Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/548,163

MODULAR PASSENGER COMPARTMENT TRIM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 28, 2023
Examiner
LYNCH, CARLY W
Art Unit
3643
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Psa Automobiles SA
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
78 granted / 165 resolved
-4.7% vs TC avg
Strong +48% interview lift
Without
With
+48.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
211
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
51.3%
+11.3% vs TC avg
§102
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
§112
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 165 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement Applicant’s information disclosure statement filed 8/28/2023 has been considered and is included in the file. Claim Objections Claims 1, 2, and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1, line 2, “comprising a passenger compartment mat” should be changed to --the trim assembly comprising: a passenger compartment mat--. In claim 1, line 12, “the contour surface” should be changed to --the side contour surface--. In claim 1, line 13, “the trim element” should be changed to --the at least one trim element--. In claim 2, lines 2-3, “the trim element has a heel projecting from the trim element and designed to conceal” should be changed to --the at least one trim element has a heel projecting from the at least one trim element, the heel designed to conceal--.. In claim 4, line 3, “each being designed” should be changed to --the at least one additional soundproofing element being designed--. 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. Claims 1-7 are 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 1 recites the limitation "the space" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the longitudinal member" in lines 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no mention of a longitudinal member in the specification. For the purpose of examination, the term will be read as “the side rail”. Claim 2 recites the limitation “a heel… designed to conceal and press on the visible face of the mat”. The phrase states the heel conceals the visible face of the mat, which is misrepresentative of the disclosed invention, in which the at least one trim element conceals a part of the visible face of the mat. Claims 3-7 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sasaki (JP H0966777, machine translation attached). Regarding claim 1, Sasaki discloses a trim assembly (Figs. 1 and 4), for trimming a passenger compartment of a motor vehicle (paragraph [0001]), comprising a passenger compartment mat (9) extending between a visible face (facing upward in Fig. 2) and a reverse face (facing downward in Fig. 2), the mat comprising a side contour surface (surface end (9a)) joining said faces (Fig. 2), the assembly further comprising a soundproofing element (8), adapted to occupy at least a part of the space comprised between a floor (7) of the passenger compartment of the vehicle (1) and the reverse face when the mat is installed in the vehicle (Fig. 2), the assembly further comprising at least one trim element (10) designed to at least partially conceal a side rail (6) of the vehicle (1), wherein the mat is designed to be positioned in the passenger compartment (Figs. 1 and 4) of the vehicle (1) with the contour surface (9a) positioned opposite at least part of the longitudinal member (6b), the trim element (10) being designed to conceal, when installed on the side rail, part of the visible face of the mat (Fig. 2 shows the concealment of a part of the visible face of the mat (9)). Regarding claim 2, Sasaki discloses the trim assembly of claim 1, and discloses wherein the trim element (10) has a heel (17) projecting from the trim element and designed to conceal and press on the visible face of the mat (Fig. 2 shows (17) pressing down on the mat and concealing a portion of the mat). Regarding claim 6, Sasaki discloses the trim assembly of claim 1, and discloses a vehicle (1) equipped with a trim assembly according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above, Fig. 1 shows the trim assembly in the vehicle (1)). 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. Claims 3-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki (JP H0966777, machine translation attached) in view of Duval et al. (FR 3040678, machine translation attached). Regarding claim 3, Sasaki discloses the trim assembly of claim 1. However, Sasaki does not explicitly disclose wherein the soundproofing element has at least one cavity accommodating a spacer designed to limit the compressibility of the soundproofing element. Duval et al. teaches, like Sasaki, a trim assembly for a motor vehicle, wherein the soundproofing element (18) has at least one cavity accommodating a spacer (shim (16) acts like a spacer in the cavity, page 8, lines 9-10 of the machine translation) designed to limit the compressibility of the soundproofing element (Figs. 1, 2, and 6, page 6, last line - page 7, first line, shim (16) is rigid, therefore limits the compressibility of the overall soundproofing element). 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 the trim assembly to provide a spacer to limit the overall compressibility of the soundproofing element as taught by Duval et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to reduce overall deflection of the mat when in use in the vehicle while maintaining appropriate soundproofing levels. Regarding claim 4, Sasaki discloses a trim kit for a motor vehicle (1) comprising an assembly according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above). However, Sasaki does not explicitly disclose at least one additional soundproofing element each being designed to be interchangeable with the soundproofing element of the assembly and to occupy a different volume. Duval et al. teaches, like Sasaki, a trim kit for a motor vehicle, wherein at least one additional soundproofing element (Figs. 2 and 6) each being designed to be interchangeable with the soundproofing element of the assembly (Fig. 1) and to occupy a different volume (Figs. 1, 2, and 6 show multiple soundproofing elements that occupy a different volume). 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 the trim kit of Sasaki to include an additional soundproofing element as taught by Duval et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide increased soundproofing to the vehicle and/or to provide options for various sized areas along the floor. Regarding claim 5, Sasaki as modified by Duval et al. teaches the trim kit of claim 4, and teaches (references to Duval et al.) wherein each soundproofing element has a different thickness (Figs. 1, 2, and 6 show different thicknesses for the soundproofing elements). Regarding claim 7, Sasaki discloses a trim method of an automotive vehicle (1) equipped with a trim kit comprising a trim assembly according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), and selecting a soundproofing element of the kit to form the assembly adapted to the floor (7) of the vehicle (Fig. 1). However, Sasaki does not explicitly disclose said trim kit comprising at least one additional soundproofing element, each additional soundproofing element being designed to be interchangeable with the soundproofing element of the assembly and to occupy a different volume. Duval et al. teaches, like Sasaki, a trim method of an automotive vehicle equipped with a trim kit, wherein at least one additional soundproofing element (Figs. 2 and 6) each being designed to be interchangeable with the soundproofing element of the assembly (Fig. 1) and to occupy a different volume (Figs. 1, 2, and 6 show multiple soundproofing elements that occupy a different volume). 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 the trim method of Sasaki to include an additional soundproofing element as taught by Duval et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide increased soundproofing to the vehicle and/or to provide options for various sized areas along the floor. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Stricker (US 5681072), Ritzema (US 6024190), Burgin (US 9505178), Rudek (2021/0270337), Burghardt et al. (DE 102024117099), Zybarth (DE 202005007646), Bloemeling (EP 1847419), Schatz (WO 2011050800) teach a soundproofing element for a passenger compartment of a motor vehicle Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate Friday. 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, Peter M Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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. /CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 28, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599117
AQUACULTURE-FEEDING / OXYGEN-DISSOLUTION ASSEMBLY FOR OCEAN APPLICATIONS AND METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593758
VERTICAL GROWING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582108
TELESCOPING LURE RETRIEVAL TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12568952
Bait Apparatus For Animal Cage Trap And Method Of Baiting Using The Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568957
TURKEY DECOY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+48.1%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 165 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