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.
Claims 5-7 are 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the badge arrangement of claim 1" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 does not recite a badge arrangement.
Claim 6 recites the limitation " The badge arrangement of claim 1" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 does not recite a badge arrangement.
Claim 7 recite the limitations " The badge arrangement of claim 1" in line 1 and “the argent color layer aperture” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim. Claim 1 does not recite a badge arrangement or an argent color layer.
As best understood, the following rejections apply.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Demontoux et al (EP 3842692 A1, Demontoux).
Regarding claim 1, Demontoux discloses a vehicle panel arrangement (Figs. 1-3, Para. 0011) comprising: a body (fig. 3, Para. 0038) having a light receiving surface side (Fig. 2, Para 0028) and a viewing side(Fig. 2, Para 0028); a color layer (Fig. 3, Para.0059)connected to the light receiving(14) surface side of the body(12); a masking layer (fig. 3, Para 0059) (fig. 3 Para. 0034)connected to portion of the color layer; a plurality of micro-apertures (Fig. 3, Para 0060) extending through the color layer (34) and the masking layer(36).
Demontoux discloses the limitations of claim 1. Demonteaux also discloses a light source (20,Fig. 1, Para. 0028) for selectively projecting light; wherein the masking layer blocks the light transmitting through the masking layer; wherein light from the light source passes through the plurality of micro-apertures(“This further improves the contrast between the regions of the inner surface 16 of the translucent member 12 covered by the mask 18 through which there is no light transmission, and the regions of the inner surface 16 of the. 'translucent element 12 which are not covered by mask 18 through which light from light source 20 is transmitted through translucent element 12”).; wherein the light receiving surface side of the body receives light from the light source transmitted through the plurality of micro-apertures and the body is transparent and allows the light from the light source transmitted through the plurality of micro- apertures to pass through the body.( “Mask 18 defines a plurality of through openings 38. Through openings 38 are regions of the inner surface 16 of translucent member 12 which are not covered by mask 18 and where light from light source 20 passes through it. 'translucent element 12.”)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-26 are allowed.
Claims 3-4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 5-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 3-4, the prior art cited of record does not anticipate individually the range of micro-apertures of claims 3-4)
Regarding the subject matter of claims 8-26, Regarding claim 8, the closest prior art cited of record, Demontoux, does not anticipate individually or teach in combination the badge arrangement comprising a light transmissible metalized film layer connected to body and to the masking layer, or, combining a metallized film layer which is light transmissible to an argent color layer having micro-apertures. Regarding method claims 19 and 23, the same reasons for allowable subject matter as cited above, apply.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Applicant’s request to withdraw the Restriction sent on 4/2/2026, the Restriction has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kerzabi (FR 3031165) discloses an optical device for efficiently lighting in front of a semi-transparent micro-hole image (fig.3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANABEL TON whose telephone number is (571)272-2382. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00pm -6:00pm (EST).
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at (571)270-5046. 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.
/ANABEL TON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights