Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/702,981

THERMOPLASTIC FIBER WEB STRUCTURE AND AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR PART

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 19, 2024
Examiner
KHAN, TAHSEEN
Art Unit
1781
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Yanfeng International Automotive Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
564 granted / 924 resolved
-4.0% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
968
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
74.7%
+34.7% vs TC avg
§102
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
§112
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 924 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Rejections - 35 USC paragraph 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. 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) 1-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isoda JP_0856772_A (see machine English translation). 1. Regarding Claims 1-5, 13, and 22, In Example 1, paragraphs [0021]-[0028] and Fig. 4, Isoda discloses a thermoplastic fiber web structure (the net matrix 10 shown in Fig. 4 that is made of a thermoplastic resin material as described in Example 1, and melt extruded into a matrix net, paragraph [0023]), characterized in that the thermoplastic fiber web structure forms a support (paragraph [0023]: prior to thermoforming, the matrix net has an apparent density of 45 kg/m3 and a 25% compression hardness of 14 kg, and after thermoforming a density of 65 kg/m3 (paragraphs [0028]), i.e. it is a support) structure through fiber filaments (paragraph [0023]: filaments are ejected from the nozzles) that are melt-bonded together (paragraph [0023]: the filaments are contact fused together), the fiber filaments being formed from a thermoplastic elastomer material (paragraph [0021]: a polyester-based elastomer block copolymer having hard segments of polybutylene terephthalate and soft segments of polyether; as is being claimed in instant Claims 2 and 4). Isoda also discloses using, alternatively, polyolefin elastomers (paragraph 0009; as is being claimed in instant Claim 3). Isoda further discloses that said its elastomer can also be nylon (paragraph 0009; as is being claimed in instant Claim 5). The thermoplastic fiber web structure in Isoda is used in an automobile interior part such as a seat cushion (Fig. 1 and paragraph [0028]) together with a sleeve (fiberfill web 11 and its preparation disclosed in paragraph [0026], i.e. a needled carded nonwoven web; as claimed in instant Claims 13 and 14) fastened to the thermoplastic fiber web by means of the melt-blown adhesive layer 14 (paragraphs [0027] - [0028]; as being claimed in instant Claim 22). 2. Regarding Claim 6, Isoda discloses having density differences in localized regions (Page 23: paragraph 0013) but does not state the claimed range. However, the Examiner respectfully submits that the difference will ultimately trace back to mere end-user product specifications which are known to vary. Applicants have not indicated how the claimed range results in unexpected properties. 3. Regarding Claims 7-9, Isoda discloses that “a preferred embodiment is also one in which the matrix layer and the core have a laminated structure of different finenesses, which is an optimum combination of filaments with apparent density, as required” (paragraph 0013, Page 23). As such, said density difference can be borne out of a difference in distribution of the fiber filaments. 4. Regarding Claim 10, Isoda discloses using hollow fiber filaments (paragraph 0015). 5. Regarding Claim 11, Isoda discloses that the denier can be as low as 100 while the density can be as low as 0.005 g/cm3 (paragraph 0013) which would result in a size of 1.68 mm diameter. 6. Regarding Claim 12, Isoda discloses a density ranging from 0.01 g/cm3 to 0.20 g/cm3 (paragraph 0013) which meets the claimed range. 7. Regarding Claims 13-21, Isoda discloses a hook (paragraph 0028) and the general embodiment of having a thermoplastic strip. The details of which would depend on end-user specifications that are known to vary. Applicants have not indicated how the claimed range results in unexpected properties. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAHSEEN KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1140. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Saturdays 08:00AM-10:00PM. 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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 5712701547. 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. /TAHSEEN KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 January 20, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600108
Core and Shell Composite Structural Member
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599187
ARTICLE WITH ADAPTIVE VENTILATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600879
COATED LENS AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589556
PULTRUDED FIBRE-REINFORCED STRIP FOR A REINFORCED STRUCTURE, SUCH AS A SPAR CAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589576
Laminated Glazing and Process
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
61%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+22.4%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 924 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month