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 02/27/2026.
Claims 1-19 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claims 1, 6-7, 10-11, 13, and 17-18 have been examined below. Claims 2-5, 8-9, 12, 14-16, and 19 are withdrawn and were not examined as they are directed to the non-elected group of the application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figure 1 is objected because figure 3, which is the view taken along P3, seems that it needs to be corrected. Figure 3 shows the depth H (or height) of each corrugated section which would not be shown if the cross section is taken from the top view as indicated in the current P3 of figure 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
378
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 Objections
Claims 10-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 2-3 of claim 10, “a free end of one of the two lateral branches or of both lateral branches” seems that it should be corrected with respect to the ‘first free end’ or ‘second free end’ introduced in claim 1.
In line 3 of claim 11, “a free end of the branches” seems that it should be corrected with respect to the ‘first free end’ or ‘second free end’ introduced in claim 1. Also, “the branches” should recite --the two lateral branches--.
Appropriate correction is required. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above.
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, 6-7, 10-11, 13, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey (US 2102936) in view of Baratin et al. (US 8769877) (hereinafter “Baratin”).
Claim 1
(Bailey discloses) A bendable seal (figures 1-3) for a motor vehicle (lines 1-6 of page 1 discloses Bailey’s invention is directed to automobiles), comprising a longitudinal profile (longitudinal profile of the invention in at least figures 1-2) configured to be positioned on a support of the motor vehicle (lines 1-6 of page 1), and an element (Annotated figure 1 below), selected from a longitudinal sealing lip and a support pad (Annotated figure 1 below),
the longitudinal profile having an open cross-section (figure 1) and comprising a bottom and two lateral longitudinal branches (both shown in Annotated figure 1 below) which respectively extend from the bottom to a first free end and a second free on either side thereof (Annotated figure 1 below), 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 (Annotated figure 1 below), the bottom and the two branches together form a clamp and delimit a longitudinal cavity (Annotated figure 1 below), having an opening opposite of the bottom (Annotated figure 1 below),
the element projecting from the longitudinal profile towards an inside of the longitudinal cavity (Annotated figure 1 below),
wherein the longitudinal profile comprises, over at least part of a length of the longitudinal profile, a bendable portion (see at least figure 3) with a corrugated structure (figures 1-2; Excerpt 1 from page 1 below),
wherein the corrugated-structure comprises a continuous succession of corrugations (figure 2), without material discontinuity (figure 2), the corrugations being made up of a continuous alternation of bridges and junction parts (both shown in Annotated figure 2 below), each bridge having a back and two legs extending from the back into the longitudinal cavity (Annotated figure 2 below), a concavity of each bridge being oriented towards an inner face of the longitudinal profile (Annotated figure 2 below), 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 (Annotated figure 2 below), wherein each junction part extends around the longitudinal profile from the first free end to the second free end (see each junction part extending from the first free end to the second free end),
wherein the corrugated-structure extends along the bottom and the two lateral longitudinal branches (Annotated figure 2 below),
and wherein the corrugations comprise parallel grooves which are oriented in parallel planes (Annotated figure 2 (II) below).
Bailey fails to disclose:
(i) the element made of elastomer material;
(ii) the longitudinal profile is made of rigid thermoplastic material.
However, Baratin teaches:
(i) an element (7; Baratin figure 1) made of elastomer material (lines 35-44 of col. 6);
(ii) a longitudinal profile (3) is made of rigid thermoplastic material (lines 26-33 of col. 6).
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 of Bailey such that it is made of elastomer material as taught by Baratin and provide the longitudinal profile such that it is made of rigid thermoplastic material as taught by Baratin, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the softer element can safely provide cushion without scratching or damaging the glass or the surface it is contacting with. Also, making the longitudinal profile from rigid thermoplastic material benefits from its rigidity and structural integrity without the inherent disadvantages of using metal or metallic materials such as cost inefficiency, weight and corrosion.
PNG
media_image2.png
486
618
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 1
PNG
media_image3.png
381
487
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 2
PNG
media_image4.png
356
514
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 2 (II)
PNG
media_image5.png
276
579
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 1
Claim 6
(Bailey, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the element made of elastomer material is coextruded onto the longitudinal profile (this was interpreted as product-by-process limitation; see MPEP 2113 (I)).
Claim 7
(Bailey, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1.
Modified Bailey 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, Baratin teaches) wherein a longitudinal profile (profile of 1; Baratin figure 1) comprises a longitudinal damping tube (9) made of elastomer material (lines 35-44 of col. 6) which projects outwards from a bottom or from one of a two lateral branches (vertical branch of 3) and wherein the longitudinal damping tube is coextruded on the longitudinal profile (Baratin figure 1).
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 sealing of modified Bailey with the damping tube of Baratin, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing exterior sealing to modified Bailey and to enhance the contact of the bendable seal creating an improved and more tighter seal.
Claim 10
(Bailey, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein a depth of the corrugation at a free end of one of the two lateral branches or of both lateral branches is equal to or greater than a depth of the same corrugation in the bottom of the longitudinal profile (Annotated figure 2 (II) above shows what is the interpreted depth and figure 2 shows equal depth at the respective free ends and with the depth at the bottom).
Claim 11
(Bailey, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, 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 a free end of the branches (Excerpt 1 above discusses that the longitudinal profile is pressed together to an increasing extent from the bottom to the edges of the sides such that they taper; the tapering of the sides teaches the decreased thickness of towards the free ends of the branches).
Claim 13
(Bailey, as modified above, discloses) The bendable seal for the motor vehicle according to claim 1, wherein an outer face of the back and/or an inner face of the junction part of the corrugations is flat (figure 2).
Claim 17
(Bailey, 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 the a longitudinal axis of said longitudinal profile (Annotated figure 2 (II) above).
Claim 18
(Bailey, 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 configuration of the seal of modified Bailey can be positioned on a rebate of the motor vehicle).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments directed to the election/restriction and claim objections have been considered.
Applicant's arguments filed on 02/27/2026 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.
Conclusion
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 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