CTNF 18/607,890 CTNF 78402 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement 1. The references disclosed within the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 18, 2024, has been considered and initialed by the Examiner. Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102(a)(1) 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 2. 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA 3. Claim s 1-3, 6, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Butz et al (WO 2005/049352) Butz discloses a door module (device) (abstract) comprising an injection molded article comprising thermoplastic resins (paragraph 29), where Figure 3 of Butz shows a body attachable to a substrate surface; and a fastening device (33) attached to the thermoplastic body to affix the thermoplastic body to the substrate surface, the fastening device comprising a meltable body affixed to a bottom surface of the thermoplastic body and extending away from the thermoplastic body; an inverted alignment depression on a distal surface of the meltable body; and a backflow-preventing rib extending between lateral sides of the meltable body, as in claim 1, as shown below: PNG media_image1.png 650 442 media_image1.png Greyscale . Concerning claim 2, Figure 2 of Butz shows a pull-cup (vehicle handle) and an interior panel of a vehicle door: PNG media_image2.png 586 487 media_image2.png Greyscale . Concerning claim 3, Figure 2 of Butz shows where the interior panel extends away from the pull-cup (vehicle handle) in a direction opposite to a direction of a pull surface of the pull-cup: PNG media_image2.png 586 487 media_image2.png Greyscale . Concerning claim 6, Figure 2 of Butz shows an arm extending from a bottom surface and the body is attached to the arm: PNG media_image2.png 586 487 media_image2.png Greyscale . Concerning claim 10, Figure 3 shows the fastening device is integrated with the thermoplastic body . Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103 07-20 AIA 4. 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA 5. Claim s 5, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butz et al (WO 2005/049352) Butz is taken as above. Butz discloses a door module (device) (abstract) comprising an injection molded article comprising thermoplastic resins (paragraph 29). In claim 5, the phrase, “responsive to treatment from a joining tool and cooling, the meltable body forms a button on an opposite surface of the substrate surface from where the thermoplastic body is located to affix the thermoplastic body to the substrate surface” introduces a process limitation to the product claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited steps imply a structure having an injection molded thermoplastic device. The reference suggests such a product because Butz discloses a door module (device) (abstract) comprising an injection molded article comprising thermoplastic resins (paragraph 29), as in claim 5. Concerning claim 7, Butz discloses a door module (device) (abstract) comprising an injection molded article comprising thermoplastic resins (paragraph 29). Although Butz does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the arm, thickness modifications involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art and therefore obvious. Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) See MPEP 2144.04. Claim Objection 6. Claims 4, 8-9, 11-12 are 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 closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited injection molded thermoplastic device further including a backflow reservoir between a meltable body and a bottom surface. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited injection molded thermoplastic device further including lateral ribs formed on the lateral sides of the meltable body. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited injection molded thermoplastic device further including chamfered corners at the distal surface of the meltable body, the chamfered corners having a radius of curvature to match an interior radius of curvature of a joining tool. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited injection molded thermoplastic device further including where the inverted alignment depression has a shape to match a joining tool tip shape. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited injection molded thermoplastic device further including where the meltable body has a rectangular cross-section to match a receiving hole in the interior panel. The prior art does not teach motivation or suggestion for modification to make the invention as instantly claimed. Conclusion 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lawrence Ferguson whose telephone number is 571- 272-1522. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9:00 AM – 5:30PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frank Vineis, can be reached on 571-270-1547. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /LAWRENCE D FERGUSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1781 Application/Control Number: 18/607,890 Page 2 Art Unit: 1781 Application/Control Number: 18/607,890 Page 3 Art Unit: 1781 Application/Control Number: 18/607,890 Page 4 Art Unit: 1781 Application/Control Number: 18/607,890 Page 5 Art Unit: 1781
Prosecution Insights