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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Applicant’s claims, filed on 09/30/2025.
Claims 13-20 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
a vehicle having a floor,
a lower opposing surface of mat is not indicated with a reference number in the drawings.
No new matter should be entered.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 12, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MacNeil et al. (US10,011,207), in the first interpretation.
Claim 12. MacNeil discloses: A grommet (132 cap, Fig. 3-6) for a vehicle floor mat (100 floor mat, Fig. 1), the grommet comprising:
a body (cylindrical structure of 314 sidewall, Fig. 4) having a wall (314 sidewall, Fig. 4) and a flange extending outwardly from said wall (318 flange, Fig. 3C), said wall having
an outer surface (316 outer surface, Fig. 4) and an inner surface (326 interior surface, Fig. 4), said inner surface defining a through bore with a closed top end (326 creates a bore up to the interior surface of 304 web wherein 304 creates a closed top end).
Claim 13. MacNeil discloses: The grommet of claim 12, wherein the flange has a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the wall of the body (diameter of 318 is greater than the diameter of 316, Fig. 4).
Claim 18. MacNeil discloses: The grommet of claim 12, wherein the wall includes a plurality of spaced blocks on an inner surface of the wall (330 bead sections, Fig. 3C), said blocks extending from a top edge or a bottom edge of the body to a point between said top edge and said bottom edge of said body (330 extends from the bottom edge to a point between the bottom and top edge, Fig. 3C).
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 1-2, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacNeil et al. (US10,011,207), in the second interpretation, ALONE.
Claim 1. A floor mat (100 floor mat, Fig. 1) for a vehicle having a floor (implicit for a vehicle floor mat; Col. 3, lines 25-26), the mat comprising:
a mat body having a core (102 mat implicitly comprising of a core, Fig. 1), an upper surface (104 upper surface, Fig. 1) and an opposing lower surface (200 lower surface, ,
a grommet (132 cap, Fig. 3-6), said grommet including
a body (cylindrical structure of 314 sidewall, Fig. 4) having a wall (314 sidewall, Fig. 4) and a flange extending outwardly from said wall (318 flange, Fig. 3C), said wall having
an outer surface (316 outer surface, Fig. 4) and an inner surface (326 interior surface, Fig. 4), said inner surface defining a through bore with a closed top end (326 creates a bore up to the interior surface of 304 web wherein 304 creates a closed top end).
MacNeil does not disclose: integrally formed with the mat body and contained between said upper surface and said lower surface.
MacNeil discloses the claimed invention except for the cap being integral to the mat. However, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success, to have made the cap integral or unitary to the mat, rather than from separate components, as it has been held that where the sub-components are used in the same way, constructing formerly separate structures as a one piece construction is a matter of obvious engineering choice and involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP §2144.04, subsection V, paragraph B & In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Claim 2. MacNeil discloses: The floor mat of claim 1, wherein the flange has a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the wall of the body (diameter of 318 is greater than the diameter of 316, Fig. 4).
Claim 8. MacNeil discloses: The floor mat of claim 1, wherein the wall includes a plurality of spaced blocks on an inner surface of the wall (330 bead sections, Fig. 3C), said blocks extending from a top edge or a bottom edge of the body to a point between said top edge and said bottom edge of said body (330 extends from the bottom edge to a point between the bottom and top edge, Fig. 3C).
Claim 9. MacNeil discloses: The floor mat of claim 8, wherein each of said blocks include an inner guide surface (330 operates as a latch and inherently guides and/or centralizes, Fig. 4).
Claims 3-7, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacNeil et al. (US10,011,207), in second interpretation, in view of Price et al. (US10,723,252)
Claim 3. MacNeil discloses: The floor mat of claim 1.
MacNeil does not disclose: the flange includes a plurality of slots.
Price discloses a floor mat with integral grommet is provided for a vehicle having a floor with at least one upstanding post.
Price teaches: the flange (44 flange, Fig. 2) includes a plurality of slots (46 slots, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the flange of MacNeil by including the slots as taught by Price with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow molten plastic that forms the mat to flow through and embed the flange into the core as taught by Price (Col. 3, lines 61-67).
Claim 4. MacNeil discloses: The floor mat of claim 1, wherein the wall includes a plurality of spaced blocks on an inner surface of the wall (330 bead sections, Fig. 3C).
MacNeil does not disclose: blocks extending from a top edge to a bottom edge of the body.
Price further teaches: blocks extending from a top edge to a bottom edge (58 blocks extending across the length of 32, Fig. 3) of the body (32 body, Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the blocks of MacNeil by including the blocks and/or ribs as taught by Price with a reasonable expectation of success in order to for the blocks and ribs to prevent inadvertent upward movement as taught by Price (Col. 4, lines 25-31).
Claim 5. MacNeil in view of Price teach: The floor mat of claim 4, wherein each of said blocks include an inner guide surface (Price: 40 inner surface inherently guides and/or centralizes, Fig. 3).
Claim 6. MacNeil in view of Price teach: The floor mat of claim 4, further comprising a plurality of ribs (Price: 56 rib like member, Fig. 3-4), each of said ribs extending between a different pair of said blocks (Price: rib-like member connected at respective ends to generally vertically-projecting blocks; Col. 4, lines 26-28).
Claim 7. MacNeil in view of Price teach: The floor mat of claim 6, wherein each of said ribs includes an inclined surface and a substantially flat upper surface (Price: as depicted, the rib includes an inclined surface on the bottom and top end, the upper surface of the rib is flat; Fig. 3-4).
Claim 10. MacNeil in view of Price teach: The floor mat of claim 8, further comprising a plurality of ribs (Price: plurality of 56, Fig. 2), each of said ribs extending between a different pair of said blocks (Price: plurality of 56 extends between a plurality of 58, Fig. 2).
Claim 11. MacNeil in view of Price teach: The floor mat of claim 1, further comprising an annular rib extending about an entire circumference of said inner surface of said wall (Price: 72 rib extends the entire circumference of the inner surface in a different embodiment, Fig. 7-10).
Claims 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacNeil et al. (US10,011,207), in first interpretation, in view of Price et al. (US10,723,252)
Claim 14. MacNeil discloses: The grommet of claim 12.
MacNeil does not disclose: the flange includes a plurality of slots.
Price discloses a floor mat with integral grommet is provided for a vehicle having a floor with at least one upstanding post.
Price teaches: the flange (44 flange, Fig. 2) includes a plurality of slots (46 slots, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the flange of MacNeil by including the slots as taught by Price with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow molten plastic that forms the mat to flow through and embed the flange into the core as taught by Price (Col. 3, lines 61-67).
Claim 15. MacNeil discloses: The grommet of claim 12, the wall includes a plurality of spaced blocks on an inner surface of the wall.
MacNeil does not disclose: blocks extending from a top edge to a bottom edge of the body.
Price further teaches: blocks extending from a top edge to a bottom edge (58 blocks extending across the length of 32, Fig. 3) of the body (32 body, Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the blocks of MacNeil by including the blocks and/or ribs as taught by Price with a reasonable expectation of success in order to for the blocks and ribs to prevent inadvertent upward movement as taught by Price (Col. 4, lines 25-31).
Claim 16. MacNeil in view of Prices teach: The grommet of claim 15, further comprising a plurality of ribs (Price: 56 rib like member, Fig. 3-4), each of said ribs extending between a different pair of said blocks (Price: rib-like member connected at respective ends to generally vertically-projecting blocks; Col. 4, lines 26-28).
Claim 17. MacNeil in view of Prices teach: The grommet of claim 16, wherein each of said ribs includes an inclined surface and a substantially flat upper surface (Price: as depicted, the rib includes an inclined surface on the bottom and top end, the upper surface of the rib is flat; Fig. 3-4).
Claim 19. MacNeil discloses: The grommet of claim 18.
MacNeil does not disclose: further comprising a plurality of ribs, each of said ribs extending between a different pair of said blocks.
Price further teaches: further comprising a plurality of ribs (Price: 56 rib like member, Fig. 3-4), each of said ribs extending between a different pair of said blocks (Price: rib-like member connected at respective ends to generally vertically-projecting blocks; Col. 4, lines 26-28).
Claim 20. MacNeil discloses: The grommet of claim 12.
MacNeil does not disclose: further comprising an annular rib extending about an entire circumference of said inner surface of said wall.
Price further teaches: further comprising an annular rib extending about an entire circumference of said inner surface of said wall (Price: 72 rib extends the entire circumference of the inner surface in a different embodiment, Fig. 7-10).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Craig whose telephone number is (571)270-0747. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thurs 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM CST.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571)270-7741. 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.
/DANIEL T CRAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3676 /TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights