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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-19 in the reply filed on 07/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 20 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/15/2026.
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.
Claims 1, 7-9, 14, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hall et al. (US 12,163,549 B2).
Claim 1: Hall et al. discloses retainer arrangement (as depicted in Figures 2-5) [for retaining and guiding a fastener to an object] including a body (24 of Figure 2) having an opening (opening formed between 42a,44a), a cylindrical cavity (46), and a pair of projections (42a,44a) defining attachment elements [for attaching to a mounting surface (the fastener 30 provides an outer surface which could be considered a mounting surface)]; said cylindrical cavity having an internal dome step (52) at a first end of the cylindrical cavity and a tapered entry (42a,44a are oriented such that the they a tapered entrance) at a second end of the cylindrical cavity, wherein the fastener is received in the cylindrical cavity (as depicted in Figures 4-5); and said opening being defined between the pair of projections (as depicted in Figures 2 and 5).
The limitations within brackets have been treated as the intended use of the retainer arrangement. Since the retainer arrangement of Hall et al. is capable of performing the identified intended use, the retainer arrangement of Hall et al. meets the limitations of the claim.
Claims 7 and 17: Hall et al. further discloses that the opening is adapted to flex the pair of projections upon receiving a force along an axis that is transverse to an axis of the cylindrical cavity (Col. 3, Lines 51-60).
Claims 8 and 18: Hall et al. further discloses that the tapered entry at the second end of the cylindrical cavity is adapted to allow entry of the fastener (Col. 3, Lines 51-60).
Claims 9 and 19: Hall et al. further discloses that the internal dome step is adapted to stop vertical movement of the fastener in a vertical direction relative to the tapered entry (Col. 4, Lines 3-18).
Claim 14: Hall et al. discloses A system for retaining and guiding a fastener to an object that includes a body (24 of Figure 2) having an opening (opening between 42,44a and opening in 52 of Figure 2), a cylindrical cavity (46 of Figure 2), and a pair of projections (42a,44a of Figure 2) defining attachment elements (attach 24 to screw 30) for attaching to a mounting surface (outer surface of 30); said cylindrical cavity having an internal dome step (52,52a of Figure 2) at a first end of the cylindrical cavity and a tapered entry (entry formed by tapered shape of 42a and 44a) at a second end of the cylindrical cavity, wherein the fastener (30 of Figure 2) is received in the cylindrical cavity (as depicted in Figures 4 and 5); and said opening being defined between the pair of projections (opening between 42a,44a are between those projections and the opening in 52 is defined between the projections).
Claims 1, and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by De Jong (US 6,709,182 B1).
Claims 1 and 14: De Jong discloses retainer arrangement (as depicted in Figure 1)[for retaining and guiding a fastener (5 of Figure 1) to an object (12 of Figure 5) including a body (10 of Figure 1) having an opening (15 of Figure 5), a cylindrical cavity (formed by tabs 16 of Figure 1), and a pair of projections (2 of Figure 1) defining attachment elements for attaching to a mounting surface (projections are referred to as mounting elements Col. 2, Lines 15-20 and Lines 34-46); said cylindrical cavity having an internal dome step (11 of Figure 5) at a first end of the cylindrical cavity and a tapered entry (provided by tapered portion of tabs 16) at a second end of the cylindrical cavity, wherein the fastener is received in the cylindrical cavity (as depicted in Figure 4); and said opening being defined between the pair of projections (as depicted in Figure 2, the opening is defined two extensions of one of the projections 2 of Figure 1).
Claim 10: De Jong further discloses that the cylindrical cavity is smooth and aligns the fastener with an axis of the object (as depicted in Figure 1).
Claim 11: De Jong further discloses that the dimensions of the pair of projections are adapted to attach to the mounting surface based on a type of the mounting surface or a position of the object (Col. 2, Lines 34-46).
Claim 12: De Jong further discloses that the pair of projections are adapted to snap fit to the mounting surface (Col. 2, Lines 34-46, the projections are designed to expand and hold the mounting surface this is considered a snap fit).
Claim 13: De Jong further discloses that the internal dome step at the first end of the cylindrical cavity is adapted to guide a torquing tool for interacting with the fastener received in the cylindrical cavity (Col. 2, Lines 41-46).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (US 12,163,549 B2).
Claim 2: Hall et al. further discloses that the opening is a V-shaped opening but fails to disclose that the opening is U-shaped.
However, it has long been held that merely changing the shape of feature known in the art requires only routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to change the shape of the opening from a V-shape to a U-shape since there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent. Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (US 12,163,549 B2) in view of Mudel et al. (US 7,946,781).
Claim 5: Hall et al. fails to disclose that the body is composed of a thermoplastic composition.
However, Mudel et al. teaches that it is known in the art to form retainer arrangements (see Figures 3-4) from a thermoplastic material (Col. 1, Lines 24-39 and Col. 3, Lines 13-29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute a thermoplastic for the material of Hall et al. because it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known prior art element for another to achieve predictable results (MPEP 2143(B)).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Jong (US 6,709,182 B1) in view of Moran et al. (US 4,500,240).
Claim 6: De Jong fails to disclose that the body is composed of a spring steel composition or elastic material
However, Moran et al. teaches that it is known in the art to form retainer arrangements (40 of Figure 1) from a spring steel (Col. 4, Lines 47-58).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute a spring steel for the material of De Jong because it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known prior art element for another to achieve predictable results (MPEP 2143(B)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 and 15-16 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Neither Hall et al. nor De Jong disclose that the mounting surface includes notches that correspond with notches in the retainer arrangement.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0198929 A1 discloses a retainer 1100 for guiding a screw 1200 that includes two projections for attaching the retainer to a mounting surface 1500. US 2026/0160285 A1 is a CIP of 2024/0198929 A1 and further includes a internal dome step formed by the tabs 70 at the top of the retainer 1100. US 9,702,386 B2 discloses a screw retainer 10 that includes notches 28 that interact with notches 48 of a mounting surface to hold the retainer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON L VAUGHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5704. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Sunil Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/JASON L VAUGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights