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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-10 and 12 insofar as definite are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Brooks et al. (US 5,235,826).
The disclosure of Brooks et al teaches the surface textile for an interior component (figure 1) of a motor vehicle as claimed including a planar body (the warp knitted fabric self-evidently has a planar attribute at least insomuch as applicant’s knitted fabric) a front side (formed on needles 21, column 7, lines 50-56) and a rear side, wherein the rear side has a slip resistant property (via tight lines formed by contractile threads 23, 25, 26, 28) that couples the front side to a carrier (1) surface of the interior component along the planar body in lieu of an adhesive, and wherein the front side and the rear side differ from one another in terms of their textile structure and/or in terms of their textile composition as seen at least in stitch diagrams 5A-5E. Regarding claim 2, the surface textile is a weft-knitted fabric (V-bed , figure 6A) composed of at least one yarn. Regarding claim 3, wherein the rear side has different yarns than the front side as seen at least in stitch diagrams 5A-5E. Regarding claim 5, the rear side has a rough and/or lamellar surface structure (knitted loops including different materials and convex portion of figure 4). Regarding claim 6, the rear side has a 3D (column 3, line 16) surface structure. Regarding claim 7, the disclosure of Brooks et al. teaches the method for producing a surface textile producing a textile in the form of a weft-knitted fabric, having a front side (formed on needles 21, column 7, lines 50-56) and a rear side, wherein the front side and the rear side are produced differently in terms of their textile structure and/or in terms of their textile composition (stitch diagrams 5A-5E), and wherein the rear side has at least a slip-resisting property (via contractile yarns). Regarding claim 8, Brooks teaches an interior component for a motor vehicle comprising , a carrier surface (1); and a surface textile (2) having a front side and a rear side, wherein the rear side has a slip-resistant property (via tight lines formed by contractile threads 23, 25, 26, 28) that couples the front side to the carrier surface of the interior component in lieu of an adhesive, and wherein the front side and the rear side differ from one another in terms of their textile structure and/or in terms of their textile composition as seen at least in stitch diagrams 5A-5E. Regarding claim 9, the surface textile is separably coupled to the carrier. Regarding claim 10, the carrier has a rough and/or 3D surface structure as seen at least in figure 1. Regarding claim 12, a motor vehicle having an interior component according to claim 8 as noted at column 1 paragraph 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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brooks et al.
Brooks teaches the invention substantially as claimed except for the specific materials of spandex and/or viscose. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the specific yarns as spandex and/or viscose for the purpose of providing spandex’s well known exceptional elasticity to the knitted cover to allow the cover to tightly conform to the foam core and since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brooks et al. in view of Booth et al. (US 10,843,600).
The disclosure of Brooks et al. teaches the invention substantially as claimed as previously indicated in the rejection to claim 8. However, the disclosure of Brooks et al. does not explicitly set forth a slip-resisting intermediate layer arranged between the carrier and the surface textile. The disclosure of Booth et al. discloses a knitted surface textile (40) for covering an interior component (12) with an intermediate adhesive layer (38’), i.e. slip-resisting layer, between a carrier (18) and surface textile (40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the knitted cover of Brooks et al. with an additional slip-resisting layer as shown by Booth et al. for the purpose of enhancing the connection between the knitted cover and the interior component thus decreasing the likely hood of inadvertent movement between the knitted cover and
interior component.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant is reminded that all business with the Patent and Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The action of the Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid to any alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt. 37 C.F.R. 1.2
Further it is noted that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111, including:
-The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references.
-A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section.
-Moreover, The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06, MPEP 714.02. The "disclosure" includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY WORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4997. The examiner can normally be reached on M, W-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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). 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.
/DANNY WORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
ldw