3m
`\
`w “”w%
`
`
`\R
`Z§.a
`a
`-
`1?
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COIVIIVIERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Ofi'ice
`Atidlbkb: CONIMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1430
`www.uspto.gov
`
`11/463,203
`
`08/08/2006
`
`
`David F. MACNEI].
`
`301700-00106
`
`6550
`
`EXAMINER
`MomkusMccmskey,LLc —
`1001 WarrenVille Road. Suite 500
`TAOUSAKIS, ALEXANDERP
`Lisle, IL 60532
`ART UNIT
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`3726
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`11/23/2010
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOLEQOA (Rev. 04/07)
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020—01138
`
`Page 1
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 1
`
`

`

`
`
`Notice of Abandonment
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
`
`11/463,203
`MACNEIL, DAVID F.
`Examine,
`Art Unit
`
`ALEXANDER P. TAOUSAKIS
`
`3726
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address--
`
`This application is abandoned in view of:
`
`1. IX Applicant’s failure to timely file a proper reply to the Office letter mailed on 11 March 2010.
`(a) [I A reply was received on
`(with a Certificate of Mailing or Transmission dated
`period for reply (including a total extension of time of
`month(s)) which expired on
`(b) [I A proposed reply was received on
`, but it does not constitute a proper reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (a) to the final rejection.
`(A proper reply under 37 CFR 1.113 to a final rejection consists only of: (1) a timely filed amendment which places the
`application in condition for allowance; (2) a timely filed Notice of Appeal (with appeal fee); or (3) a timely filed Request for
`Continued Examination (RCE) in compliance with 37 CFR 1.114).
`
`), which is after the expiration of the
`
`but it does not constitute a proper reply, or a bona fide attempt at a proper reply, to the non-
`(c) I] A reply was received on
`final rejection. See 37 CFR 1.85(a) and 1.111. (See explanation in box 7 below).
`
`(d)
`
`No reply has been received.
`
`2. El Applicant’s failure to timely pay the required issue fee and publication fee, if applicable, within the statutory period of three months
`from the mailing date of the Notice of Allowance (PTOL—85).
`(with a Certificate of Mailing or Transmission dated
`(a) [I The issue fee and publication fee, if applicable, was received on
`), which is after the expiration of the statutory period for payment of the issue fee (and publication fee) set in the Notice of
`Allowance (PTOL—85).
`
`is due.
`is insufficient. A balance of $
`(b) [I The submitted fee of EB
`The issue fee required by 37 CFR 1.18 is $
`. The publication fee, if required by 37 CFR 1.18(d), is $
`
`.
`
`(c) [I The issue fee and publication fee, if applicable, has not been received.
`
`3.|:| Applicant’s failure to timely file corrected drawings as required by, and within the three-month period set in, the Notice of
`Allowability (PTO-37).
`(a) El Proposed corrected drawings were received on
`after the expiration ofthe period for reply.
`
`_)
`
`, which is
`
`
`
`(with a Certificate of Mailing or Transmission dated
`
`(b) El No corrected drawings have been received.
`
`4. [I The letter of express abandonment which is signed by the attorney or agent of record, the assignee of the entire interest, or all of
`the applicants.
`
`5. [I The letter of express abandonment which is signed by an attorney or agent (acting in a representative capacity under 37 CFR
`1.34(a)) upon the filing ofa continuing application.
`
`6. [I The decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interference rendered on
`of the decision has expired and there are no allowed claims.
`
`and because the period for seeking court review
`
`7. [I The reason(s) below:
`
`IDAVID P. BRYANT/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3726
`
`Petitions to revive under 37 CFR 1.137(a) or (b), or requests to withdraw the holding of abandonment under 37 CFR 1.181, should be promptly filed to
`minimize an neative effects on atent term.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—1432 (Rev. 04—01)
`
`Notice of Abandonment
`
`Part of Paper No. 20101119
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 2
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 2
`
`

`

`
`
`Electronic Patent Application Fee Transmittal
`
`
`
`Filing Date: 08-Aug-2006
`
`Title of Invention:
`
`DESIGNING AND MANUFACTURING VEHICLE FLOOR TRAYS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`First Named Inventor/Applicant Name: David F. MACNEIL
`
`Filer:
`
`Jefferson Perkins/Patricia Romanelli
`
`Attorney Docket Number:
`
`301700-00106
`
`Filed as Small Entity
`
`Utility under 35 USC 1 1 1 (a) Filing Fees
`
`Description
`
`Fee Code
`
`Quantity
`
`Amount
`
`SUE-:33: in
`
`Basic Filing:
`
`
`Pages:
`
`Claims:
`
`Miscellaneous-Filing:
`
`
`Petition:
`
`
`Patent-Appeals-and-lnterference:
`
`Post-Allowance-and-Post-lssuance:
`
`Extension-of—Time:
`
`Extension - 3 months with $0 paid
`
`2253
`
`1
`
`555
`
`555
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, |PR2020-01 138
`
`Page 3
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 3
`
`

`

`
`
`‘
`.
`_
`Sub-Total in
`Description
`Fee Code
`Quantity
`Amount
`USD($)
`
`
`
`
`Miscellaneous:
`
`
`Total in USD ($)
`
`555
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020-01138
`
`Page 4
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 4
`
`

`

`Electronic Acknowledgement Receipt
`
`EFS ID:
`
`8389612
`
`Application Number:
`
`11463203
`
`International Application Number:
`
`
`Confirmation Number:
`
`6550
`
`Title of Invention:
`
`DESIGNING AND MANUFACTURING VEHICLE FLOOR TRAYS
`
`
`
`
`
`First Named Inventor/Applicant Name:
`
`David F. MACNEIL
`
`Deposit Account Payment was successfully received in RAM
`
`Customer Number:
`
`64770
`
`Filer:
`
`Jefferson Perkins/Patricia Romanelli
`
`Jefferson Perkins
`Filer Authorized By:
`
`
`
`
`301700-00106
`
`Attorney Docket Number:
`
`Receipt Date:
`
`10-SEP-2010
`
`08-AUG-2006
`Filing Date:
`
`
`
`
`09:12:38
`
`Time Stamp:
`
`Application Type:
`
`Utility under 35 USC111(a)
`
`Payment information:
`
`yes
`
`Submitted with Payment
`
`
`
`$555
`
`8898
`
`503982
`
`PaymentType
`
`RAM confirmation Number
`
`Deposit Account
`Authorized User
`
`The Director of the USPTO is hereby authorized to charge indicated fees and credit any overpayment as follows:
`
`Charge any Additional Fees required under 37 C.F.R. Section 1.21 (Miscellaneous fees and charges)
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020-01138
`
`Page 5
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 5
`
`

`

`File Listing:
`
`Number
`
`Document Description
`
`File Name
`
`1
`
`Fee Worksheet (PTO-875)
`
`fee-info.pdf
`
`FIle SIze(Bytes)/
`Message Digest
`30517
`
`IPages
`MultI-
`Part /.2Ip (Ifappl.)
`
`c75e676b4i 9e3cc546aa57855e8004c14eb
`18/65
`
`no
`
`2
`
` Document
`
`Warnings:
`Information:
`
`This Acknowledgement Receipt evidences receipt on the noted date by the USPTO ofthe indicated documents,
`characterized by the applicant, and including page counts, where applicable. It serves as evidence of receipt similar to a
`Post Card, as described in MPEP 503.
`
`New Applications Under 35 U.S.C. 111
`Ifa new application is being filed and the application includes the necessary components for a filing date (see 37 CFR
`1.53(b)—(d) and MPEP 506), a Filing Receipt (37 CFR 1.54) will be issued in due course and the date shown on this
`Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the filing date ofthe application.
`
`National Stage of an International Application under 35 U.S.C. 371
`Ifa timely submission to enter the national stage of an international application is compliant with the conditions of 35
`U.S.C. 371 and other applicable requirements a Form PCT/D0/E0/903 indicating acceptance of the application as a
`national stage submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 will be issued in addition to the Filing Receipt, in due course.
`
`New International Application Filed with the USPTO as a Receiving Office
`lfa new international application is being filed and the international application includes the necessary components for
`an international filing date (see PCT Article 11 and MPEP 1810), a Notification of the International Application Number
`and ofthe International Filing Date (Form PCT/R0/105) will be issued in due course, subject to prescriptions concerning
`national security, and the date shown on this Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the international filing date of
`the application.
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 6
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 6
`
`

`

`3m
`\
`w “”w%
`
`
`\R
`Z§.a
`a
`-
`1?
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COIVIIVIERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Ofi'ice
`Atidlbkb: CONIMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1430
`www.uspto.gov
`
`11/463,203
`
`08/08/2006
`
`
`David F. MACNEI].
`
`301700-00106
`
`6550
`
`EXAMINER
`MomkusMcCluskey,LLc —
`1001 WarrenVille Road. Suite 500
`TAOUSAKIS, ALEXANDERP
`Lisle, IL 60532
`ART UNIT
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`3726
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`03/11/2010
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOLEQOA (Rev. 04/07)
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020—01138
`
`Page 7
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 7
`
`

`

`
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
`11/463,203 MACNEIL, DAVID F.
`Examine,
`Art Unit
`Office Action Summary
`ALEXANDER P. TAOUSAKIS
`3726
`
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1 136(a).
`In no event however may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`DIX Responsive to communication(s) filed on 12 November 2009.
`
`2a)IZ This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`
`3)I:I Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 CD. 11, 453 0.6. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`4)IZ Claim(s) L6 is/are pending in the application.
`4a) Ofthe above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`
`5)I:I Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`6)IZI Claim(s)_1-6 is/are rejected.
`7)I:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`8)I:I Claim(s)_ are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`10)I:I The drawing(s) filed on
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`11)I:I The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)|:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)—(d) or (f).
`a)I:I All
`b)I:I Some * c)I:I None of:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`
`
`3.I:I Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`4) I] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper N0(3)/M3" Date. _
`2) I] Notice of Draftsperson’s Patent Drawing Review (PTO—948)
`3) E Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`5) I:I Notice of Informal Patent Application
`
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date 12/03/2009.
`6) D Other:
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)
`
`Part of Paper No.lMai| Date 20100226
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, IPR2020-01138
`
`Page 8
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 8
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Terminal Disclaimer
`
`The terminal disclaimer filed on 11/12/2009 disclaiming the terminal portion of
`
`any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of
`
`US. Patent No.: 7,444,748 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal
`
`disclaimer has been recorded.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
`forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining
`
`obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
`
`PPM“?
`
`Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`Claims 1-2, 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Stanesic (6,817,649) in view of Kacyra et al (7,215,430).
`
`MaCNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MaCNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 9
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 9
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`1.
`
`Page 3
`
`Stanesic teaches process for manufacturing a vehicle floor tray, comprising the steps of:
`
`molding a layer of polymeric material in a mold to for conform to a carpeted vehicle floor
`
`(see Figure 2 and column 2 lines 27-49).
`
`Stanesic fails to teach digitally measuring the surface of a vehicle foot well, converting
`
`the measured data into a three-dimensional image and creating a mold based on that
`
`image.
`
`Kacyra et al teach digitally measuring the three-dimensional position of a plurality of
`
`points on a surface of a workpiece (see column 2 lines 43-47), storing said points in a
`
`memory (see column 22 lines 44-55), using the stored points to construct a model of the
`
`surface (see column 2 lines 48-49); using the model of the surface to construct a three-
`
`dimensional image of a vehicle floor tray (see column 2 lines 50-51 and column 22 lines
`
`57-64) and constructing an image of something other than what was digitally captured
`
`(see column 32, lines 44-52, where it discloses warping or adjusting the digitally
`
`captured image to account for errors and deviations, and note that these deviations can
`
`account for a carpeted sun‘ace).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to create the mold of England based off a three-dimensional image of the
`
`vehicle floor obtained through digital measurement, as taught by Kacyra et al, because
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 10
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 10
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 4
`
`it forms a more quickly formed and precisely contoured floor tray (see Kacyra et a/
`
`column 1 lines 16-20).
`
`2.
`
`Stanesic/Kacyra et al teach the process of Claim 1, wherein said step of digitally
`
`measuring the three-dimensional position of the points on the surface of the vehicle foot
`
`well comprises using a coordinate measurement machine (CMM) (see Kacyra et al
`
`column 8 lines 37-56).
`
`4.
`
`Stanesic teaches process for manufacturing a vehicle floor tray, comprising the steps of:
`
`molding a layer of polymeric material in a mold to for conform to a carpeted vehicle floor
`
`(see Figure 2 and column 2 lines 27-49).
`
`Stanesic fails to teach digitally measuring the surface of a vehicle foot well, converting
`
`the measured data into a three-dimensional image and creating a mold based on that
`
`image.
`
`Kacyra et al teach digitally measuring the three-dimensional position of a plurality of
`
`points on a surface of a workpiece (see column 2 lines 43-47), storing said points in a
`
`memory (see column 22 lines 44-55), using the stored points to construct a model of the
`
`surface (see column 2 lines 48-49); using the model of the surface to construct a three-
`
`dimensional image of a vehicle floor tray (see column 2 lines 50—51 and column 22 lines
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020-01138
`
`Page 11
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 11
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 5
`
`57-64) and constructing an image of something other than what was digitally captured
`
`(see column 32, lines 44-52, where it discloses warping or adjusting the digitally
`
`captured image to account for errors and deviations, and note that these deviations can
`
`account fora carpeted surface), establishing a top sketch plane to intersect the vehicle
`
`foot well model and to establish a top margin of the vehicle floor tray, establishing a
`
`bottom sketch plane to be at the lowest elevation of the vehicle floor tray image to be
`
`created and drawing sidewalls between the top sketch plane and the bottom sketch
`
`plane to approximate corresponding sidewalls of the vehicle foot well tray (see Kacyra
`
`et al column 3 lines 33-50, where it discloses determining points in three planes to
`
`create the three-dimensional model of the workpiece, and column 22 lines 60-65 —
`
`column 23 lines 1—19, where it discloses processing of the model using a CAD system
`
`which allows for manipulating the image including construction of multiple views).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to create the mold of England based off a three-dimensional image of the
`
`vehicle floor obtained through digital measurement and establishing top and bottom
`
`sketch planes, as taught by Kacyra et al, because it forms a more quickly formed and
`
`precisely contoured floor tray and allows for different viewing and adjustment of the
`
`image (see Kacyra et al column 1 lines 16-20).
`
`5. Stanesic/Kacyra et al teach the process of Claim 4, including adjusting the digitally
`
`captured image (see column 32, lines 44-52, where it discloses warping or adjusting the
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 12
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 12
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 6
`
`digital/y captured image to account for errors and deviations, and note that these
`
`deviations can account for a carpeted surface).
`
`Stanesic/Kacyra et al fail to teach tilting the top sketch plane of the vehicle foot well
`
`model to produce a tray that is deeper in a direction toward the vehicle firewall.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to adjust the digital model of the vehicle floor tray of Stanesic, including tilting
`
`the top sketch plane to produce a tray with more depth, in order to better conform to the
`
`surface of the floor tray, to provide more space for an occupants feet/shoes, to account
`
`for position of the brake/gas/clutch pedals, and for various other advantages.
`
`6.
`
`Stanesic /Kacyra et al teach the process of Claim 1, and further comprising the step of
`
`modifying the drawn sidewalls of the three-dimensional image of the vehicle floor tray to
`
`conform at least the upper two-thirds of the area of the outer surface of the sidewalls
`
`nearest to the top margin to respective surfaces of the vehicle foot well model, such that
`
`through those areas the sidewalls of the vehicle floor tray do not depart from the
`
`corresponding surfaces of the vehicle foot well by more than one-eighth of an inch (see
`
`Kacyra et al column 2 lines 43-51, where it discloses determining the three-dimensional
`
`image of workpiece so that the image direct/y corresponds to the workpiece, and
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 13
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 13
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 7
`
`column 32 lines 44-61, where it discloses modification of the three-dimensional image to
`
`account for and eliminate measurement errors).
`
`Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Stanesic (6,814,649) in view of Kacyra et al (7,215,430), further in view of Letcher,
`
`Jr. (5,856,828).
`
`3. Stanesic teaches process for manufacturing a vehicle floor tray, comprising the steps
`
`of:
`
`molding a layer of polymeric material in a mold to for conform to a carpeted vehicle floor
`
`(see Figure 2 and column 2 lines 27-49).
`
`Stanesic fails to teach digitally measuring the surface of a vehicle foot well, converting
`
`the measured data into a three-dimensional image and creating a mold based on that
`
`image.
`
`Kacyra et al teach digitally measuring the three-dimensional position of a plurality of
`
`points on a surface of a workpiece (see column 2 lines 43-47), storing said points in a
`
`memory (see column 22 lines 44-55), using the stored points to construct a model of the
`
`surface (see column 2 lines 48-49); using the model of the surface to construct a three-
`
`dimensional image of a vehicle floor tray (see column 2 lines 50—51 and column 22 lines
`
`57-64) and constructing an image of something other than what was digitally captured
`
`(see column 32, lines 44-52, where it discloses warping or adjusting the digital/y
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 14
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 14
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 8
`
`captured image to account for errors and deviations, and note that these deviations can
`
`account for a carpeted surface).
`
`Letcher, Jr. teaches that it is well known to connect together groups of points with B-
`
`splines and lofting between B-Splines to create areal segments (see column 2 lines 61-
`
`67).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`was made to create the mold of England based off a three-dimensional image of the
`
`vehicle floor obtained through digital measurement, as taught by Kacyra et al, because
`
`it forms a more quickly formed and precisely contoured floor tray (see Kacyra et al
`
`column 1 lines 16-20). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to create B-splines, as
`
`taught by Letcher, Jr., because it provides support for a broader set of curve and
`
`surface types (see Letcher, Jr. column 2 lines 7-9).
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-6 have been considered but are
`
`moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in
`
`this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 15
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 15
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 9
`
`§ 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37
`
`CFR1.136(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 ALEXANDER P. TAOUSAKIS whose telephone number
`
`is (571)272-3497. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5:30.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, David Bryant can be reached on (571) 272-4526. The fax phone number for
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 16
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 16
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/463,203
`Art Unit: 3726
`
`Page 10
`
`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.
`
`Alexander P Taousakis
`Examiner
`Art Unit 3726
`
`/A|exander P Taousakis/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 3726
`
`/DAVID P. BRYANT/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3726
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020-01138
`
`Page 17
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 17
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`
`11/463203
`MACNEIL, DAVID F.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`Page 1 of 1
`ALEXANDER P. TAOUSAKIS
`3726
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Notice of References Cited
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`.
`.
`.
`Date
`Document Number
`CIaSSIfIcatlon
`Name
`MM-YYYY
`Country Code-Number-Kind Code
`
`US—5,856,828
`01-1999
`345/420
`Letcher, Jr., John 8.
`us—
`
`——
`__
`——
`__
`_ ——
`I-— ——
`I-—_——
`I-—_——
`I__——
`I-—_——
`I-—_——
`——
`——
`
`
`
`__
`
`*A copy of this reference is not being furnished with this Office action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a).)
`Dates in MM-YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTO—892 (Rev. 01—2001)
`
`Notice of References Cited
`
`Part of Paper No. 20100226
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeiI IP, lPR2020-01138
`
`Page 18
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 18
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Applicant(s)/Patent Under
`Reexamination
`
`MACNEIL, DAVID F.
`
`Examiner
`
`Art Unit
`
`ALEXANDER P TAOUSAKIS
`
`3726
`
`Index of Claims
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`n Non-Elected
`
`Appeal
`
`a Objected
`
` Rejected
`Cancelled
`
`
`
`Allowed Restricted
`
`+I
`
`El Claims renumbered in the same order as presented by applicant
`
`El CPA
`
`U T.D.
`
`U R.1.47
`
`CLAIM
`
`Final
`
`Original
`
`08/10/2009
`
`
`
` /
`
` 111463203
`
`I Interference
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20090810
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 19
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 19
`
`

`

`
`
`11463203
`
`Examiner
`
`MACNEIL, DAVID F.
`
`Art Unit
`
`ALEXANDER P TAOUSAKIS
`
`3726
`
`
`
`
`
`Application/Control No.
`
`Applicant(s)lPatent Under
`Reexamination
`
`Search Notes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SEARCHED
`
`
`Class
`Subclass
`Date
`Examiner
`
`29
`527.1, 407.05, 897.2
`8/10/2009
`AT
`33
`503
`296
`97.23
`73
`
`
`
`
`1.79
`
`SEARCH NOTES
`
`Updated previous search
`
`Search Notes
`
`
`
`2/26/2010
`
`
`
`INTERFERENCE SEARCH
`
`IALEXAN DER P TAOUSAKIS/
`
`Examiner.Art Unit 3726
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. : 20100226
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 20
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 20
`
`

`

`JSPGPUB; JSPAT;
`PR8;
`
`, J50
`
`EAST Search History
`
`EAST Search History
`
`EAST Search History (Prior Art)
`
`s38m7wm1“6“6»“I“734“6“
`
`33
`
`.3vv33v333
`
`333333333333 33533333333333333
`
`
`
`u32303aa3na3nae“.d.d““e38323“C“V“a“a“Jn“Jn“3m“4""20$0313.3n3n3nm3da3da3331935.3.33)3)“.Jo“)0“)0(3“a“a““i
`
`“042n2h373343d.$“e.$“e.m“3)“3)““d3066“58r35“533rniwnfwnn“ee3ee““e3015363/3/2“iefihenhea“r9“rg““m“025.“7M3933mmmmemnem
`
`
`
`
`
`33339333933333333333333133333333333U3333(33W6wWSd1m3(3m3U33(3436W3(36
`c32303a“I“I“e)“e)““34“17
`DndH/“dh/a“dd“ms30"“903.Id““D'81“r3%mmhmmmdedemmh0333633,333t3(\r3n33e5“19“old33“(x“hu“a“a““V3““3832mmNhm...“Sm)m)mmd93839N783333..“mw%ma)“dmmn692382“533“w33nb3n33“a.486“U8“0333“rm“0c“o$“3.343.“3.L3r“0“.Ii33m3Tl.mm“oemammalom“atflfimow3“3)3|“(III333mn3.3WK3.ET3()wwmwmmmm3m£3430mare39Mb3|
`
`
`
`“mamma““h3271“Um3.|.|3.l3(\
`
`(x3uu3
`
`
`
`
`
`333Nm3.33333mm.ms
`35m“nn3“33u.mrWd33mdmmmmmmmaw“0_3c.333%maNewJm37wEmu
`
`3)3333333“'7nd32.MWe3%)mmmm33m327mm).
`“7333mmrQm(3“(3mTm7mm38$
`.3wwmmmm3l)mu
`
`
`
` 30; J30
`
`
`
`SWmmmmmn33unaWnmmumr3m33u3mNN3NmmNNmNuNNmNPO3ONOmm0Om0m0Om03m33333333333333333333m
`
`33333333333333333333333333333 333333333333333333
`
`33333333333333333333333333333 333333333333333333
`
`
`JS PGPL B; JSPAT;
`SOCR; E30; J30
`
`S33
`3
`
`JS PGPLB; JSPAT;
`JSDCR'
`E30; J30
`
`333333333333333333333333333333333333
`:04
`
`
`33333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333
`SPGPLB; JSPAT;
`JSOCR;
`
`OR
`
`3 EEK?"
`30; J30
`
`SPAT
`
`333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`St.2Z3pmpmmpmpmmpmmNm"au6mpmm6DDmDmmm0m,0m,0mDmDmDmDemmwom8m8omNamNammcmmom3cm3omm11300n00n0“0n0u03Om0I00“00300“0“0“0m0“0“O333m3,_3333333333333A3L333333333333m33m3._3333330333333333K323£3333m33m3,_3333333m33n33,_3333m3n3L3“333n3L33333333n33,_33333333333333m33n3L33333
`
`33
`3
`Default Operator
`‘333333333333333333333333333333333333 333333333333333333 ‘33333333333333333333333333333333333
`30%
`
`3333333333333333333.333333333333 333333333333333333 333333333333333333333333333333333333
`
`
`1..1..“:3.C.“C.C.“C.NC.“C.23.m4:ma:22356m66m6m6m6m636m6D.11311m11m1“1m1m131n1m66w77m77m7m7m7m7m7m7a[E[Z3/r“I1“/m“1m13'm1
`wm“3““mw3“44w54m45m9m9m9m9w0m1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`fileill/CVDocumentsWo20and%205ettings/ataousakjs/My%2.,.3203/EASTSea1‘chHistory.11463203_AccessibleVersionhtm (1 of 6)2/26/2010 12:17:38 PM
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020-01138
`
`Page 21
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2008
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01138
`Page 21
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`EAST Search History
`
`US—PGPUB; USPAT;
`
`N
`:OR
`
`
`
`
`
`NN=§xtN=1:NN=§3NN=1:NNkkt:kkxtkkttkkx15::NNNRNN‘xN:
`
`5NNNNN.‘
`
`JS—PGPUB; JSPAT;
`JSOCR; EPO; J30
`
`
`
`
`
`NNNNNNNNNNNNN‘
`, JSPAT;
`PO; J30
`
`
`
`N NNNNNN“Nu“NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.
`NN
`OR
`JS— PGPL B;
`DEER?”
`JPO
`F’O'
`JSDCR
`
`JSDCR'
`
`PO; JPO
`
`
`
` O5::tkkttkkNNNkktN==§NN==\NNR=\:NN.\
`
`50R
`- NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
`§0R
`
`USPGPUB; USPAT;
`JPO
`. EPO'
`USOCR
`
`S-PGPUB; USPAT;
`USOCR; EPO; JPO
`US—PGPUB; USPAT;
`USDCR'
`EPO; JPO
`
`“Usi‘fié‘fiUETDEEHW
`
`EOR
`NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.
`§0R
`
`NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
`3‘
`
`SNN
`:
`‘NNNNNNNNNNNNN“NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN-
`N
`=02
`
`NNN_NN.NN
`
`
`
`NN.NNNN.NNN113N33N3N33N4N55N5N4.4.N4.N..1...1.N..1.N..1.2.N2.N2.2.N2.N66N6N44N4N44N4N44N4N11N1N11N1N11N1N11N1N77m7N44N4N44N4N44N4N11N1NQ2N2N22NQN22N2N//N/lNll/NNllNIN66N6N66N6N66N6N66N6N1010N,0N,0DN0ND,0N10ND0NDNomomNamNamomNomNampmNamNamomNomN00N0N0ONONO0NON0ONON00N0N00NON00N0N00N0
`
`\NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
`
`
`
`NNNNNNNmNNmNNNx‘“\NNNNNNNNN“NNNNNNNN00::NN0NNNNN0:30N00NNN1NN0:NNNN03:00:3:
`
`NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.
`§OR
`
`w
`
`SNNNNNNNNNN.
`: 1 0
`
`‘U§‘1‘5€§FUETD§13RF
`USDCR; EPO; JPO
`
`file:///C1/D0cuments%20and%205ettings/ataousakjs/My%2.,.3203/EASTSea1‘chHist0ry.11463203_AccessibleVersionhtm (2 of 6)2/26/2010 12:17:38 PM
`
`MacNeiI Exhibit 2008
`
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, |PR2020—01138
`
`Page 22
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`N0418292384572WN03N0925N760N0NNN1r644312428NN4Nn41.4NS4NSnNn0rnN0262918488577mNa010.0173N10NNaNaN200U060367171Na