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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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)(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.
Claims 1-3, 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mateina (EP 730839A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mateina teaches a blind rivet 10, 12, 13 (see Abstract) comprising a sleeve section 10 which at a fastening end (lower end as shown in figure 1) of the sleeve section 10 is expandable with a pulling mandrel (figure 3b), a functional flange at 12b which is integrally configured with the sleeve section 10 (figure 3a) at a functional end (upper end as shown in figure 1) of the sleeve section 10 opposite to the fastening end (figure 3a) and which extends radially beyond the sleeve section (figure 3a), and a connecting head 17, 11 which is molded to the functional flange 12b (figure 2b) so that a connection between the blind rivet and an add-on part 10 can be established (figure 4).
Regarding claim 2, the functional flange at 12b of which is formed disc-like and thereby forms an axial undercut at 12a in a longitudinal direction of the sleeve section (figure 2b).
Regarding claim 3, the functional flange at 12b of which is configured-mushroom-shaped (figure 2b) in an axial direction of the sleeve section and tapers in the direction of the fastening end of the sleeve section (taper to 12a).
Regarding claim 6, the connecting head at 17, 11 of which is configured similar to a double cone with a fastening cone (below 12a) and a connecting cone (above 12a) connected via a tapered neck portion (12a; figure 2b).
Regarding claim 8, the functional flange (functional flange can comprise all of element 12) of which includes at least one step at 26 in an axial direction (figure 2b), which provides a retention surface, in the direction of the fastening end of the sleeve section (figure 3a).
Regarding claim 9, Mateina teaches a component at 20-22 (figure 4), with a component aperture in which the blind rivet according claim 1 (as described above) is arranged (figure 4).
Regarding claim 10, an add-on part 21, 22is arranged at the connecting head 12b of the blind rivet (figure 4).
Claims 1-5, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saltenberger (U.S. 2014/0314513).
Regarding claim 1, Saltenberger teaches a blind rivet 10 (see Abstract) comprising a sleeve section 19, 24 which at a fastening end (lower end as shown in figure 1) of the sleeve section 19, 24 is expandable with a pulling mandrel (figure 4), a functional flange at 17 which is integrally configured with the sleeve section 19, 24 (figure 2) at a functional end (upper end as shown in figure 1) of the sleeve section 19, 24 opposite to the fastening end (figure 1) and which extends radially beyond the sleeve section (figure 1), and a connecting head 20, 22, 23 which is molded to the functional flange 17 (figure 2) so that a connection between the blind rivet 10 and an add-on part 42, 43 can be established (figure 4).
Regarding claim 2, the functional flange at 17 of which is formed disc-like and thereby forms an axial undercut at 18 in a longitudinal direction of the sleeve section (figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, the functional flange at 17 of which is configured-mushroom-shaped (figure 1) in an axial direction of the sleeve section and tapers in the direction of the fastening end of the sleeve section (flange 17 tapers as it extends radially outwardly and axially downwardly).
Regarding claim 4, the disc-like functional flange at 17 of which is completely surrounded circumferentially by the connecting head 20, 22, 23, which comprises a plastic material (paragraph [0034]).
Regarding claim 5, the connecting head 20, 22, 23 of which has a fastening side (lower end as shown in figure 1) which faces towards the fastening end of the sleeve section 19, 24 and from which at least one embossing or sealing rip projects (outer surface of 20), which is configured circumferentially around the sleeve section (around portion 24 of sleeve section; figure 1) and axially projects beyond the functional flange 17 (figure 2).
Regarding claim 9, Saltenberger teaches a component at 42, 43, with a component aperture in which the blind rivet according claim 1 is arranged (figure 4).
Regarding claim 10, an add-on part 42 is arranged at the connecting head of the blind rivet (figure 4).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mateina (EP 730839A1) in view of Saltenberger (U.S. 2014/0314513).
Regarding claim 4, Mateina discloses the claimed invention except for the functional flange comprising plastic material. Saltenberger teaches that it is known to form a functional flange of plastic material (see paragraph [0034]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the blind rivet of Mateina with the functional flange being made of plastic material, as taught by Saltenberger, in order to use a well known, durable and flexible material, and since it has been held to be 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. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Further regarding claim 4, the disc-like functional flange at 12b of which is completely surrounded circumferentially by the connecting head at 17.
Regarding claim 5, the connecting head 17, 11 of which has a fastening side (lower end as shown in figure 1) which faces towards the fastening end of the sleeve section 10 and from which at least one embossing or sealing rip projects 11, which is configured circumferentially around the sleeve section (figure 3a) and axially projects beyond the functional flange 12b (figure 3a).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mateina (EP 730839A1) in view of Thorpe (U.S. 3,477,336).
Regarding claim 7, Mateina discloses the claimed invention except for the ball-like coupling head. Thorpe teaches that it is known to form a connecting cone with a ball-like coupling head (see element 14). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the blind rivet of Mateina with the connecting cone having a ball-like coupling head, as taught by Thorpe, in order to snugly fit within a rounded recess.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art is cited for the sleeve functional flange.
THIS ACTION IS NON-FINAL.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIKI MARINA ELOSHWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4538. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7: 00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
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, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
/NIKI M ELOSHWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights