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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The recitation “the application material layer remains intact” in lines 8-9 is not clear. It is not clear what is meant by remaining intact.
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) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DeGrote et al. (US 2020/0164795 A1) (“DeGrote”).
With respect to claim 20, DeGrote discloses a decorative element for a motor vehicle (abstr., 0006), the element comprising a decoration blank – corresponding to the decorative layer - that includes a visible side and a blank adhesive side – the backing is attached using an adhesive (0006, 0098), an application material layer that includes an adhesive side and a lamination side – a backing - adhered to the decoration blank (0007, 0098, e.g. Fig. 7), an adhesive layer coupled to the blank adhesive side of the decoration blank and the adhesive side of the application material layer (0098), a functional opening defined in the decoration blank such that the application material layer remains as is (0007, 0099), the functional opening including a filler material which is a light transmissive resin material (0101), which has been interpreted as corresponding to “at least partially translucent” limitation. The Examiner notes the recitation “the application material layer remains intact” in lines 8-9 does not provide further structural limitation with respect to the application material layer.
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(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeGrote, in view of Heffelbower (US 2013/0341817 A1).
DeGrote teaches the element of claim 21. DeGrote discloses the functional opening comprises a first functional opening that is light transmissive (0101), which has been interpreted as corresponding to the “at least partially translucent” limitation of the claim. The first functional opening is in communication with a light source (0099). DeGrote is silent with respect to a second functional opening that is light-impermeable and acoustic wave permeable. Heffelbower discloses a decorative trim element for a vehicle (0003, 0005), comprising a decoration blank – element 15, an application material layer – element 13, that adheres to the decoration blank through an adhesive – foam layer 35 (0016, 0020, Fig. 5), wherein the element comprises a functional opening – element 16 – which is light-impermeable – element 16 is filled with foam, the foam further being present in area 30, thus, element 16 has been interpreted as being light-impermeable (0020, Fig. 2). Regarding the second functional opening being acoustic wave permeable, since one end of the opening 16 contacts foam (Fig. 3), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that it is acoustic wave permeable (0020, 0021, Figs. 2 and 3). Regarding the second functional opening being in communication with a loudspeaker, the Examiner notes the loudspeaker is not an element of the decorative element. Since the decorative element of Heffelbower is to be used for vehicle interior trim panels, door panels and/or instrument panels (0003, 0005), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the decorative element of Heffelbower to be in communication with a loudspeaker.
It has been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the decorative element of DeGrote comprising a second functional opening which is light-impermeable, acoustic wave permeable, and in communication with a loudspeaker since it is known in the art of decorative trim elements to include in them functional openings that are light-impermeable, the element of DeGrote suitable for a trim panel or instrument panel (abstr.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on June 22, 2026 have been fully considered.
The Applicant argued DeGrote does not appear to provide an adhesive layer between a decoration blank and an application material. The Examiner notes DeGrote discloses an adhesive layer between the decoration blank and the application material in par. [0098]. The Applicant argued DeGrote is silent as to a functional opening that is defined such that an application material layer remains intact. The Examiner notes the claim recites “a functional opening defined in the decoration blank such that the application material layer remains intact.” The recitation “the application material layer remains intact” does not provide further structural limitation with respect to the application material layer.
The Applicant argued DeGrote and Heffelbower are silent with respect to a second functional opening that is light-impermeable and acoustic wave permeable, the second functional opening in communication with a loudspeaker. The Examiner notes it is Heffelbower that discloses an element comprising a functional opening – element 16 – which is light-impermeable – element 16 is filled with foam, the foam further being present in area 30, thus, element 16 has been interpreted as being light-impermeable (0020, Fig. 2). Regarding the second functional opening being acoustic wave permeable, in Heffelbower one end of the opening 16 contacts foam (Fig. 3), thus it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that it is acoustic wave permeable (0020, 0021, Figs. 2 and 3). Regarding the second functional opening being in communication with a loudspeaker, the Examiner notes the loudspeaker is not an element of the decorative element. Since the decorative element of Heffelbower is to be used for vehicle interior trim panels, door panels and/or instrument panels (0003, 0005), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the decorative element of Heffelbower to be in communication with a loudspeaker, as discussed above.
The Applicant argued a decorative element having a first and second functional openings is not known in the art. The Examiner notes it is a combination of DeGrote and Heffelbower that teaches a decorative element having both first and second functional openings, as discussed above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOANNA PLESZCZYNSKA whose telephone number is (571)270-1617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~ 11:30-8.
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, Maria Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/Joanna Pleszczynska/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights