DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 06/03/2026.
Claims 1-5, 9-19, 25, 28, 31-33, and 38-40 are currently pending. Claims 1-5, 9-16, 18-19, and 38-40 have been examined below and claims 17, 25, 28, and 31-33 were withdrawn. Claims 6-8, 20-24, 26-27, 29-30, and 34-37 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5, 9-16, 18-19, and 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 38
Recitations such as “a resin and a susceptor configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin, which in turn softens said molded component to weld said resin to said molded component, and softens said seal body to weld said resin to said seal body” on lines 12-15 discloses new matter. Emphasizing the bolded limitations, the original disclosure does not support softening of both the molded component and the seal body.
Applicant’s specification only discloses softening of resin (see support on pars. 5, 6, 20, 26, and 29), none of these paragraphs disclosed that the molded component and the seal body are also softened upon the energizing of the resin and susceptor which would chemically change the composition of both the molded component and the seal body.
Applicant’s recitation of ‘weld’ is also rejected as new matter as the original disclosure only discloses “The process of energizing the susceptor 30 and softening the resin 28 to mount the seal body 12 to the molded component 24 may be referred to as electromagnetic welding” (par. 29), and the traditional ‘weld’ as applicant recited and electromagnetic welding are not the same processes. Two common types of welding (arc welding and gas welding) includes melting of the welding material to join two separate parts together (see attached image below). However, applicant’s electromagnetic welding clearly states that “It is to be appreciated that the resin 28 need only soften and need not melt, although it is contemplated that the resin 28 may melt. The resin 28 may approach, but not reach, a melting point of the resin 28. However, it is further to be appreciated that the resin 28 may not even be capable of melting” (par. 30).
With the evidence provided above, examiner notes that the limitations on lines 12-15 are rejected for disclosing new matter.
Note that this new matter issue is also present in claim 38.
PNG
media_image1.png
166
964
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Source: https://www.neit.edu/blog/types-of-welding-processes
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.
Claims 1-3, 9-12, 14-16, 19, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaye et al. (US 6409251) (hereinafter “Kaye”) in view of Haq et al. (US 20160284449) (hereinafter “Haq”).
Claim 1
(Kaye discloses) A seal assembly (figure 4) adapted to be coupled to a flange (16) of a vehicle (figure 1), said seal assembly comprising:
a seal body (36) extruded from an elastomeric material (lines 27-29 of col. 5) and having a base, a first leg extending from said base, and a second leg extending from said base spaced from said first leg (the base, first leg, and second leg all shown in Annotated figure 4 below), with said base, said first leg, and said second leg collectively defining a mounting channel (62) for receiving the flange of the vehicle (figure 4);
at least one seal feature (44) co-extruded with said seal body with said seal feature extending from said seal body and spaced from said mounting channel (figure 4);
a molded component (40) coupled to said seal body and molded from a thermoplastic material (lines 18-20 of col. 6); and
an adhesive (150) disposed between said seal body and said molded component (figure 4); and
wherein said molded component is directly mounted to said seal body only through said adhesive without additional mechanical fastening between said molded component and said seal body (see figure 4 showing the molded component 40 directly mounted to the seal body 36 only through the adhesive without additional mechanical fastening between said molded component and said seal body; note that the fastening of 160 within 156 is between the molded component and door panel 74 and not between the molded component and seal body).
Kaye fails to disclose an electromagnetic adhesive disposed between said seal body and said molded component, with said electromagnetic adhesive comprised of a resin and a susceptor configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin, which in turn softens said molded component to weld said resin to said molded component, and softens said seal body to weld said resin to said seal body thereby directly mounting said molded component to said seal body.
(However, Haq teaches) an electromagnetic adhesive (10; Haq figure 1), with said electromagnetic adhesive comprised of a resin (12) and a susceptor (14) configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin (Excerpt 1 from par. 48 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the adhesive of Kaye with the electromagnetic adhesive of Haq to effectively join two substrates together regardless of their chemical composition. Furthermore, the susceptors can serve as a composite reinforcement to improve the mechanical properties of the electromagnetic adhesive.
(Kaye, as modified above, teaches) the electromagnetic adhesive disposed between said seal body and said molded component, with said electromagnetic adhesive comprised of a resin and a susceptor (taught in the combination above) configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin, which in turn softens said molded component to weld said resin to said molded component, and softens said seal body to weld said resin to said seal body thereby directly mounting said molded component to said seal body (due to the new matter issues above, this was interpreted by the examiner as energizing the electromagnetic adhesive adheres the seal body and the molded component together).
PNG
media_image2.png
623
692
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 4
PNG
media_image3.png
167
469
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 1
Claim 2
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein at least one of said base and said first leg has an outer surface (Annotated figure 4 above) spaced from said mounting channel and said seal feature, and wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is disposed on said outer surface (Annotated figure 4 above).
Claim 3
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 2, wherein said molded component abuts at least one of said base and said first leg in addition to being directly mounted to said seal body by said electromagnetic adhesive (Annotated figure 4 above).
Claim 9
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein said susceptor is further defined as a plurality of susceptor particles (14A and 14B; Haq figure 1) impregnated in said resin.
Claim 10
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein said susceptor comprise a ferromagnetic material (Excerpt 2 from par. 51 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
108
482
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 2
Claim 11
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 10, wherein said ferromagnetic material comprises at least one chosen from iron, nickel, and magnetite (Excerpt 3 from par. 51 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
82
470
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 3
Claim 12
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein said seal body extends along an axis (Annotated figure 4 above), and wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is applied to said seal body continuously along said axis (Annotated figure 4 above).
Claim 14
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein said molded component is molded separate from said seal body (figure 4).
Claim 15
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein said molded component is a decorative cover (lines 61-64 of col. 4) having a first cover portion extending parallel to said first leg of said seal body (Annotated figure 4 above) and a second cover portion extending at an angle from said first cover portion (Annotated figure 4 above).
Claim 16
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 15, wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is disposed between said first cover portion and said first leg (Annotated figure 4 above).
Claim 19
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1, wherein said seal body further includes an embedded reinforcing member (60; figure 4) for reinforcing said mounting channel (figure 4).
Claim 38
(Kaye discloses) A seal assembly (figure 4) adapted to be coupled to a flange (16) of a vehicle (figure 1), said seal assembly comprising:
a seal body (36) extruded from an elastomeric material (lines 27-29 of col. 5) and having a base, a first leg extending from said base, and a second leg extending from said base spaced from said first leg (the base, first leg, and second leg all shown in Annotated figure 4 above), with said base, said first leg, and said second leg collectively defining a mounting channel (62) for receiving the flange of the vehicle (figure 4);
at least one seal feature (44) co-extruded with said seal body with said seal feature extending from said seal body and spaced from said mounting channel (figure 4);
a molded component (40) coupled to said seal body and molded from a thermoplastic material (lines 18-20 of col. 6); and
an adhesive (150) disposed between said seal body and said molded component (figure 4); and
wherein said molded component is directly mounted to said seal body through said adhesive (figure 4).
Kaye does disclose the seal body made of Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM), but silent regarding:
(i) the seal body at least partially comprising polypropylene;
(ii) the molded component at least partially comprising polypropylene;
Kaye fails to disclose:
(iii) an electromagnetic adhesive disposed between said seal body and said molded component, with said electromagnetic adhesive comprised of a resin and a susceptor, with said resin at least partially comprising polypropylene, and said adhesive configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin, which in turn softens said molded component to weld said resin to said molded component, and softens said seal body to weld said resin to said seal body thereby directly mounting said molded component to said seal body.
(i and ii) However, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice, therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to comprise the seal body and the molded component with polypropylene for the added benefit of the plastic-based polypropylene such as structural integrity and durability therefore they would last longer and block minor scratches.
(However, Haq teaches) an electromagnetic adhesive (10; Haq figure 1), with said electromagnetic adhesive comprised of a resin (12) and a susceptor (14), with said resin at least
partially comprising polypropylene (discussed in par. 49), and said adhesive configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin (Excerpt 1 from par. 48 above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the adhesive of Kaye with the electromagnetic adhesive of Haq to effectively join two substrates together regardless of their chemical composition. Furthermore, the susceptors can serve as a composite reinforcement to improve the mechanical properties of the electromagnetic adhesive.
(iii) the electromagnetic adhesive disposed between said seal body and said molded component, with said electromagnetic adhesive comprised of a resin and a susceptor, with said resin at least partially comprising polypropylene (taught in the combination above), and said adhesive configured to be energized upon exposure to electromagnetic energy such that said susceptor softens said resin, which in turn softens said molded component to weld said resin to said molded component, and softens said seal body to weld said resin to said seal body thereby directly mounting said molded component to said seal body (due to the new matter issues above, this was interpreted by the examiner as energizing the electromagnetic adhesive adheres the seal body and the molded component).
Claims 4-5 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaye in view of Haq, as applied to claims 1-3, 9-12, 14-16, 19, and 38 above, in further view of Clark et al. (US 9616734) (hereinafter “Clark”).
Claim 4
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 2.
Modified Kaye fails to disclose wherein said outer surface defines a notch, and wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is disposed in said notch.
(However, Clark teaches) an outer surface defines a notch (both shown in Annotated figure 18 below), and wherein an adhesive (986) is disposed in said notch (Clark figure 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the outer surface of modified Kaye with the notch similar to the teachings of Clark to keep the adhesive flush with respect to the outer surface such that the molded component does not protrude too far from the seal body when mounted.
PNG
media_image6.png
608
572
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 18
Claim 5
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 4, wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is shaped to conform to said notch when said molded component is mounted to said seal body (this is taught via the combination above; also see Annotated figure 18 above).
Claim 39
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 38, wherein at least one of said base and said first leg has an outer surface (Annotated figure 4 above) spaced from said mounting channel and said seal feature,
wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is disposed on said outer surface (Annotated figure 4 above).
Modified Kaye fails to disclose:
(i) wherein said outer surface defines a notch, and
(ii) wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is disposed in said notch.
(i and ii) (However, Clark teaches) an outer surface defines a notch (both shown in Annotated figure 18 above), and wherein an adhesive (986) is disposed in said notch (Clark figure 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the outer surface of modified Kaye with the notch such that the electromagnetic adhesive of modified Kaye is located at the notch similar to the placement of the adhesive of Clark to keep the adhesive flush with respect to the outer surface such that the molded component does not protrude too far from the seal body when mounted.
Claim 40
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 39, wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is shaped to conform to said notch when said molded component is mounted to said seal body (this is taught via the combination above).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaye in view of Haq, as applied to claims 1-3, 9-12, 14-16, 19, and 38 above, in further view of Goldberg et al. (US 6487819) (hereinafter “Goldberg”).
Claim 13
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 1.
Modified Kaye is silent regarding said electromagnetic adhesive is coextruded with said seal body.
(However, Goldberg teaches) a magnetic adhesive (636; Goldberg figure 6) is coextruded with a seal body (632; lines 7-10 of col. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electromagnetic adhesive of modified Kaye such that it is coextruded with said seal body as taught by Goldberg for a cheaper and faster manufacturing by not requiring a fastening or adhering element to attach the electromagnetic adhesive to the seal body and for improved attachability of the electromagnetic adhesive to the seal body by being extruded.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaye in view of Haq, as applied to claims 1-3, 9-12, 14-16, 19, and 38 above, in further view of Pasqualini (FR 2545145).
Claim 18
(Kaye, as modified above, discloses) The seal assembly of claim 15.
Modified Kaye fails to disclose wherein said electromagnetic adhesive is disposed between said second cover portion and said base.
(However Pasqualini teaches) a cover (8; Pasqualini figure 2) having a first cover portion extending parallel to a first leg (the first cover portion and first leg shown in Annotated figure 2 below) of a seal body (4) and a second cover portion extending at an angle from said first cover portion (Annotated figure 2 below),
wherein an adhesive (7) is disposed between said second cover portion and a base (Annotated figure 2 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electromagnetic adhesive of modified Kaye such that it is disposed between the second cover portion and base as taught by Pasqualini for significantly adding more surface area of adhesion between the seal body and molded component thus significantly reducing the chances of the molded component from detaching from the seal body.
PNG
media_image7.png
464
571
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 2
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments were directed to the amendments in the independent claims 1 and 38.
Regarding “Specifically, claim 1 has been amended to clarify that the softening of the resin of the adhesive in turn softens the molded component to weld the resin to the molded component. Similarly, claim 1 has been amended to clarify that the softening of the resin of the adhesive in turn softens the seal body to weld the resin to the seal body”, this was found unpersuasive as, although there is support for the softening of the resin, the original disclosure does not have support for the following recitations (i) ‘softens the molded component’ and (ii) ‘softens the seal body’ therefore new matter issues were discussed in the rejection above.
Applicant was also noted regarding the recitation of ‘weld’ in the amendments (see above). Due to these issues, the amendments do not place the application in condition for allowance. Furthermore, regarding to claim 38, the amendments for requiring the seal body, molded component, and adhesive to at least partially comprise polypropylene also does not place the application in condition for allowance as this feature is not critical to the invention - i.e., applicant’s specification discloses all three parts to be formed by other materials (see par. 41).
Lastly, examiner notes that the limitation “wherein said molded component is directly mounted to said seal body only through said electromagnetic adhesive without additional mechanical fastening between said molded component and said seal body” in claim 1 simply requires no additional mechanical fastening between the seal body and the molded component. In reference to figure 4 of Kaye, the mechanical fastening of part 160 through the opening 156 is between the molded component and the door panel 74, and not between the molded component 40 and seal body 36. Therefore, the prior art meets the claim limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hatta et al. (US-20110143113) was cited as a pertinent prior art as it teaches a seal assembly with a seal body 12 and a molded component 13 directly mounted together with only an adhesive 18 and no mechanical fastenings in between (see Hatta figure 6).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights