DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Enomoto et al (US 11242084 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Enomoto discloses A fastening structure (Fig.3 depicts a bolt 60 and nut portion 121 with a female screw, indicating a fastening structure), comprising: a first member (fixation bracket 51, Fig.3, it is the position of the examiner that 51 is the first member) that includes a through hole (51a); a second member (Fig.3, it is the position of the examiner that the combination of annular member 20 connected to the second bracket portion 12 forms the second member); and a fastening member that is inserted through the through hole (Fig.3 depicts bolt 60 passes through 51a) and fastens the first member and the second member (Fig.3b depicts that bolt 60 fastens the first and second members), wherein rigidity of a portion of the first member around the through hole is lower than rigidity of a portion of the second member fastened with the fastening member (since the first member 51 originates from the frame 50 of the vehicle (Col 2 Ln 67) and 20 (which with 12 makes up the second member) have higher degree of hardness than frame 50 (Col 3 Ln 29), it is the position of the examiner that the through hole of the first member have lower rigidity than the second member while fastened with the fastening member, Fig.3b).
Regarding Claim 2, Enomoto discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Enomoto also discloses the second member includes a through hole (Fig.3 depicts that 20 consist of through hole 23 while 12 consist nut portion 121 with female screw), and the fastening member is inserted through the respective through holes of the first member and the second member (Fig.3 depicts that bolt 60 is inserted through holes 51a (first member) and 23 with 121 (second member) respectively).
Regarding Claim 3, Enomoto discloses a fastening structure, comprising: a first member that includes a through hole; a second member; and a fastening member that is inserted through the through hole and fastens the first member and the second member (see above in Claim 1), wherein the first member and the second member make surface contact with each other (Fig.3B depicts part of second member 20 is in contact with 51 when bolt 60 is tightened, Col 4 Ln 3) by at least one of the first member and/or the second member being deformed by a fastening force of the fastening member (Col 4 Ln 6, due to tightening screw 60, the circumferential edge of through-hole 51a is plastically deformed, as depicted in Fig.3b).
Regarding Claim 4, Enomoto discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Enomoto also discloses the first member is a bracket (fixation bracket 51) for attaching a compressor to an engine (note that the italicized limitation is interpreted as an intended use for the bracket; it is the position of the examiner that the fixation bracket 51 is capable of attaching any form or/and number of structures, which also includes attaching a compressor to an engine), and the second member is a hanger (it is the position of the examiner that 12, which is the second bracket portion, along with 20 forming the second member, is the hanger) for suspending the engine (note that the italicized limitation is interpreted as an intended use for the second member and is not a positive claim limitation requiring a hanger; hence it is the position of the examiner that the second bracket portion is fully capable of suspending any form or/and number of structures, which also includes working as a hanger to suspend an engine).
Regarding Claim 5, Enomoto discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Enomoto also discloses the portion of the first member around the through hole is formed as a thin portion (Fig.3B annotated depicts thin portion on the first member which is around the through hole 51a)
PNG
media_image1.png
403
411
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Enomoto discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Enomoto also discloses the portion of the first member around the through hole is formed as a thin portion by forming a portion of the through hole close to the second member as a large-diameter portion (Fig.3b annotated from Enomoto depicts that the thin portion is formed due to the inclined portion 22a, that also creates a large diameter for the first member, which is close to the second member) and forming a portion of the through hole apart from the second member as a small- diameter portion (Fig.3B annotated the hole 51a on the other side of first member is smaller than the larger hole towards the second member).
Regarding Claim 7, Enomoto discloses all the limitations of Claim 1. Enomoto also discloses a material of the portion of the first member around the through hole has lower rigidity than a material of the portion of the second member fastened with the fastening member (Col 3 Ln 29, 20, which is a portion of the second member, has higher material rigidity compared to the portion near 22a of the first member, fastened with the bolt 60).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hesse et al (DE102012001859B4)
Okhubo et al (GB 2415025 A)
Kornblum et al (US 7306418 B2)
Mcmahon et all (GB 2587391 A)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMAD FAROOQ whose telephone number is (571)270-3284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday between 10:00am to 6:30pm 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, Christine Mills, can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/AHMAD FAROOQ/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights