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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 19 December 2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 6 includes two empty leader lines, and a random marking in the lower right corner.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: The phrase “the cover portion itself and to” should be removed from line 2 of claim 2.
The phrase “and to the wheel cover itself” should be removed from line 2 of claim 13.
These corrections are for grammatical clarity, and to remove redundant limitations from the claims. 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 1-20 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.
Claims 1 and 12 are indefinite due to the fact that the term “via” in lines 2 and 5, and 4 and 7, respectively, is a generally narrative term that fails to describe any actual physical structure of the claimed invention.
Claims 5 and 15 are indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear how the second set of spacer members are “disposed between” consecutive ones of the second set of retention tabs, given the fact that the second set of spacer members are an integral portion of the second set of retention tabs.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett et al (9,242,506) in view of Wang (12,115,815).
Per claims 1 and 12, Bennett et al shows a wheel cover 10 including a cover portion 20 removably attached to a wheel 80 with a first set of retention tabs 42, and a button cap 50 removably coupled to the cover portion 20 by a second set of retention tabs 62 that are inserted into a corresponding set of retention slots 28 in the cover portion 20. The button cap 50 and cover portion 20 are axially aligned and centered about the axis of rotation of the wheel 80.
Per claims 2 and 13, the button cap 50 may be coupled to the wheel 80 without the cover portion 20 (see Figure 11).
Per claims 3 and 14, the first set of retention tabs 42 include a first set of spacer members 44 that define a first standoff height between the cover portion 20 and the wheel 80.
Per claims 5 and 15, as best understood, the second set of retention tabs 62 of the button cap 50 include a second set of spacer members 64 defining a second standoff height between the button cap 50 and the cover portion 20. Individual ones of the second set of spacer members 64 are disposed between consecutive ones of the first set of spacer members 44.
Regarding claims 10 and 20, the limitation that the second setoff retention tabs are “dual shot molded to increase longevity and fatigue resistance” is a method step in a product claim, and receives no patentable weight (see MPEP 2113).
Per claim 12, the wheel 80 includes a lip 94 extending around the axis of rotation 81 within a center bore 90.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Bennett et al does not show the cover 10 covering the spokes 86 of the wheel 80. Wang teaches the use of a cover 2, including a button cap 3, that covers the spokes 41 of a wheel 40. Therefore, from this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success to form the cover portion of Bennett et al to cover the spokes of the wheel, dependent upon the desired aesthetics thereof, and to prevent damage to the wheel due to contact with debris during use.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Bennett et al does not show the first set of retention tabs being urged into engagement with the lip of the central bore by a wire ring. Wang teaches the use of such a ring 17. Therefore, from this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the first set of retention tabs of Bennett et al with a wire ring, to provide positive tension on the first set of retention tabs, thus preventing the wheel cover from detaching from the wheel during use.
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett et al in view of Wang as applied to claims 1-5, 10-15, and 20 above, and further in view of Cuevas et al (7,416,260). Bennett et al as modified by Wang does not show the first standoff height being equal to the second standoff height.
In Figures 3 and 3A, Cuevas et al teaches the height (or length) of a first set of retention tabs 72 being substantially equal to the height (or length) of a second set of retention tabs 94. Therefore, from this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success to form the first and second sets of retention tabs of Bennett et al as modified by Wang with equal standoff heights, for the purpose of allowing both the cover portion and the button cap to utilize (i.e. attach to) the same lip of the central bore of the wheel, thus reducing the amount of machining required on the wheel (decreasing both manufacturing cost and time).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 and 17-19 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references show either wheel covers with separate central caps or covers with logos.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R BELLINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6680. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571)272-6684. 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.
/JASON R BELLINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615