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 05/15/2026.
Claims 1-5 and 7-18 are currently pending. Claims 1, 7, 10-11, 13, and 17-18 have been examined below. Claims 2-5, 8-9, 12, and 14-16 are withdrawn and were not examined as they are directed to the non-elected group of the application. Claims 6 and 19 are cancelled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/11/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
In lines 19-20 of claim 1, “wherein each junction part extends around the longitudinal profile from the first free end to the second free end” is brought to applicant’s attention. Note that this amended limitation is not described in the specification, thus examiner relies on the definitions and the teachings of applicant’s figures. Note that ‘around’ is described as -- In close to all sides from all directions-- or -- In a circle or with a circular motion-- which the junction parts 261 of applicant does not clearly show (i.e., it does not revolve on a circle). However, examiner is interpreting this limitation such that the junction parts are extending from one free end to another free end as it constitutes to the limitation ‘extends around’ per claim 1. Therefore, the scope of the claim is clear and no new matter is present.
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, 7, 10-11, 13, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graf et al. (US 20090214831) (hereinafter “Graf”) in view of Reineke (US 7467495).
Claim 1
(Graf discloses) A bendable seal (figure 2) for a motor vehicle (Graf discloses sealing assembly for motor vehicles; abstract), comprising a longitudinal profile (30) configured to be positioned on a support of the motor vehicle, and an element (the sealing body ‘[formed] about or upon the carrier’ discussed in par. 33) made of elastomer material (par. 33),
the longitudinal profile having an open cross-section (figure 2) and comprising a bottom (32) and two lateral longitudinal branches (34 and 36) which respectively extend from the bottom to a first free end (37) and a second free end (38) on either side thereof, such that the first and the second free ends are respectively located furthest from the bottom than any other portion of the two lateral longitudinal branches (figure 2), the bottom and the two branches together form a clamp (see clamp shape of 30 in figure 2) and delimit a longitudinal cavity having an opening opposite of the bottom (the U-shape in figure 2 has a cavity and an opening opposite the bottom 32),
wherein the longitudinal profile is made of rigid thermoplastic material (pars. 25-27) and comprises, over at least part of a length of the longitudinal profile, a bendable portion (bendable portion at one of the corrugations) with a corrugated structure (Excerpt 1 from par. 17 below),
wherein the corrugated-structure comprises a continuous succession of corrugations, without material discontinuity (figure 2), the corrugations being made up of a continuous alternation of bridges and junction parts (Partial Annotated figure 2 below), each bridge having a back and two legs extending from the back into the longitudinal cavity (Partial Annotated figure 2 below), a concavity of each bridge being oriented towards an inner face of the longitudinal profile (the concave shape of the bridge is shown to be oriented to an inner face 46 of the longitudinal profile), and each junction part joining an inner end of a leg of one of the bridges to an inner end of a leg of a neighboring bridge (Partial Annotated figure 2 below), wherein each junction part extends around the longitudinal profile from the first free end to the second free end (Partial Annotated figure 2 below),
wherein the corrugated-structure extends along the bottom and the two lateral longitudinal branches (figure 2),
wherein the corrugations comprise parallel grooves which are oriented in parallel planes (Partial Annotated figure 2 (II) below).
Graf does disclose the element made of elastomer material [i.e., a sealing body formed about the longitudinal profile (par. 33)], but is silent regarding:
(i) the element made of elastomer material, selected from a longitudinal sealing lip and a support pad;
(ii) the element made of elastomer material projecting from the longitudinal profile towards an inside of the longitudinal cavity;
(iii) wherein the element made of elastomer material is coextruded onto the longitudinal profile.
However, Reineke teaches:
(i) A bendable seal (figures 1-2) for a motor vehicle (abstract), comprising a longitudinal profile (1 and 2), and an element (3 or 4), selected from a longitudinal sealing lip (4; Reineke figure 2) and a support pad (3);
(ii) the element projecting from the longitudinal profile towards an inside of a longitudinal cavity (seal lip 4 projects towards an inside of the cavity defined by the U-shaped retainer; Reineke figure 2);
(iii) wherein the element is coextruded onto the longitudinal profile (Excerpt 2 from col. 4 below).
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 element made of elastomer material of Graf with the longitudinal sealing lip of Reineke and to coextrude the element made of elastomer material onto the longitudinal profile as taught by the manufacturing procedure of Reineke for improving the sealing of the bendable seal. The coextrusion of the element made of elastomer material onto the longitudinal profile leads to reduction of assembly time and produces a seamless unibody product which prevents water from seeping through open spaces.
PNG
media_image1.png
626
601
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Partial Annotated figure 2
PNG
media_image2.png
763
885
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Partial Annotated figure 2 (II)
PNG
media_image3.png
125
472
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 1
PNG
media_image4.png
108
492
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 2
Claim 7
(Graf, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1.
Modified Graf fails to disclose wherein the longitudinal profile comprises a longitudinal damping tube made of elastomer material which projects outwards from the bottom or from one of the two lateral branches and wherein the longitudinal damping tube is coextruded on the longitudinal profile.
(However, Reineke teaches) wherein a longitudinal profile (1 and 2) comprises a longitudinal damping tube (5; Reineke figure 2) made of elastomer material (lines 21-24 of col. 2) which projects outwards from a bottom (the top part of the inverted U-shaped retainer of Reineke) or from one of a two lateral branches (the right side vertical portion of the inverted U-shaped retainer where hollow volume 5 is attached) and wherein the longitudinal damping tube is coextruded on the longitudinal profile (Excerpt 2 above).
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 longitudinal profile of modified Graf with the longitudinal damping tube of Reineke for further improving the sealing of the bendable seal and to also provide an interference fitting with the motor vehicle therefore improving the fit of the bendable seal.
Claim 10
(Graf, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein a depth of the corrugation at the first free end, the second free end, or both the first free end and the second free end, is equal to or greater than a depth of the same corrugation in the bottom of the longitudinal profile (figure 2).
Claim 11
(Graf, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1.
Modified Graf fails to disclose wherein a thickness of the thermoplastic material constituting the longitudinal profile is less in the two lateral branches than in the bottom and decreases towards the first free end and towards the second free end.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been no more than an obvious matter of engineering design choice, as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill to modify the thicknesses of the longitudinal profile at the first and second free ends relative to the thickness at the bottom such that the thickness decreases towards the first free end and towards the second free end for further optimizing the shape of the longitudinal profile and its relative fit to the motor vehicle. Furthermore, the reduction in thickness decreases material requirement which improves cost and reduces manufacturing time.
Claim 13
(Graf, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein an outer face of the back of the corrugations (Partial Annotated figure 2 (II) above), an inner face of the junction part of the corrugations, or both the outer face of the back of the corrugations and the inner face of the junction part of the corrugations, are flat (Partial Annotated figure 2 (II) above; note that this was interpreted as an ‘or’ clause therefore only one of the options are required to be taught by the prior art).
Claim 17
(Graf, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the parallel planes of the parallel grooves of the corrugations are oriented perpendicularly or substantially perpendicularly to a longitudinal axis (Partial Annotated figure 2 (II) above) of said longitudinal profile.
Claim 18
(Graf, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the bendable seal is configured to be positioned on a rebate of the motor vehicle (intended use; the modified bendable seal of modified Graf can be positioned on a rebate of a motor vehicle).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments directed to the drawing objection has been considered and the objection was withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments directed to the claim objections have been considered and the objections were withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 05/15/2026 have been fully considered but they 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 argues “The "coextruded" limitation here is precisely such a term: it identifies a fusion-bonded, interdiffused interface that the overmolded structure of Baratin does not and cannot produce”, examiner notes that this process of coextrusion is known in the sealing assembly (see Reineke above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tooker et al. (US 11247546) (hereinafter “Tooker”) was cited as pertinent prior art as it teaches coextruding a sealing lip 28 with the sealing body 26a. As noted above, the process of coextrusion is known in the sealing assembly for vehicles and such process is not novel.
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