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.
Claim 6 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. With respect claim 6, “two of said reinforcing protrusions” is vague and indefinite and lack of antecedent basis since applicant inferentially claims there are two protrusions.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
616
949
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Heckmann et al (EP 2008855 A2).
With respect to claim 1. Heckmann discloses a holder for an exhaust system of an internal combustion engine, the holder comprising: a holder body (1) having a holder base (5) and a holder wall (U-shaped wall 7 and 25) extending from said holder base; a holder pin (13) extending from an outer face of said holder wall; and, said holder pin having a pin recess (R, see markup above) being formed in at least one peripheral region thereof.
With respect to claim 2, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above, wherein at least one of the following applies (highlighted in bold applies): i) said holder base (5) is formed so as to be plate-shaped; and, ii) a fastening member reach-through opening is provided in said holder base; and, iii) an anti-rotation protrusion extending in an opposite direction to an extension direction of said holder wall with respect to said holder base is provided on said holder base.
With respect to claim 3, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above, wherein at least one of the following applies (highlighted in bold applies): i) said holder wall (U-shaped wall 7 and 25) extends at least in some regions along an outer peripheral region of the holder base; and, ii) said holder wall is formed in an annular manner substantially without interruptions; and, iii) said holder wall has a varying wall height starting from said holder base.
With respect to claim 4, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 3 as advanced above,, wherein said holder pin (13) is provided on said holder wall in a region (upper region of wall 25) thereof having a maximum wall height.
With respect to claim 8, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above, wherein said pin recess in said holder pin (13) is formed at least in a first end region (E1, see markup above) of said holder pin adjoining said holder wall.
With respect to claim 9, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above, wherein said holder pin (13) defines a pin longitudinal axis and extends in a direction of said pin longitudinal axis; and, said pin recess (R, see markup above) is formed in said holder pin extending in the direction of said pin longitudinal axis so as to be open radially to the outside.
With respect to claim 10, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above, wherein said holder pin (13) has a second end region (E2, see markup above) remote from said holder wall; and, said holder pin has a pin head (27) protruding with respect to an outer dimension of said holder pin at said second end region; and, said pin recess (R, see markup above) extends up to said pin head.
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.
PNG
media_image2.png
553
938
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 5-7 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heckmann et al (EP 2008855 A2) in view of Noll (DE 102014005286 B3).
With respect to claim 5, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above except for wherein at least one reinforcing protrusion adjoining said holder base is provided on an inner face of said holder wall.
Noll discloses a holder for an exhaust system of an internal combustion engine, the holder comprising: a holder body (figure 2) having a holder base (28) and a holder wall (24) extending from said holder base; a holder pin (26) extending from an outer face of said holder wall; and wherein at least one reinforcing protrusion (P, see markup above) adjoining said holder base is provided on an inner face of said holder wall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the holder of Heckmann such that wherein at least one reinforcing protrusion adjoining said holder base is provided on an inner face of said holder wall for reinforcement purposes as taught to be desirable by Noll.
With respect to claim 6, Heckmann and Noll combined discloses the holder of claim 5 as advanced above, wherein Noll discloses two of said reinforcing protrusions (P, see markup above) arranged at a distance from one another are provided on said inner face of said holder wall; and, wherein at least one of the following applies: i) said holder pin (26, figure 3) adjoins said outer face of said holder wall between said two reinforcing protrusions; and, ii) at least one of said two reinforcing protrusions adjoins said holder wall in an overlapping manner.
With respect to claim 7, Heckmann and Noll combined discloses the holder of claim 5 as advanced above, wherein Noll discloses at least one of the following applies: i) at least one of said two reinforcing protrusions (P, see markup above) is in the form of a rib; and, b) at least one of said two reinforcing protrusions (P, see markup above) transitions into a wall region of said holder wall having a greater wall thickness which decreases in a direction away from said one reinforcing protrusion.
With respect to claims 13-16, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above except for wherein said holder body is formed integrally with the holder pin as a die-cast part (per claims 13 and 15) and the die-cast part made from aluminum (per claims 14 and 16).
Noll discloses a holder for an exhaust system of an internal combustion engine, the holder comprising: a holder body (figure 2) having a holder base (28) and a holder wall (24) extending from said holder base; a holder pin (26) extending from an outer face of said holder wall; and wherein at least one reinforcing protrusion (P, see markup above) adjoining said holder base is provided on an inner face of said holder wall wherein Noll discloses a method comprising: making the holder body integrally as a die-cast part and wherein the die-cast part is made integrally from aluminum (Noll discloses in the “Description”, paragraph 21, “The flange part and the mounting part may be formed of metal. For example, the flange part and the mounting part may be made by die- casting aluminum.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to have modify the holder of Heckmann such that said holder body is formed integrally with the holder pin as a die-cast part and the die-cast part made from aluminum as such method and material is old and well-known in the art as demonstrated by Noll.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heckmann et al (EP 2008855 A2).
With respect to claims 11 and 12, Heckmann discloses the holder of claim 1 as advanced above except for wherein said pin recess has a recess depth that is at least 30% or 50% of a cross-sectional dimension of said holder pin in a recess depth direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the pin recess has a recess depth that is at least 30% or 50% of a cross-sectional dimension of said holder pin in a recess depth direction. , since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art of record further demonstrate exhaust holders interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ko (Korie) H Chan whose telephone number is (571)272-6816. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Friday, 8:00 - 5:00 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Liu can be reached on 571-272-8227. 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.
/Ko H Chan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Khc
Prosecution Insights