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 .
Amendment filed 5/12/2026 has been entered with claims 1, 3-7 and 9-10 pending in the present application.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “where silencer” in Line 3 grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is required.
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 10 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.
Re. Cl. 10, the limitation “the mechanical bonding member comprises “stapler or sewing thread” renders the claim indefinite in the Examiner’s position. It is unclear if the Applicant is intending to claim a staple and a stitch of some sort of if somehow a stapler is located between the two layers to hold them together. It appears as if this may be a translation issue and it is requested that the language be clarified so that the claims can be properly interpreted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-4 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato WO 2014/038242 (hereinafter Sato) in view of Takata US 2018/0015689 (hereinafter Takata).
PNG
media_image1.png
436
597
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re. Cl. 1, Sato discloses: A floor wiring module (Fig. 1), comprising: a silencer (1, Fig. 1); a carpet (2, Fig. 1) stacked on one main surface of the silencer (see Fig. 1); and a wiring member (9, Fig. 1) sandwiched and held between the silencer and the carpet (see Fig. 1), wherein a stacked region where the silencer and the carpet are stacked includes a first region where the silencer and the carpet are thermally pressed and fixed to each other (see annotated figure 1) and a second region (see Fig. 1, where 90 are located between 1 and 2, represented by the dashed lines), adjacent to the first region on the one main surface (see Fig. 1), where the wiring member is located between the silencer and the carpet (see Fig. 1), wherein the stacked region includes a third region (see annotated figure 1), adjacent to the second region on the one main surface (see annotated figure 1), where the silencer and the carpet are fixed to each other via a mechanical bonding member (see annotated figure 1, via 4), , and in the first region, the silencer and the carpet is fixed to each other without the mechanical bonding member (see annotated figure 1, via 3).
Re. Cl. 3, Sato discloses: an area of the first region is larger than an area of the third region in the one main surface (see annotated figure 1).
Re. Cl. 4, Sato discloses: the first region is disposed in a region which a passenger steps on more likely than the second region and the third region in a floor of a vehicle (due to the larger area of the first region, a user is more likely to step on the first region than the third when employed in a vehicle).
Re. Cl. 9, Sato discloses: A method of manufacturing a floor wiring module (see Fig. 1), comprising: stacking a carpet (2, Fig. 1) on one main surface of a silencer (1, Fig. 1); thermally pressing and fixing a first region of a stacked region where silencer and the carpet are stacked (see annotated figure 1, via 3); and locating a wiring member between the silencer and the carpet in a second region of the stacked region where the silencer and the carpet are not fixed to each other (see Fig. 1, where 9 are located and represented by dashed lines); providing the stacked region with a third region (see annotated figure 1) that is adjacent the second region on the one main surface, fixing the silencer and the carpet to each other in the third region via a mechanical bonding member (see annotated figure 1, via 41, 42), and in the first region, fixing the silencer and the carpet to each other without the mechanical bonding member (see Fig. 1, via 3).
Re. Cls. 1 and 9-10, Sato does not disclose wherein the mechanical bonding member is a separate component from the silencer and the carpet (Cl. 1), providing the mechanical bonding member as a separate component from the silencer and the carpet (Cl. 9) or the mechanical bonding member comprises a tag-pin fastener, stapler, or sewing thread (Cl. 10). Takata discloses a flooring wiring module (Fig. 1) which includes various stacked layers (see Fig. 3a) that are secured together using a mechanical boding member which is a separate component from the stacked layers (tag pin, stapler, Paragraph 0039, Lines 14-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the mechanical boding members of Sato in the third region to be a separate component from the layers as disclosed by Takata with reasonable expectation of success since it has been held obvious to replace one known means with another to achieve a predictable result. KSR Int’l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. ___, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR)
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Takata as applied above, and in further view of Sonoda JP 2015/220800 (hereinafter Sonoda).
Re. Cls. 5-6, Sato does not disclose a wiring holding part fixing the wiring member to at least one of the silencer and/or the carpet is provided to the second region (Cl. 5) or the wiring holding part is a holding part that includes another mechanical bonding member or a bonding holding part having a fixing force that is smaller than a fixing force between the silencer and the carpet in the first region (Cl. 6). Sonoda discloses a floor wiring module (Fig. 1) which includes a wiring holding part (36, Fig. 1-2) fixing the wiring member to at least one of the silencer and/or the carpet is provided to the second region (see Fig. 2, region where 34 is stacked on 32 but spaced by 22); the wiring holding part is a holding part including a mechanical bonding member (see 36, Fig. 2, it mechanically bonds 22 and 30) or a bonding holding part having smaller fixing force than fixing force between the silencer and the carpet in the first region.
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 Sato device to include the wiring holding part of Sonoda with reasonable expectation of success since Sonoda states that such a modification fixes the electric wire module to the soundproof member (Paragraph 0029 and 0042 for example). Such a modification would prevent inadvertent shifting of the wiring, thus providing a more secure connection.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Naoki JP 2012-107869 (hereinafter Naoki).
Re. Cl. 7, Sato does not disclose the carpet includes a window part located in a region that is closer to a center than to an outer edge of the one main surface of the silencer, and the wiring member includes an end portion extending onto the carpet through the window part. Naoki discloses a vehicle flooring wiring module (Fig. 1) which includes an upper member or carpet (57, Fig. 8) including a window part (85, Fig. 8) located in a region that is closer to a center than to an outer edge of the one main surface of the silencer (see Fig. 8, along an interior of the device not at the outer edges), and the wiring member includes an end portion extending onto the carpet through the window part (see 63, Fig. 8).
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 Sato device to have the window as disclosed by Naoki with reasonable expectation of success to enable the user to route particular cables to particular parts of a vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-7 and 9-10 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sato US 2015/0321625, Nishimura US 2021/0024019, and Mizuno US 2021/0020331 discloses other known floor wiring modules which are presented to the Applicant for their consideration.
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 CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at (571)272-4797. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights