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 Objections
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 8, after the phrase “mixtures of materials” the claim includes two commas. Applicant should delete one of the commas. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 28-31 and 33-34 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.
Regarding claim 28, the phrase “comprising a thermoformed component in accordance with Claim 1” is indefinite, as claim 1 already requires “wherein at least one of the first cover layer and the first filling is thermoformed”. It is unclear if the “thermoformed component” of claim 28 is referring to the already established thermoformed first cover layer or first filling or claim 1, or if claim 28 is attempting to introduce an additional thermoformed component. Applicant should clarify the claim language to be clear.
Regarding claim 29, in its current form, the claim appears to begin as an independent claim, establishing “a method of production of an acoustically moulded product”, and then includes “or” language referring back to “the production of an acoustically effective component in accordance with a method in accordance with Claim 25”. It is improper for a claim to have language that is alternatively independent or dependent on another claim. Because the claim dependency on claim 25 appears to be optional, for the rejection, the Examiner will interpret the claim as being optionally independent, or dependent claim 25.
Further regarding claim 29, in the last line of the claim, the phrase “thermoforming of the component at least one of the first cover layer and the first filling” is indefinite as the language is confusing. It appears Applicant may have intended the language to read: “thermoforming at least one of the first cover layer and the first filling.” Applciant should amend the language to be more clear.
Regarding claim 31, in its current form, the claim appears to begin as an independent claim, establishing “a method for producing an acoustically-effective component”, and then includes “or” language referring back to “a moulded part in accordance with Claim 28”. It is improper for a claim to have language that is alternatively independent or dependent on another claim. Because the claim dependency on claim 28 appears to be optional, for the rejection, the Examiner will interpret the claim as being optionally independent, or dependent claim 28.
Claims 28-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 28, the phrase “comprising a thermoformed component in accordance with Claim 1” fails to further limit claim 1, from which it depends. Claim 1 already requires “wherein at least one of the first cover layer and the first filling is thermoformed,” so the generically stated “thermoformed component” of claim 28 is fails to further limit claim 1, as claim 1 already requires a thermoformed component. If Applicant is intending to claim a thermoformed component different than, or in addition to thermoformed components already established in claim 1, Applicant should amend claim 28 to be more specific as to what is meant by “a thermoformed component”.
Regarding claims 29 and 31, which respectively depend from claims 25 and 28, each require a number of limitations before the “or” language (as referenced in the 112b rejection above) that are not required by the claims from which they depend, and therefor fail to further limit the subject matter claimed, as they are not “construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers”. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 31 and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Arata (2015/0034414).
With respect to claim 31, Arata teaches a method for producing an acoustically-effective component (Figures 1-5 and 9-11, #6A/6C), the method including the following steps: forming a pouch (11) from at least a first cover layer (one of 13/14), which forms a first chamber (defined by chamber accommodating chips #12/21, in the same way as Applicant’s), wherein the first cover layer (one of 13/14) comprises a flexible material with an extended surface area and a specific flow resistance of between 10 and 1,500 rayls ([0107], [0111], [0123] – note that the thickness and airflow resistance ranges described in [0111] and [0123] yield a specific flow resistance covering the claimed range); and arranging a first filling (defined by chip layer 21 in Figures 3-5, or one of chip layers forming layer #21 on one side of intermediate membrane #27 in Figures 9-11), in the first chamber, wherein the first filling comprises: voluminous non-woven material, foam particles, synthetic fibres, natural fibres or mixtures of the materials ([0058]-[0066]), or a moulded part in accordance with Claim 28, as an acoustically-effective damping element (6/6A/6C) in a motor vehicle (1). It is noted that this claim is interpreted as being independent as the dependency on claim 28 appears to be optional, see 112b rejection above.
With respect to claim 33, Arata teaches wherein the damping element (6/6A/6C) takes the form of an acoustically-effective interior or exterior component ([0102]).
With respect to claim 34, Arata teaches wherein the damping element (6/6A/6C) takes the form of a side member infill, a sill infill, an A/B/C pillar infill, a bulkhead insulation, a tunnel absorber, a door insulation, or a wheel arch absorber ([0102]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15, 24-25 and 35 are allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
The Examiner found Applicant's arguments, filed on 6/16/26, persuasive with respect to claims 1-15, 24-25 and 35, and therefore considers that the references of the Prior Art of record fail to teach, or suggest any obvious combination of the limitations discussed in the previous Office Action, and further comprising the limitations of (With respect to claims 1 and 25) a first cover layer, which forms a first chamber, wherein the first cover layer comprises a flexible material with an extended surface area and a specific flow resistance of between 10 and 1,500 rayls, wherein the first cover layer comprises a non-woven material, wherein at least one of the first cover layer and the first filling is thermoformed.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance."
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/16/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to the 112 rejections of claims 28-31 and 33-34, and the prior art rejections of claims 31 and 33-34.
Regarding the 112 rejections of claims 29 and 31, it is noted that Applicant did not address the 112b or 112d rejections of these claims that details their indefiniteness as being constructed as an option Independent and dependent claim. Applicant must reconstruct these claims to be either independent, or depend on another claim.
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 JEREMY AUSTIN LUKS whose telephone number is (571)272-2707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:00-5:00).
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 270-7938. 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.
/JEREMY A LUKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights