DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the AIA first to invent provisions. 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 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.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 1/22/2026 have been entered.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sieber et al. (DE 102018119516 A1; “Sieber”) in view of Wollar (U.S. Patent No. 4,648,766 A; “Wollar”).
Sieber discloses:
Regarding claim 9:
A method of assembling a component of a drive train (see abstract), the component comprising at least a first part (16) having a plurality of threaded holes (22, e.g. see in FIG. 1, 4; pg. 3, “the respective opening 18 . 20 . 22 have an internal thread”) and a second part (12) having a corresponding number of through holes (18, FIG. 1, 4 show the same number of holes 18 as the number of holes 22), the threaded holes and through holes each extending along an axial direction (depicted in FIG. 1, 4); the method comprising at least the following steps:
a) providing the first part and the second part (depicted in FIG. 1, 4);
b) arranging at least two guide elements (26; FIG. 1, 4) in the threaded holes of the first part, wherein each guide element extends through one of the through holes (pg. 3, “In the openings arranged one behind the other in the axial direction is one in each and shown assembly pin plugged in”);
c) bringing together the first part and the second part along the axial direction (as depicted by arrows in FIG. 4, assembled version shown in FIG. 1), the parts being aligned with respect to one another via the guide elements (abstract, “a first opening (18) of a first component (12) second opening (20) of a second component (14) and pin body (28) which can be inserted into a third opening (22) of a third component (16) for radially centering the components(12, 14, 16) and / or aligning the components (12 , 14, 16”);
d) inserting a first screw element via a first through hole into a first threaded hole and screwing the first screw element (at the upper hole; pg. 1, “The individual openings of the components can be provided in order to use a fastening means, for example a screw, in them in the final assembled state. As a result, the openings of the components can also be positioned coaxially to one another in the preassembled state, so that the assembly pin can easily be inserted simultaneously into the openings of the various components.”); and
e) removing a guide element from the component (pg. 2, “In order to uncover the openings occupied by the assembly pin during final assembly, the assembly pin can be easily removed again”; pg. 3, “the assembly pin used for centering can hold the pulley decoupler together in the pre-assembled state and be easily removed for final assembly, so that the pulley decoupler does not fall apart”) and inserting a second screw element via a second through hole into a second threaded hole and screwing the second screw element to produce the component (at the lower hole; pg. 1, “The individual openings of the components can be provided in order to use a fastening means, for example a screw, in them in the final assembled state. As a result, the openings of the components can also be positioned coaxially to one another in the preassembled state, so that the assembly pin can easily be inserted simultaneously into the openings of the various components.”).
Although Sieber discloses that each of the guide elements have projections (44), Sieber does not expressly disclose that each of the guide elements is designed in two parts.
Wollar teaches each guide element (10) designed in two parts (part 20, part 22; FIG. 1) as a means to prevent damage to the projections (col. 2, ll. 17-28, “because the resilient flexible plastic locking projections directly slide across and engage sharp edges when inserted in an attachment hole in a support panel made of sheet metal, improper installation of the fastener or repeated insertion and withdrawal of the shank (occasioned by frequent detachment and reattachment of the liner panel) can damage the projections and render the fastener unfit to firmly secure the liner panel in place or unfit to enable an effective seal when mounted on the support panel. Therefore, there is a need for an improved fastener for this purpose.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, Sieber such that that each of the guide elements is designed in two parts, as taught by Wollar, as a means to prevent damage to the projections.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4, 5-8, 10-11, and 13 are allowed.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment to claim 9 filed 1/22/2026 have been fully considered and have required a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Sieber and Wollar, as described supra.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL D YABUT whose telephone number is (571)270-5526. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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 John Olszewski can be reached on (571) 272-2706. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL D YABUT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656