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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakada et al. (US 2023/0371708).
Regarding claim 1, Nakada et al. discloses an apparatus comprising:
a female member (108) configured to be fixed to the first cover material (102A); and
a male member (110) configured to be fixed to the second cover material (102B), wherein
the female member comprises: a main piece (114); an engagement portion (132) formed inside the main piece to be engageable with the male member (Fig. 2 as shown), and a projecting portion (130) that extends closer to a fixation position of the second cover material to the male member with respect to the engagement portion, a distal end of the projecting portion being configured to be in contact with the second cover material in an engaged state in which the male member is engaged with the engagement portion (Fig. 1 as shown),
the male member comprises a male member body (142, 162); and a tape member (140) attached to the male member body, and
in the engaged state, the main piece is located to cover at least the male member body as a whole from outside between a fixation position of the first cover material to the female member and the fixation position of the second cover material to the male member, and is exposed outside with respect to the first cover material and the second cover material between the fixation position of the first cover material to the female member and the fixation position of the second cover material to the male member (Fig. 1 as shown).
Regarding claim 2, Nakada et al. further discloses wherein
the main piece comprises: a fixation portion (112) configured to be fixed to the first cover material; and an extension (138, 124) extending continuously from the fixation portion (Fig. 2 as shown),
the extension has a housing space defined inside thereof, opposite a surface exposed outside, to house a part of the male member, and the engagement portion is formed in the housing space (Fig. 2 as shown).
Regarding claim 3, Nakada et al. further discloses wherein an outer surface of the extension is at least partially curved (Fig. 2 as shown).
Regarding claim 4, Nakada et al. further discloses wherein
the engagement portion comprises an engagement piece projecting from an inner side of the extension toward the housing space (Fig. 2 as shown), and the extension comprises a projecting portion (Fig. 2 as shown).
Regarding claim 5, Nakada et al. further discloses wherein
the engagement portion comprises an engagement piece projecting from an inner side of the extension toward the housing space (Fig. 2 as shown),
the male member comprises an engaged portion (Fig. 2 shows a portion between 162 and 142) configured to be engaged with a distal end of the engagement piece,
the fixation portion comprises a receiving portion (126) continuous with a portion opposite a continuous portion with the extension (Fig. 2 as shown), and
the receiving portion is configured to receive the male member in the engaged state at a side opposite the engaged portion (Fig. 2 as shown).
Regarding claim 7, Nakada et al. further discloses wherein
the male member body is long (Fig. 2 as shown) and flexible (Paragraph 21 describes synthetic resin which is considered flexible) and comprises an engaged portion (between 162 and 142) configured to be engaged with the engagement portion (Fig. 2 as shown), and
a thickness of the male member body, excluding the engaged portion, in a thickness direction orthogonal to a longitudinal direction of the male member body is smaller than a width of the male member body in a width direction orthogonal to the longitudinal direction and the thickness direction (Fig. 1 as shown).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakada et al. as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hallock et al. (US 2023/0031408).
Regarding claim 6, Nakada et al. further discloses wherein
the engagement portion comprises: an engagement piece projecting from an inner side of the extension (Fig. 2 as shown).
Nakada et al. fail to disclose and an engagement projection continuous with the fixation portion, the engagement projection being located at a position facing the engagement piece; the male member comprises a pair of engaged portions configured to be engaged with the engagement piece and the engagement projection.
Hallock et al. teach an engagement projection continuous with a fixation portion (Fig. 2 shows 35 with a barbed shape) and a male member with a pair of engaged portions (45 and opposed wall of 42)
From this teaching of Hallock et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to include an engagement projection on the interior of the fixation portion and the male member with structures to positively lock with the engagement piece and engagement projection to provide a positive lock between the male and female member to strengthen the junction between the members.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakada et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Iwamoto (WO 2004/031042).
Regarding claim 8, Nakada et al. discloses the invention except for wherein the female member is formed from a softer material than the male member.
Iwamoto teaches wherein a female member (52) is softer than a male member (51; See Page 8, Paragraph 8 and last two Paragraphs of Page 8 of the translation as provided).
From this teaching of Iwamoto, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to recognize having hybrid materials allows for easiest engagement of the male and female members such that having a relative rigid male member ensures entry of the male member in to the holding space of the of the softer female member.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 8 rely upon the allowability of claim 1 from which it depends. As such, the arguments are considered moot as claim 1 has been demonstrated above as not being allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Form 892.
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 MICHAEL S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5735. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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.
/M.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/SPE, Art Unit 3677