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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the slot" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear if “the slot” is the same as “the elongated slot”.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Nowacyzk et al. (US-20130081913) in view of Lee (KR-20100030051).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Nowacyzk et al. discloses a shock absorber (fig 2) comprising: an inner tube (30) defining an inner volume; a piston (32) slidably disposed in the inner tube (fig 2), the piston dividing the inner volume of the inner tube into a rebound working chamber and a compression working chamber (fig 2,46/48); an intermediate tube (40) on the inner tube defining an intermediate chamber (84) between the inner tube and the intermediate tube (fig 2), the intermediate chamber being in fluid communication with the inner volume of the inner tube ([0025], at least through 86); an outer tube (36);
the inner tube and the intermediate tube being in the outer tube (figs 2-3), the outer tube defining a reserve chamber (52) between the outer tube and the intermediate tube; a valve (42) fluidly connecting the intermediate chamber and the reserve chamber (figs 2-3); a slot (fig 3 at 122) in the outer tube (36) between the valve (42) and the reserve chamber (52).
Nowacyzk et al. is silent as to the shape of the opening at 122. Lee teaches wherein shock absorber (50) comprises intermediate tube (52a) including flow path holes (522) that may be formed in a circular shape, but is not limited thereto and may be modified in shape. In the present invention of Lee, it is disclosed wherein the shape of the hole is modified to be elliptical or elongated in the axial direction (cl. 2) of the shock absorber in order to prevent stress concentration and thereby increase rigidity of the tube (52a, Applicant provided translation p. 11). Lee doesn’t show wherein the elongated slot 522 is in the outer tube of the shock absorber, however, lee has been relied upon to teach wherein a modification in the shape of an aperture in a cylinder wall is improved in at least strength and stress concentration prevention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Nowacyzk et al. to utilize an elliptical or elongated shape as taught by Lee for a fluid passage hole in a cylinder wall at least in order to increase strength of the tube and prevent stress concentration at the aperture (Applicant provided translation p. 11, “For example, in the present invention, in order to prevent stress concentration occurring in the inner tube 52a as the diameter of the passage hole 522 increases, it is preferable to form the passage hole 522 in an elliptical shape. More preferably, the flow path 522 is made of an elliptical shape long in the longitudinal direction. As such, when the passage hole 522 has an elliptical shape that is long in the longitudinal direction, the cross-sectional area of the inner tube 52a may be increased, thereby making the rigidity of the inner tube 52a more rigid.”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose wherein the aperture (122) has a first end and a second end (fig 3, at least at either side of 100), the first end and the second end being spaced from each other along the axis and spaced from the valve along the axis (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose a transfer ring (104 or 124) sealed to the valve and having a bore (110) in fluid communication with the valve and the intermediate chamber (fig 3), the transfer ring extending from the valve through the slot (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose wherein the elongated slot has elongated sides (122 including opening at 98) and the transfer ring (124) has a flange abutting the elongated sides of the slot (fig 3 at least at 124). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Nowacyzk et al. discloses a stud (318 and/or 104) fixed to the intermediate tube ([0039] at least wherein 318 is welded to 40), the intermediate tube (40) having an orifice open the intermediate chamber (figs 3 and 7A), the stud having a bore in fluid communication with the orifice, the valve being in fluid communication with the bore of the stud (figs 3-7B).
Regarding claim 7, Nowacyzk et al. discloses wherein the intermediate tube (40) includes a flat defining the office, the stud (104) being fixed to the intermediate tube at the flat (fig 4). In at least figure 4, it has been interpreted that 104 is fixed at the stepped flat portion of 40 at 104.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose wherein the aperture (122) has elongated sides and the stud (104) is between intermediate tube and the elongated sides of the slot (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose a transfer ring (at least 90 or 318) sealed to the valve and having a bore (110) in fluid communication with the valve and the intermediate chamber (84), the transfer ring extending from the valve through the aperture (122) and into the stud (fig 3, [0026]). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, Nowacyzk et al. discloses wherein the transfer ring (90) is sealed (O-ring) to bore of the stud (fig 3, [0026]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose wherein the slot (122) has a first end and a second end (fig 3, at least at either side of 100), the first end and the second end being spaced from each other along the axis and spaced from the transfer ring (90) along the axis (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose wherein the elongated slot at (122) has a length along the axis and the transfer ring (90) is centered on the length (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose a valve housing (98) sealed to the outer tube, the valve housing surrounding the elongated slot (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, Nowacyzk et al. discloses wherein the valve has a first port (120) in communication with the slot and a second port (110) in communication with the intermediate chamber.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose a valve housing (98) sealed to the outer tube (fig 3), the valve housing surrounding the elongated slot and the first port (120) of the valve (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 15.
Regarding claims 3-15, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Nowacyzk et al. to utilize an elliptical or elongated shape as taught by Lee for a fluid passage hole in a cylinder wall at least in order to increase strength of the tube and prevent stress concentration at the aperture (Applicant provided translation p. 11, “For example, in the present invention, in order to prevent stress concentration occurring in the inner tube 52a as the diameter of the passage hole 522 increases, it is preferable to form the passage hole 522 in an elliptical shape. More preferably, the flow path 522 is made of an elliptical shape long in the longitudinal direction. As such, when the passage hole 522 has an elliptical shape that is long in the longitudinal direction, the cross-sectional area of the inner tube 52a may be increased, thereby making the rigidity of the inner tube 52a more rigid.”).
Regarding claim 16, Nowacyzk et al. discloses a shock absorber (fig 2) comprising: an inner tube (30) defining an inner volume; a piston (32) slidably disposed in the inner tube (fig 2), the piston dividing the inner volume of the inner tube into a rebound working chamber and a compression working chamber (fig 2,46/48); an intermediate tube (40) on the inner tube defining an intermediate chamber (84) between the inner tube and the intermediate tube (fig 2), the intermediate tube having an orifice (102) open to the intermediate chamber and the inner tube (40) having an orifice open (at least 86) to the intermediate chamber and the inner volume ([0025]); an outer tube (36) defining a reserve chamber (52) between the outer tube and the intermediate tube (fig 2); a valve (42) fluidly connecting the intermediate chamber (84) and the reserve chamber (52) figs 2-3); a slot (fig 3 at 122) in the outer tube (36) between the valve (42) and the reserve chamber (52).
Nowacyzk et al. is silent as to the shape of the opening at 122. Lee teaches wherein shock absorber (50) comprises intermediate tube (52a) including flow path holes (522) that may be formed in a circular shape, but is not limited thereto and may be modified in shape. In the present invention of Lee, it is disclosed wherein the shape of the hole is modified to be elliptical or elongated in the axial direction of the shock absorber in order to prevent stress concentration and thereby increase rigidity of the tube (52a, Applicant provided translation p. 11). Lee doesn’t show wherein the elongated slot 522 is in the outer tube of the shock absorber, however, lee has been relied upon to teach wherein a modification in the shape of an aperture in a cylinder wall is improved in at least strength and stress concentration prevention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Nowacyzk et al. to utilize an elliptical or elongated shape as taught by Lee for a fluid passage hole in a cylinder wall at least in order to increase strength of the tube and prevent stress concentration at the aperture (Applicant provided translation p. 11, “For example, in the present invention, in order to prevent stress concentration occurring in the inner tube 52a as the diameter of the passage hole 522 increases, it is preferable to form the passage hole 522 in an elliptical shape. More preferably, the flow path 522 is made of an elliptical shape long in the longitudinal direction. As such, when the passage hole 522 has an elliptical shape that is long in the longitudinal direction, the cross-sectional area of the inner tube 52a may be increased, thereby making the rigidity of the inner tube 52a more rigid.”).
Regarding claim 17, Nowacyzk et al. discloses a stud (at least 104/318) fixed to the intermediate tube (40), the stud having a bore (100/110) in fluid communication with the orifice of the intermediate tube (fig 3).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose a transfer ring (at least 124 and/or 90) sealed to the valve, the transfer ring having a bore (100/110) extending from the valve through the elongated slot to the stud (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 15
Regarding claim 19, Nowacyzk et al. discloses wherein the valve (42) has a first port (120) in communication with the slot (122) and a second port in communication with the bore of the transfer ring (110/100).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Nowacyzk et al. and Lee disclose a valve housing (98) sealed to the outer tube (fig 2 and 3), the valve housing surrounding the elongated slot and the first port of the valve (fig 3). As set forth above and as modified by the elongated shape of Lee, it has been interpreted that the combination would provide the orientation as claimed in claim 15
Regarding claims 16-20, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Nowacyzk et al. to utilize an elliptical or elongated shape as taught by Lee for a fluid passage hole in a cylinder wall at least in order to increase strength of the tube and prevent stress concentration at the aperture (Applicant provided translation p. 11, “For example, in the present invention, in order to prevent stress concentration occurring in the inner tube 52a as the diameter of the passage hole 522 increases, it is preferable to form the passage hole 522 in an elliptical shape. More preferably, the flow path 522 is made of an elliptical shape long in the longitudinal direction. As such, when the passage hole 522 has an elliptical shape that is long in the longitudinal direction, the cross-sectional area of the inner tube 52a may be increased, thereby making the rigidity of the inner tube 52a more rigid.”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 6-9, filed 5/7/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 102(a1) Nowacyzk et al. , have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nowacyzk et al. (US-20130081913) in view of Lee (KR-20100030051). Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K HSIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6259. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5, Monday-Friday.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
/JAMES K HSIAO/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights