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 .
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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/02/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6, 10-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukumoto (US 10655374B2, hereinafter referred to as “Fukumoto”) in view of Melanie Anna (DE102017102331A1, hereinafter referred to as “Melanie”).
Regarding claim 1, Fukumoto discloses a routing clip for routing a plurality of tubes (Figs 1 and 8, clamp 1 for routing pipes 2), the routing clip (1) comprising: a first component (Figs 1 and 2, lid member 4); and a second component (Figs 1 and 2, base member 3) pivotally coupled with the first component via a hinge (Figs 1 and 2, hinge structure 5) and configured to alternate between an open position (Figs 2, 4A, 5A) and a closed position (Figs 1 and 8), wherein, when in the closed position (Figs 1 and 8), the first component and the second component define a plurality of pockets (Figs 1 and 8, space between elastic members 10 to accommodate pipe 2), each of the plurality of pockets configured to secure one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 1 and 8, multiple spaces between 10 to secure pipes 2) and wherein each of the plurality of pockets comprises a flexible band support element (Fig 4A and 6, elastic members 10 in each pocket between notch 9) configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 1 and 8).
However, Fukumoto fails to disclose the flexible band support element comprising a resilient band spanning between opposing sidewalls of the pocket.
However, Melanie teaches the flexible band support element comprising a resilient band spanning between opposing sidewalls of the pocket (Figs 1-3, elastic plate 14, 24 spanning between sidewalls (11, 21) of pocket openings (16, 26)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukumoto by Melanie base on the following rationale: Referring to Fukumoto, as discussed in col 6, lines 37-51 and shown in Figs 1 and 8, the shape of pockets is formed by a pair of V-shaped notches 9 next to each other which jointly defines rhombic openings for holding the pipes 2 individually. On the other hand, referring to Melanie, the shape of the elastic plate 14, 24 in Figs 1 and 3 show a “tire inner-tube like” structure for the elastic plate 14, 24 having a round/circular surface for improved holding contact area of each round tube. As a result, above discussed advantages of matching surface contour of flexible band support element to the held circular tube of Melanie over Fukumoto serve as teaching, suggestion, or motivation, in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify rhombic/V-shaped structure of the elastic members and pocket of Fukumoto to circular-shaped elastic plates 14, 24 of Melanie, and there would have been reasonable expectation of success because both references Fukumoto and Melanie belong as analogous art in the field of rotating hinged multiple pipes/tubes clip assembly with mounting features to a vehicle frame, and that has a latch or locking feature which allow easy access. In addition, the base member 3 and the lid member 4 of Fukumoto is made by plastic injection molded plastic members as discussed in col 10, lines 30-35 of Fukumoto, which can easily be modified in shape/structure by means of using a different structured metal mold insert.
Regarding claim 2, Fukumoto fails to disclose wherein the flexible band support element comprises a curved portion configured to conform to a shape of the one of the plurality of tubes.
However, Melanie teaches wherein the flexible band support element (Figs 1-3, elastic plates 14, 24) comprises a curved portion configured to conform to a shape of the one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 1-4, tubes are circular and thus matching with shape of round opening 31).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukumoto by Melanie based on same rationales previously discussed for claim 1 above, thereby omitted herein for brevity.
Regarding claim 5, Fukumoto discloses further comprising an exterior snap assembly configured to secure the routing clip in the closed position (Figs 1 and 8, latch mechanism 6 secure clip 1 in closed position).
Regarding claim 6, Fukumoto discloses wherein the exterior snap assembly (6) comprises a first clip (Fig 3, engagement wall 28 and barb 25a combined) coupled to the first component (Fig 3, coupled to pled to lid member 4) that is configured to engage a corresponding second clip coupled to the second component (Figs 4A and 8, barb 27a and engagement claw 27 coupled to base member 3).
Regarding claim 10, Fukumoto discloses further comprising a fastener configured to couple the routing clip to a component (Fig 4A, fastener (11) couples clip (1) to component (32)).
Regarding claim 11, Fukumoto discloses wherein the fastener is coupled to the second component (Fig 4A, fastener (11) coupled to base member (3)).
Regarding claim 13, Fukumoto discloses wherein the hinge comprises a shaft and a pivot socket (Figs 1, hinge pin 16 and hole 19 at portion 17 for hinge assembly 5).
Claim(s) 3-4, 7-8 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukumoto (US 10655374B2, hereinafter referred to as “Fukumoto”) in view of Melanie Anna (DE102017102331A1, hereinafter referred to as “Melanie”), and further in view of Child (US 8910912B2, hereinafter referred to as “Child”).
Regarding claim 3, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to a sidewall to bridge at least a portion of one of the plurality of pockets.
However, Child teaches wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to a sidewall to bridge at least a portion of one of the plurality of pockets (Figs 3 and 4, curved portions at 64, 66 connected at ends adjacent to 80, 82 to sidewall 60 to bridge the pockets).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukumoto by Child in view of Melanie base on the following rationale: Referring to Fig 8 of Fukumoto, as shown by dashed line for the contour of the pipe 2 versus the straight edges of the elastic members 10, which forms a rectangular surrounding space acting to pinch against four sides of the tubular structure of the pipe 2, due to the presence of four overlapping or intersecting regions in the pocket. On the other hand, referring to Figs 1 and 2 of Child, the smooth circular contour along edges at the opening 100 of the pocket would serve to smoothly support each tube/pipe without any undue exertion of pressure. As a result, the pinch edge effect of elastic members 10 acting on the pipe/tube 2 would possibly impede fluid flow inside the tube due to added flow resistance by deformation of round outer wall shape for the pipe/tube for Fukumoto. On the hand, smooth circular contour along edges at the opening 100 of the pocket of Child would solve the problem discussed for Fukumoto. In addition, Child expressly teaches that the clip for holding fuel lines is able to provide a forgiving retainer that reduces noise and vibration, by having large areas of contact and bumpers 90, 92, 94, 96 limiting area of contact and transfer of vibration (col 4, lines 29-46). Meanwhile, Fukumoto fails to provide any of such vibration dampening features. Furthermore, Child is further improvement upon Melanie based on the following: referring to Child in Fig 3, the combined structures of the post 44, the aperture 48 and the overall structure of the retainer insert in Figs 3-4 allows for having an integral simpler structure for Child in contrast to the individual pieces of elastic plates 14, 24 that have to be secured by many fastening projections 15 into mounting holes 16 shown in Figs 1-4 taught by Melanie. As a result, above discussed advantages of Child over Fukumoto and Melanie, respectively, serve as teaching, suggestion, or motivation, in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the overall structure of the elastic members 10 of Fukumoto to be circular shaped retainer insert halves 14 of Child, and there would have been reasonable expectation of success because both references Fukumoto and Child belong as analogous art in the field of rotating hinged multiple pipes/tubes assembly clip with mounting features to a vehicle frame/component, and that has a latch or locking feature which allow easy access.
Regarding claim 4, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to the sidewall via a wall feature and a bend feature.
However, Child teaches wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to the sidewall via a wall feature and a bend feature (Figs 3 and 4, wall feature (52) and bend feature (80, 82)).
Regarding claim 7, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach further comprising one or more interior snap assemblies positioned between adjacent pockets.
However, Child teaches further comprising one or more interior snap assemblies positioned between adjacent pockets (Figs 3-5, snap assemblies 44, 46, and 48, 50 positioned between pockets 100 102 in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 8, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein each of the one or more interior snap assemblies comprises a first clip coupled to the first component that is configured to engage a corresponding second clip coupled to the second component
However, Child teaches wherein each of the one or more interior snap assemblies comprises a first clip (Fig 5, snap assembly 46, 50 has clip (46)) coupled to the first component (Fig 5, 46 coupled to shell 18) that is configured to engage a corresponding second clip (Fig 5, clip (44) of snap assembly 44, 48) coupled to the second component (Fig 5, 44 coupled to shell 16).
Regarding claim 14, Fukumoto discloses a routing clip for routing a plurality of tubes (Figs 1 and 8, clamp 1 for routing pipes 2), the routing clip (1) comprising: a first component (Figs 1 and 2, lid member 4 ); a second component (Figs 1 and 2, base member 3) pivotally coupled with the first component via a hinge (Figs 1 and 2, hinge structure 5) and configured to alternate between an open position (Figs 2, 4A, 5A) and a closed position (Figs 1 and 8); and an exterior snap assembly configured to secure the routing clip in the closed position (Figs 1 and 8, latch mechanism 6 secure clip 1 in closed position), wherein, when in the closed position, the first component and the second component define a plurality of pockets (Figs 1 and 8, space between elastic members 10 to accommodate pipe 2), each of the plurality of pockets configured to secure one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 1 and 8, multiple spaces between 10 to secure pipes 2), and wherein each of the plurality of pockets comprises a flexible band support element configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes (Fig 4A and 6, elastic members 10 in each pocket between notch 9 configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes shown in Figs 1 and 8).
However, Fukumoto fails to disclose the flexible band support element comprising a resilient band spanning between opposing sidewalls of the pocket and configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes via a curved portion configured to conform to a shape of the one of the plurality of tubes.
However, Melanie teaches the flexible band support element comprising a resilient band spanning between opposing sidewalls of the pocket (Figs 1-3, elastic plate 14, 24 spanning between sidewalls (11, 21) of pocket openings (16, 26)).
Furthermore, Child teaches the flexible band support element configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes via a curved portion configured to conform to a shape of the one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 2 and 3, flexible connectors 80, 82, 84, 86 together with tube seat 64, 66; Figs 1 and 2, tube seats 64, 66, 70, 68 are curved portion to conform to round shape of pipe/tube/conduit (col 3, line 65 to col 4, line 3, col. 5 lines 2-9).
Regarding claim 15, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to a sidewall to bridge at least a portion of one of the plurality of pockets.
However, Child teaches wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to a sidewall to bridge at least a portion of one of the plurality of pockets (Figs 3 and 4, curved portions at 64, 66 connected at ends adjacent to 80, 82 to sidewall 60 to bridge the pockets).
Regarding claim 16, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to the sidewall via a wall feature and a bend feature.
However, Child teaches wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to the sidewall via a wall feature and a bend feature (Figs 3 and 4, wall feature (52) and bend feature (80, 82).
Regarding claim 17, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach further comprising one or more interior snap assemblies positioned between adjacent pockets, wherein each of the one or more interior snap assemblies comprises a first clip coupled to the first component that is configured to engage a corresponding second clip coupled to the second component.
However, Child teaches further comprising one or more interior snap assemblies positioned between adjacent pockets (Figs 3-5, snap assemblies 44, 46, and 48, 50 positioned between pockets 100, 102 in Fig 1), wherein each of the one or more interior snap assemblies comprises a first clip coupled to the first component that is configured to engage a corresponding second clip coupled to the second component (Fig 3, engagement wall 28 and barb 25a combined) coupled to the first component (Fig 3, coupled to pled to lid member 4) that is configured to engage a corresponding second clip coupled to the second component (Figs 4A and 8, barb 27a and engagement claw 27 coupled to base member 3)).
Regarding claim 18, Fukumoto discloses a routing clip for routing and securing a plurality of tubes to a component (Fig 5A, clip 1 securing pipe 2 in Fig 1 to component (32) ) having an opening (Fig 5A, hole 33), the routing clip (1) comprising: a first component (Fig 5A, lid member 4); a second component (Fig 5A, base member 3) pivotally coupled with the first component via a hinge (Fig 5A, hinge 5) and configured to alternate between an open position (Fig 2) and a closed position (Fig 1); an exterior snap assembly (Fig 1, latch 6) configured to secure the routing clip (1) in the closed position (Fig 1); and a fastener (Fig 8, mounting portion 11) coupled to the second component (Fig 8, 11 coupled to 3) and configured to couple to the component via the opening (Fig 8, via hole 33), wherein, when in the closed position, the first component and the second component define a plurality of pockets (Fig 8, pockets in space between 9 and 10), each of the plurality of pockets configured to secure one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 1 and 8), and wherein each of the plurality of pockets comprises a flexible band support element configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes (Fig 4A and 6, elastic members 10 in each pocket between notch 9; Figs 1 and 8);
However, Fukumoto fails to disclose wherein each of the plurality of pockets comprises a flexible band support element comprising a resilient band spanning between opposing sidewalls of the pocket and configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes via a curved portion configured to conform to a shape of the one of the plurality of tubes.
However, Melanie teaches wherein each of the plurality of pockets comprises a flexible band support element comprising a resilient band spanning between opposing sidewalls of the pocket (Figs 1-3, elastic plate 14, 24 spanning between sidewalls (11, 21) of pocket openings (16, 26)).
Furthermore, Child teaches the flexible band support element configured to conform to the one of the plurality of tubes ……. via a curved portion configured to conform to a shape of the one of the plurality of tubes (Figs 2 and 3, flexible connectors 80, 82, 84, 86 together with tube seat 64, 66; Figs 1 and 2, tube seats 64, 66, 70, 68 are curved portion to conform to round shape of pipe/tube/conduit, see col 3, line 65 to col 4, line 3, col. 5 lines 2-9 for details).
Regarding claim 19, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to a sidewall to bridge at least a portion of one of the plurality of pockets.
However, Child teaches wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to a sidewall to bridge at least a portion of one of the plurality of pockets (Figs 3 and 4, curved portions at 64, 66 connected at ends adjacent to 80, 82 to sidewall 60 to bridge the pockets).
Regarding claim 20, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to the sidewall via a wall feature and a bend feature.
However, Child teaches wherein the curved portion is connected at each of its ends to the sidewall via a wall feature and a bend feature (Figs 3 and 4, wall feature (52) and bend feature (80, 82)).
Regarding claims 4, 7-8 and 14-20, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukumoto by Child in view of Melanie based on same rationales previously discussed for claim 3 above, thereby omitted herein for brevity.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Fukumoto (US 10655374B2, hereinafter referred to as “Fukumoto”) in view of Melanie Anna (DE102017102331A1, hereinafter referred to as “Melanie”), and further in view of Dorschner (FR 3131761 publication, hereinafter referred to as “Dorschner”).
Regarding claim 9, Fukumoto and Melanie, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or teach wherein the routing clip is fabricated as a unitary structure including the hinge and the flexible band support elements.
However, Dorschner teaches wherein the routing clip is fabricated as a unitary structure including the hinge and the flexible band support elements (Figs 2a, 2b, 3 and 5, first part 10 and second part 20 are integral with each other; Fig 1b: part 103 and 104 combined serves as the hinge; Fig 2a, living hinge (4’), flexible band support (30)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fukumoto by Dorschner base on the following rationale: Referring to Fig 2 of Fukumoto, the hinge structure 5 is a complicated assembly having various components including a hinge pin 16, abutting portion 21, bearing portion 17, and projections 22. On the other hand, the only integral portion that needs to form a hinge for Dorschner is just the flexible portion 4 which acts as a hinge. As a result, above simplification of hinge of Dorschner over Fukumoto serve as teaching, suggestion, or motivation, in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the overall structure of the first and second components of Fukumoto to become one integral pipe clamping device with a living hinge as taught by Dorschner, and there would have been reasonable expectation of success because both references Fukumoto and Dorschner belong as analogous art in the field of rotating hinged multiple pipes/tubes assembly clip with mounting features to a vehicle body, and that has latch feature which allow easy opening and closing. In addition, the empty space 6 or free space between parts 20 and 30 taught by Dorschner improves flexibility of the retaining strip (see English translation copy, pages 2-3) so as to be able to replace or eliminate the elastic member 10 of pipe clamp of Fukumoto, to preserve the same function.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection based on Melanie Anna (DE102017102331A1) does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable subject matter
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Cited prior art including Fukumoto, Melanie and Child singularly or in any combinations, fails to disclose or teach “wherein the hinge is a living hinge formed integrally with the first component and the second component” as claimed in claim 12. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schaty (US 5271587) discloses a clip for pipes. Kraus (US 4881705) disclose a hinged pipe holder. Costigan (US 10302228B2) disclose a cable clip. Kato (US 9644777B2) disclose a vibration dampening clamp for pipes. Kovac (US 7387282B2) disclose a hinged clip having a retainer. Nakanishi (US 20050166122A1) discloses a tube holder. Meyers (US 8967556B2) disclose a tube clip with living hinge. Kato (US 9416896B1) discloses a tube clip assembly. Pearson (US 9453593B2) discloses a tube-retaining assembly.
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 DING Y TAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4271. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00am MT--5:00pm MT.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached on 571-272-4797. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DING Y TAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights