DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on 06/23/2025, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The following is a Non-Final Office Action on the merits in response to applicant’s filing from 06/23/2025.
Claims 1-10 are pending and have been considered below.
Priority
The application claims foreign priority to JP 2024-108835, filed on 07/05/2024. The priority is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/22/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirose (US 2013/0147172) in view of Tsuno (JP 2009/222108), as cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 1, a vehicular interior component {10} covering a vehicular body {11} from a vehicular interior side {“As illustrated in FIG. 1, a door trim 10 (a vehicular door trim, a vehicular interior part) is mounted on a compartment inner side of a door inner panel 11 (see FIG. 5) that configures a vehicular door panel (a vehicular body panel)” [0014]}, the vehicular interior component {10} comprising: an interior component body {12} including a design surface section {30 (Fig. 1): “The trim board 12 includes an upper board 13 and a lower board 30” [0015]} having a plate shape {“board” shape (Figs. 1-2, 5-6)} and configured as a portion of a vehicular interior design surface {left side surface of 30 facing vehicle seat 18 in Fig. 5, and bottom surface of 30 opposite 30A in Fig. 6: “outer side surface 30A” [0017]}, and a stopper projection {31} projecting from the design surface section {30} toward a vehicular exterior side {right side in Fig. 5, and top side in Fig. 6}; and a functional component {50} mounted on a vehicular exterior side {top side (Fig. 6)} of the interior component body {12} and including a mount portion {52 (Figs. 2-4, 6)} including a fitting hole {52A (Figs. 2-4, 6)} in which the stopper projection {31} is fitted {Fig. 6}.
However, Hirose does not explicitly disclose the stopper projection includes a weakened portion.
Tsuno (JP 2009/222108) teaches a stopper projection {10} of a door trim {1} including a weakened portion {13 (Figs. 2, 4-5)}.
In light of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vehicular interior component, as disclosed by Hirose, such that the stopper projection (that is configured to receive a largest load) includes a weakened portion {on the exterior (left) side surface of the stopper projection 31 (Fig. 6)}, as taught by Tsuno, in order to restrict movement between coupled members of the door trim {“The relative movement between the joint members is restricted. Furthermore, the relative movement between the engaging members in the direction orthogonal to the insertion direction of the panel member with respect to the door panel is also restricted by the fitting of the concave portion or the through hole of the door panel with the convex portion of the panel member” [0020]}.
Regarding claim 2, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 1. Hirose further discloses the functional component {50} includes a functional component body {51} that includes an opposed wall {51B (Fig. 6)} that is opposite the vehicular body {11}, and an outer wall {51C, 51D, 51E} extending from an outer edge of the opposed wall {51B} toward the interior component body {12: “The pad main body 51 is formed in substantially a triangular prism shape having two surfaces (the compartment inner side surface 51A and the compartment outer side surface 51B) and three surfaces (the upper surface 51C, the side surface 51D, a lower surface 51E) connecting the two surfaces. The pad main body 51 may be formed in any prism shape” [0030]}, the outer wall {51C, 51D, 51E} and the opposed wall {51B} defining an inner space in the functional component body {51}, the mount portion {52} extends outward from the outer wall {51C, 51D, 51E} of the functional component body {51}, the stopper projection {31} has a first surface {right side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} that is opposite the functional component body {51} and a second surface {left side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} that is opposite from the first surface {right side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)}, and the weakened portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)} is a recessed portion {13} that is on the second surface {exterior (left) side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} of the stopper projection {31}.
Regarding claim 3, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 2. Hirose further discloses the stopper projection {31} includes a stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)} that extends from the interior component body {12} and a stopper portion {31A} that projects from the second surface {exterior (left) side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} of a distal end of the stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)}, the stopper portion {31A} is stopped by a first hole edge {edge of 52A farthest away from 51} of the fitting hole {52A} that is on an opposite side from the functional component body {51} with respect to the fitting hole {52A}, and the recessed portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)} is between a basal end {bottom end of 31 connected to 12+30 (Fig. 6)} of the stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)} and the stopper portion {31A}.
Regarding claim 4, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 3. Hirose further discloses the stopper projection {31} includes a rib {widened protrusion at the bottom end of 31 that are connected to 12+30 (Fig. 6)} that connects the second surface {exterior (left) side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} of the stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)} and a vehicular exterior side surface {30A (Fig. 6)} of the interior component body {12}, and the recessed portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)} is between the rib {widened protrusion at the bottom end of 31 that are connected to 12+30 (Fig. 6)} and the distal end {31A} of the stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)}.
Regarding claim 5, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 3. Hirose further discloses the mount portion {52} includes a first wall {wall of 52 farthest away from 51 (Fig. 6)} extending from the first hole edge {edge of 52A farthest away from 51} of the fitting hole {52A} toward the vehicular exterior side and the functional component body {51}, and a second wall {wall of 52 closest to 51} extending toward the vehicular exterior side from a second hole edge {edge of 52A closest to 51} of the fitting hole {52A}, the second hole edge {edge of 52A closest to 51} being closer to the functional component body {51} than the fitting hole {52A} is, the second wall {wall of 52 closest to 51} supporting the stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)}, and the first wall {wall of 52 farthest away from 51} and the second wall {wall of 52 closest to 51} hold the stopper projection body {central portion of 31 (Fig. 6)} of the stopper projection {31} between the first wall {wall of 52 farthest away from 51} and the second wall {wall of 52 closest to 51} and the stopper portion {31A} of the stopper projection {31} is contacted with and stopped by a distal end {top end (Fig. 6)} of the first wall {wall of 52 farthest away from 51}.
Regarding claim 6, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 1. Hirose further discloses the functional component {50} is a shock absorber {50: “shock absorber pad 50” [0017]}, the stopper projection {31} of the interior component body {12} includes multiple stopper projections {31}, and one of the multiple stopper projections {31} that is to receive a largest load includes the weakened portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)}.
Regarding claim 7, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 1. Hirose further discloses the functional component {50} has a peripheral edge {51D, 51E (Fig. 4)} and includes the mount portion {52} adjacent to the peripheral edge {51D, 51E (Fig. 4)}, and the weakened portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)} is a recessed portion {13 (on the exterior to 51 side of 31)} that is recessed to be away from the peripheral edge {51D, 51E (Fig. 4)}.
Regarding claim 8, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 7. Hirose further discloses the stopper projection {31} is deformable to be bent at the recessed portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)} when receiving a load {under a particular load, such as an extremely high load aimed directly at the recessed portion, the projection would be deformable to be bent at the recessed portion}.
Regarding claim 9, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 7. Hirose further discloses the functional component {50} includes a functional component body {51}, the mount portion {52} extends outward from the functional component body {51}, and the stopper projection {31} has a first surface {right side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} that is opposite the functional component body {51} and a second surface {exterior (left) side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} that is opposite from the first surface {right side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} and includes the recessed portion {13 (as modified by Tsuno in the claim 1 rejection)} on the second surface {exterior (left) side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)}.
Regarding claim 10, Hirose and Tsuno disclose all the aspects of claim 9. Hirose further discloses the mount portion {52} includes a first wall {wall of 52 farthest away from 51 (Fig. 6)} extending toward the vehicular exterior side and the functional component body {51} from a first hole edge {bottom edge of 52A farthest away from 51} of the fitting hole {52A} that is on an opposite side from the functional component body {51} with respect to the fitting hole {52A}, and a second wall {wall of 52 closest to 51} extending toward the vehicular exterior side from a second hole edge {edge of 52A closest to 51} of the fitting hole {52A} that is closer to the functional component body {51} than the fitting hole {52A} is, and the first surface {right side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} of the stopper projection {31} is contacted with the second wall {wall of 52 closest to 51} and the second surface {exterior (left) side surface of 31 (Fig. 6)} of the stopper projection {31} is away from the first hole edge {bottom edge of 52A farthest away from 51 (see the gap between 52 and 31 in Fig. 6)}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel M Keck whose telephone number is (571)272-5947. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-4:00.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached on (571)270-5985. 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 M. Keck/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614