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)(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.
Claims 1, 3, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kwon et al. (US 2024/0183369).
Kwon et al. discloses a clip (100) for attaching a vehicle interior component to a rectangular hole provided in a vehicle body panel, as shown in Figures 1-2B and disclosed in paragraph [0031]. The clip (100) comprises a body (121,122) to be attached to the vehicle interior component and two or more engagement portions (123) formed integrally with the body (121,122) and configured to be pressed against the rectangular hole, as shown in Figure 2A. The two or more engagement portions (123) protrude on two sides of the body (121,122) via a gap therebetween and are configured to be arranged in positions adjacent to at least a pair of left and right corners in two pairs of left and right corners of the rectangular hole (11), as shown in Figures 1-2B. Each engagement portion (123) has a fall prevention claw and an engagement claw for clamping a hole edge of the rectangular hole at an upper end thereof, as shown in Figure 2A.
PNG
media_image1.png
276
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 3, the body (121,122) is substantially U-shaped to form a U-shaped body, as shown in Figure 2A. The engagement portions (123) are provided on two sides in a width direction of opposing end portions of the U-shaped body, as shown in Figure 1.
In reference to claim 4, the body (121,122) and the engagement portions (123) are integrally formed of a plate, as shown in Figures 1-2A and disclosed in paragraph [0032]. The respective engagement portions (123) are connected to sides of a middle portion (122) of the U-shaped body, as shown in Figure 1.
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2024/0183369) in view of Cramer et al. (US 2020/0180486).
Kwon et al. discloses the combination of the clip of claim 1 and an assist grip as the vehicle interior component, as disclosed in paragraph [0031].
However, Kwon et al. does not disclose the assist grip switches between a retracted position and a use position via a holding member.
Cramer et al. teaches an assist grip switchable between a retracted position and a use position via a holding member (154), as shown in Figures 1-3 and disclosed in paragraph [0034]. The clip (152) is assembled to a standing wall provided on the holding member. The standing wall defines central channel (174), as shown in Figure 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to assemble the clip of Kwon et al. to a standing wall of a holding member of a pivoting assist grip, as taught by Cramer et al., with a reasonable expectation for success to minimize the vehicle interior volume occupied by the handle when not needed to maximize passenger space while still providing an easily accessible assist handle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter of claim 2 is engagement claw arranged at a position away from the side of the body further than the fall prevention claw, which is not found in the prior art of record. The closest prior art, Kwon et al., has the engagement claw located at the same distance from the body as the fall prevention claw.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Huelke et al. (9,440,596) shows a rectangular hole.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP whose telephone number is (571)272-6656. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:30.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5500. 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.
GREGORY A. BLANKENSHIP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3612
/GREGORY A BLANKENSHIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612 September 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights