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 . 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.
Election/Restrictions
A telephone call was made to Bryan H. Opalko on 10/23/2025 to notify the attorney of the Examiner’s position that claims 7-10 are part of Species B (having an extension on the longitudinally moveable member) and not part of elected Species A (having an extension on the front stop) (see Examiner’s Requirement for Restriction/Election filed 03/28/2025) (see also Applicant’s Response to Election/Restriction filed 09/29/2025). In Applicant’s Response to Election/Restriction, Applicant elected Species A of Figures 2-8, without traverse, alleging that Species A encompasses at least claims 7-10, 11-13 and 14-17. However, independent claim 7, in the fifth to last line, recites the “the extension of the member” (exemplified as extension 414e in Fig. 10), as directed to Species B. Thus, claims 7-10 have been withdrawn from consideration by the Examiner, as per MPEP § 821. Therefore, Claims 11-17 are being considered by Examiner in this Office action, as they are drawn to elected Species A.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 12, line 10, the period after “position” should be changed to a semicolon. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Willison (US 2,724,513) in view of Cope (US 3,759,400).
Referring to Claim 11: Willison teaches a railcar damping system configured for placement in a railcar center sill (10) having longitudinally spaced front (12) and rear stops (14) defining a center sill pocket (16) (Figs. 1 and 2), said railcar damping system comprising:
a yoke (44) provided in the center sill pocket and having a longitudinal axis, the yoke including opposing top and bottom walls extending longitudinally and including a distal end wall connecting the top and bottom walls to define a yoke pocket (Fig. 2);
a damping assembly (60) disposed in the yoke pocket and configured for receiving and dissipating external forces acting on a coupler connected to the yoke, the damping assembly including a member having a base portion (70)
a follower block (68) provided within the yoke pocket for movement along the longitudinal axis, the follower block positioned transversely of the longitudinal axis and including opposing proximal and distal facing stop sides (Figs. 1 and 2) (Col. 2, lines 50-52);
wherein the front stop (12) includes a proximal stop surface formed on an inner surface of the front stop and a distally extending portion (78) extending longitudinally and terminating in a distal stop surface (76) (Fig. 1) (Col. 2, lines 41-43);
wherein in buff movement, the follower block (68) is urged toward the distal end of the center sill pocket (16) and engages the damping assembly (60), follower block travels along the inner surface of the distally extending portion (78) of the front stop (12) and engages the base portion (70) of the member defining a full buff position (Figs. 1 and 2) (Col. 2, lines 50-52);
wherein in draft movement, the member (60, 64, 70) is urged toward the proximal end of the center sill pocket until the proximal end (70) of the member engages the distal stop surface (76) of the front stop (12, 78) defining a full draft position (Figs. 1 and 2) (Col. 2, lines 50-52).
As noted by strikethrough above, Willison does not specifically teach a side wall extending longitudinally along the center sill pocket and having proximal and distal ends, wherein follower block engages the sidewall of the member defining a full buff position. However, Cope teaches a housed draft gear, wherein the draft gear assembly includes a housing member (1) having a side wall (5) extending longitudinally along the center sill pocket and having proximal and distal ends (Fig. 1), wherein follower block (28) engages the sidewall (26) of the member defining a full buff position (Col. 4, lines 4-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Willison to provide a housing member with a side wall to the damping assembly, as taught by Cope, in order to provide additional protection to the damping assembly with a reasonable expectation of success.
Referring to Claim 12: Willison in view of Cope, as applied to claim 11, further teaches a railcar damping system, wherein:
the member is a longitudinally moveable member, wherein:
in buff movement, the follower block is urged toward the distal end of the center sill pocket and engages the damping assembly, follower block travels along the inner surface of the distally extending portion of the front stop and engages the side wall of the longitudinally moveable member defining a full buff position;
in draft movement, the longitudinally moveable member is urged toward the proximal end of the center sill pocket until the proximal end of the longitudinally moveable member engages the distal stop surface of the front stop defining a full draft position.
or;
the member is a housing (Cope, 1), wherein:
in buff movement, the follower block (Willison, 68) is urged toward the distal end of the center sill pocket (Willison, 16) and engages the damping assembly (Willison, 16), follower block travels along the inner surface of the distally extending portion (Willison, 78) of the front stop (Willison, 12) and engages the side wall (Cope, 5) of the housing defining a full buff position;
in draft movement, the housing (Cope, 1) is urged toward the proximal end of the center sill pocket (Willison, 16) until the proximal end of the housing engages the distal stop surface (Willison, 76) of the front stop defining a full draft position (Willison, Col. 2, lines 30-43).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Willison in view of Cope and Sommerfeld (US 2006/0043045 A1).
Referring to Claim 13: Willison fails to specifically teach that the damping system is configured to facilitate full compression of the damping assembly in buff movement but partial compression of the damping assembly in draft movement. Rather, Willison teaches that the key 40, yoke 44 and coupler shank 42 are dimensioned to allow the desired amount of unrestricted travel of the gear in buffing and drafting (Col. 2, lines 44-61). However, Sommerfeld teaches a long buff short draft travel draft gear, wherein the components are dimensioned to allow full buff travel and limit total draft travel (Para. [0061]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Willison to dimension components to allow full buff travel and limit total draft travel, as taught by Sommerfeld, in order to optimize buffing and drafting performance relative to compression of the damping assembly and thereby accommodate additional buff travel in the standard pocket (see Sommerfeld, Para. [0035]) with a reasonable expectation of success.
Reasons for Allowance
Claims 14-17 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art fails to teach the combination of limitations recited in independent claim 14. More specifically, the prior art, including Willison, Cope and Sommerfeld, fails to teach a follower block “including a flange portion defining opposing proximal and distal facing stop sides . . . wherein in buff movement . . . the flange portion of the follower block travels along the distally extending portion of the front stop and engages the side wall of the member defining a full buff position,” as recited in claim 14. While Willison teaches distally extending portions of the front stop, Willison fails to teach the follower block flange portion travelling along the distally extending portions of the front stop. Other references teach follower blocks with what may be interpreted as flanges (see, e.g., Sommerfeld’s first portion 232 on follower 230 (Fig. 1), Manley (US 5,176,268) (Fig. 4), O’Connor (US 1,964,170) (Fig. 3), Schoedl et al. (US D857,554 S) and Schoedl et al. (US D963,520 S)). However, Examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Willison with a flanged follower to meet the limitations of claim 14. Such a modification would require an improper degree of hindsight reasoning as it is unclear why or how one of ordinary skill in the art would modify Willison such that said modified follower flanges travel along the distally extending portions of the front stop.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY L KUHFUSS whose telephone number is (571)270-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00am to 6:00 pm CDT.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached on (571)272-6682. 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.
/ZACHARY L KUHFUSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617