resin 14 across the cavity A; (g) exiting the projectile element 18 from the cavity A, into a floating core accommodating portion D (FIG. 1-4; 5:21-10:39). Iwata does not appear to expressly disclose an insert for a component for a vehicle interior (b) providing the insert in the cavity, and pushing the projectile through the insert and resin. However, Reese discloses a similar method of molding by forcing a projectile though a cavity filled with resin (title/abstract; FIG. 1-3) including a fiber-reinforced hose (6) insert, equated with the claimed tubular structure; and forming a front end or cross member for an automobile body, equated with the claimed component for a vehicle interior (FIG. 4-5; p. 5), wherein the component comprises resin formed into and around the insert, which is configured to provide a formed resin component comprising the tubular structure to provide a structure for the component (pp. 4+). At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Iwata to include the insert of Reese, in order to reinforce the molded component with a known means. Regarding claim 2, Reese suggests the insert comprises metal (pp. 3-5). Regarding claim 3, Reese suggests the braided metal insert is equated with a pipe (pp. 3-5). Regarding claim 4, Reese suggests the insert comprises an axial opening and a radial set of holes, e.g. the interstitials of the fibers through which the matrix resin can flow into and around the insert in a set of radial rings (FIG. 3, 6, pp. 5-6). Regarding claim 5, Iwata discloses an embodiment wherein the component comprises a multi-section component comprising a first section and a second section (FIG. 14; 14:55+). Further, Reese suggests a first section 4 or resin surrounding and penetrating the insert and a second section 18 of resin (FIG. 6; pp. 5-6) Regarding claim 6, Iwata discloses an embodiment wherein the first section of the component has an inner diameter larger than an inner diameter of the second section of the component (FIG. 14; 14:55+). Regarding claim 7, Iwata discloses a method of producing a hollow molded body 10, equated with the claimed structure, in a multi-section mold 16 comprising a cavity A using a core 18, 30, 32, equated with the with the claimed multi-stage projectile element, having an increase diameter core 32, equated with the base stage, floating core 18, equated with the front stage, (title/abstract; FIG. 1-4, 12-15) comprising the steps of: (a) providing the mold 16 with multi-section cavity A; (c) providing the multi-stage projectile element 18, 30, 32 (FIG. 13); (d) providing resin 14 into the cavity A; (e) providing water into the cavity to push the multi-stage projectile element through and into resin 14 in the cavity A (5:64-6:8); (f) pushing the multi-stage projectile element through resin 14 across the first section 13 of the cavity A; (g) separating the base stage 32 of the multi-stage projectile element from the front stage 18, of the multi-stage projectile element between the first section 13 of the cavity A and the second section 12 of the cavity A (FIG. 14); (h) pushing the front stage 18, 30 of the multi-stage projectile element through resin across the second section 12 of the cavity A (FIG. 14); (i) exiting the front stage of the multi-stage projectile element from the cavity into a floating core accommodating portion D (FIG. 1-4, 12-15; 5:21+, 13:61-16:62). Iwata does not appear to expressly disclose an insert for a component for a vehicle interior (b) providing the insert in the cavity, and pushing the projectile through the insert and resin. However, Reese discloses a similar method of molding by forcing a projectile though a cavity filled with resin (title/abstract; FIG. 1-3) including a fiber-reinforced hose (6) insert, equated with the claimed tubular structure (pp. 4+) and forming a front end or cross member for an automobile body, equated with the claimed component for a vehicle interior (FIG. 4-5; p. 5) wherein the component comprises resin formed into and around the insert, which is configured to provide a formed resin component comprising the tubular structure to provide a structure for the component (pp. 4+). At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Iwata to include the insert of Reese, in order to reinforce the molded component with a known means. Regarding claim 8, Iwata suggests the front stage of the multi-stage projectile element is separated from the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element at a feature between the first section of the cavity and the second section of the cavity (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 9, Iwata suggests the component comprises a section formed with the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 10, Iwata suggests the component comprises a multi-section component comprising a first section and a second section (FIG. 15; 13:61+). Reese discloses resin formed into and around the insert in a set of radial rings (FIG. 3, 6, pp. 5-6). Regarding claim 11, Reese suggests a first section 4 or resin surrounding and penetrating the insert and a second section 18 of resin (FIG. 6; pp. 5-6) Regarding claim 12, Iwata suggests the step of removing a resin component formed with the insert and the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element from the mold (FIG. 15; 16:4+). Regarding claim 13, Iwata suggests the step of separating the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element from the front stage of the multi-stage projectile element comprises engagement of the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element with a mold feature (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 14, Iwata suggests the mold feature is between the first section of the cavity and the second section of the cavity (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 15, Reese suggests the insert comprises an axial opening and a radial set of holes, e.g. the interstitials of the fibers through which the matrix resin can flow (FIG. 3, 6, pp. 5-6). Regarding claim 16, Iwata suggests the step of separating the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element from the front stage of the multi-stage projectile element between the first section of the cavity and the second section of the cavity comprises engagement of the base stage of the projectile element with a mold feature; wherein the mold feature comprises a reduction in size of an effective inner diameter between the first section of the cavity and the second section of the cavity (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 17, Iwata suggests forming a structure comprising a first section and a second section; wherein the structure is formed from a resin material; wherein the structure comprises a central opening formed by the projectile element; wherein a cross-section area of the first section is larger than a cross-section area of the second section (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 18, Iwata suggests the structure is formed by injecting water to push the projectile element through a cavity in the mold containing the resin material; wherein the projectile element comprises a perimeter surface; wherein water and resin material are in contact adjacent the perimeter surface; wherein the resin material is provided as the perimeter surface of the structure (5:64+). Regarding claim 19, Iwata suggests n the projectile element comprises a multi-stage element; wherein the multi-stage element comprises a front stage and a base stage; wherein the base stage is detachable from the front stage; wherein the structure comprises the base stage of the multi-stage projectile element (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+). Regarding claim 20, Iwata suggests the first section of the structure comprises a first diameter; wherein the second section of the structure comprises a second diameter; wherein the first diameter is greater than the second diameter (FIG. 12-15; 13:61+) Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 20 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. First, it is noted that during the 05 March 2026 interview the rigidity of the insert was discussed and would advance prosecution. However, the instant arguments/amendments do not recite or address the rigidity of the insert only that the resulting formed resin component “provide a structure” which is not the same as an express recitation that the insert is rigid. Regarding Applicant’s arguments that the cited prior art fails to teach the newly claimed “formed resin component is configured to provide a structure to the component” it is the position of the Examiner that such a feature is taught by the combination of Iwata and Reese. Specifically, that Reese suggests a braided metal insert in which resin is formed into, e.g. within the interstitials of the metal fibers, and around; resulting in a formed resin component that provides the claimed structure. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin A Schiffman whose telephone number is (571)270-7626. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-530p 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. 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. /BENJAMIN A SCHIFFMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 27, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 19, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 16, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 05, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 05, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 20, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 30, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600071
MOLD CLAMPING METHOD FOR AN INJECTION MOLDING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600637
A METHOD FOR PRODUCING A SOLID OBJECT FROM A BIOMATERIAL-BASED STARTING MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589529
RESIN SEALING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593642
METHOD OF PROCESSING A WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589533
MOLDED FOAM MANUFACTURING APPARATUS AND SCREW FOR MOLDED FOAM MANUFACTURING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+28.2%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 910 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month