DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
Misnumbered claims 25-27 need to be renumbered to 24-26.
Claims 26-27 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 26, line 1, recites “a recovery line connection aperture” which should be changed to “the recovery line connection aperture”.
Claim 26, lines 1-2, recites “a recovery point” which should be changed to “the recovery point”.
Claim 26, line 3, recites “a side” which should be changed to “the side”.
Claim 26, line 3, recites “a plate” which should be changed to “the plate”.
Claim 26, line 4, recites “a bend radius” which should be changed to “the bend radius”.
Claim 27, lines 1-2, recites “a pair of interface members” which should be changed to “the pair of interface members”.
Claim 27, line 2, recites “a plate” which should be changed to “the plate”.
Claim 27, line 4, recites “edges of the connection aperture” which should be changed to “the edges of the connection aperture”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 3-4, 9-13, 16-19, 23, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Olson US 20130277946 A1.
Regarding independent claim 1 and dependent claim 26, Olson discloses [a recovery line connection aperture 9 interface member 11 for a vehicle recovery point,] (Fig. 1-4; Paragraph 0033) [the recovery point comprising a plate 3 having the recovery line connection aperture through a distal end thereof,] (Fig. 1-3; Paragraph 0033; As shown in Fig. 1-3, Olson illustrates the plate 3 having the having the recovery line connection aperture through a distal end.) wherein [the interface member is applied against a side surface 5 of the plate to interface an edge of the aperture so that an outer bearing surface of the interface member increases a bend radius of the recovery line connection around the edge of the connection aperture in use.] (Fig. 2 & 4; As shown in Fig. 2 & 4, Olson illustrates wherein the interface member 11 is applied against a side surface 5 of the plate 3, directly surrounding the aperture edge. This causes the connection to bear against the outer face of the interface member rather than the aperture edge of the plate, which shifts the point of contact outward from the plate. By moving the contact point outward, the path of the connection is lengthened around the aperture, which increases the effective bend radius of the connection when in use.)
Regarding claim 3, Olson discloses [wherein the interface member 11 comprises a planar inner surface lying against the side surface of the plate adjacent the aperture.] (Fig. 4; Paragraph 0033; As shown in Fig. 4, Olson illustrates wherein the interface member 11 comprises a planar inner surface lying against the side surface of the plate adjacent the aperture.)
Regarding claim 4, Olson discloses [wherein the interface member is welded to the side surface.] (Paragraph 0033)
Regarding claim 9, Olson discloses [wherein the outer bearing surface is substantially orthogonal with respect to the side surface of the plate at an inner edge of the interface member.] (Fig. 4; As shown in Fig. 4, Olson illustrates wherein the outer bearing surface 21 is substantially orthogonal with respect to the side surface of the plate 3 at an inner edge of the interface member.)
Regarding claim 10, Olson discloses [wherein an inner edge of the interface member 11 meets the edge of the connection aperture 9.] (Fig. 4; As shown in Fig. 4, Olson illustrates wherein an inner edge of the interface member 11 meets the edge of the connection aperture 9.)
Regarding claim 11, Olson discloses [wherein the outer bearing surface is substantially orthogonal with respect to the side surface of the plate 3 at an outer edge of the interface member 11.] (Fig. 4; As shown in Fig. 4, Olson illustrates wherein the outer bearing surface is substantially orthogonal with respect to the side surface of the plate 33 at an outer edge of the interface member 11.)
Regarding claim 12, Olson discloses [wherein an outer edge of the outer bearing surface meets an outer edge of the plate 3.] (Fig. 9; As shown in Fig. 9, Olson illustrates wherein the outer edge of the interface member 11 meeting the outer edge of the plate 3.)
Regarding claim 13, Olson discloses [wherein a portion of the outer edge of the interface member follows the outer edge of the plate.] (Fig. 9; As shown in Fig. 9, Olson illustrates wherein a portion of the outer edge of the interface member follows the outer edge of the plate.)
Regarding claim 16, Olson discloses [the recovery point and wherein the edge of the connection aperture is chamfered.] (Fig. 10; As shown in Fig. 10, Olson illustrates wherein the edge of the connection aperture 9 being chamfered.)
Regarding claim 17, Olson discloses [wherein the interface member 11 is annular.] (Fig. 9; As shown in Fig. 9, Olson illustrates wherein the interface member 11 is annular/ring-shaped.)
Regarding claim 18, Olson discloses [wherein the interface member 11 defines an insertion portion 13 which fits within the connection aperture,] (Fig. 4; Paragraph 0033) [the insertion portion defining an outer fitting surface which fits against an inner surface of the connection aperture and an inner surface continuing from the outer bearing surface.] (Fig. 4; As shown in Fig. 4, Olson illustrates wherein the insertion portion defines an outer fitting surface which fits against an inner surface of the connection aperture and an inner surface continuing from the outer bearing surface.)
Regarding claim 19, Olson discloses [wherein the insertion portion 13 is cylindrical.] (Fig. 4-6; Paragraph 0033)
Regarding claim 23, Olson discloses [wherein the insertion portion 13 defines a planar inner surface adjacent and orthogonal to the outer fitting surface of the insertion portion.] (Fig. 4; As shown in Fig. 4, Olson illustrates wherein the insertion portion 13 defines a planar inner surface 19 adjacent and orthogonal to the outer fitting surface of the insertion portion.)
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 2, 20-22, 25, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson US 20130277946 A1 in view Lee KR 20150137358 A.
Regarding claims 2 and 27, Olson does not disclose wherein a pair of interface members are applied to opposite sides of the plate so that each increases the bend radius of the recovery line connection around respective edges of the connection aperture in use.
Lee teaches [wherein a pair of interface members are applied to opposite sides of the plate so that each increases the bend radius of the recovery line connection around respective edges of the connection aperture in use.] (Fig. 3 & 4; As shown in Fig. 3 & 4, Lee illustrates a pair of interface members 200, 300 that are disposed on opposite sides of the plate, such that each interface member engages a respective side adjacent to the aperture. Each interface member shafts the point at which the recovery connection engages the aperture edge outward from the plate surface, thus increasing the effective bend radius of the recovery connection around the respective aperture edge in use.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the pair of opposing interface members of Lee with the recovery point plate of Olson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for distributing the contact of the recovery connection across both sides of the plate aperture, thus reducing localized stress at the edges of the aperture and increasing the effective bend radius on both sides which will improve durability and load-handling performance.
Regarding claim 20, Olson does not explicitly teach that the insertion portion inserts half way into the connection aperture or less. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the insertion portions of Olson to use a depth of the insertion portion that is halfway or less into the connection aperture so as to achieve an optimal structural support for the insertion portions of the interface members at the aperture edge, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. See, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Moreover, Applicant should note that nothing of record, nor known in the art, suggests that using the specific claimed range or value yields any previously unexpected results.
Regarding claim 21, Olson does not disclose [wherein a pair of interface members are applied to opposite sides of the plate and wherein respective insertion portions thereof meet within the connection aperture.]
Lee teaches [wherein a pair of interface members are applied to opposite sides of the plate and wherein respective insertion portions thereof meet within the connection aperture.] (Fig. 3 & 4; As shown in Fig. 3 & 4, Lee illustrates a pair of interface members 200, 300 that are disposed on opposite sides of the plate and wherein respective insertion portions meet with the connection aperture.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the opposing interface members with meeting insertion portions of Lee with the recovery point plate of Olson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for creating a continuous or aligned bearing surface through the aperture, thus providing uniform engagement with the recovery connection and reducing wear or damage at the aperture edges.
Regarding claim 22, Olson, as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the insertion portion defines a planar distal face and wherein distal faces of the insertion portions meet end on.] (Fig. 3 & 4; As shown in Fig. 3 & 4, Lee illustrates wherein the insertion portion defines a planar distal face and wherein distal faces of the insertion portions meet end on.)
Regarding claim 25, Olson does not disclose a stress relief notch in the planar inner surface adjacent the outer fitting surface.
Lee teaches [a stress relief notch 120 in the planar inner surface adjacent the outer fitting surface.] (Fig. 4; Page 4, lines 10-12)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the stress relief notch of Lee with the recovery point plate of Olson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for reducing localized stress concentration at the junction between the planar inner surface and the outer fitting surface, thus improving fatigue resistance and extending the service life of the interface member.
Claims 5, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson US 20130277946 A1 in view of a second embodiment of Olson US 20130277946 A1.
Regarding claim 5, the first embodiment of Olson does not disclose wherein the outer bearing surface is curved on an inside thereof.
The second embodiment of Olson teaches [wherein the outer bearing surface is curved on an inside thereof.] (Fig. 15; As shown in Fig. 15, Olson illustrates the outer bearing of the interface member 211A’ surface being curved on an inside thereof.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the curved inner bearing surface of the second embodiment of Olson with the interface member of Olson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for reducing stress concentration and wear on the recovery connection at the aperture edge, thus improving durability and load-handling capability.
Regarding claim 14, Olson, as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein an inner edge of the interface member is rounded.] (Fig. 15; As shown in Fig. 15, Olson illustrates the inner edge of the interface member 211A’ being rounded.)
Regarding claim 15, Olson, as modified, does not explicitly teach wherein the inner edge has a radius of approximately 0.5mm. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the inner edge of the second embodiment of Olson to use an inner edge with a radius of approximately 0.5mm, so as to achieve an optimal reduction in stress concentration and wear at the aperture edge, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. See, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Moreover, Applicant should note that nothing of record, nor known in the art, suggests that using the specific claimed range or value yields any previously unexpected results.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson US 20130277946 A1 in view of Sanftleben et al. US 9079465 B1.
Regarding claim 6, Olson does not disclose wherein the outer bearing surface is curved on an outside thereof.
Sanftleben et al. teaches [wherein the outer bearing surface is curved on an outside thereof.] (Fig. 10; As shown in Fig. 10, Sanftleben et al. illustrates the outer surface of a chain aperture 222 being curved on an outside thereof.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the outside curvature of Sanftleben et al. with the interface member of Olson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for easing the transition of the recovery connection around the exterior edge of the aperture, thus reducing abrasion and improving wear resistance.
Regarding claim 7, Olson does not disclose wherein the outer bearing surface is semicircular in cross-section.
Sanftleben et al. teaches [wherein the outer bearing surface is semicircular in cross-section.] (Fig. 10; As shown in Fig. 10, Sanftleben et al. illustrates the outer surface of a chain aperture 222 being curved along its outer and inner edges, thus making it semicircular in cross-section.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the semicircular cross-sectional profile of Sanftleben et al. with the interface member of Olson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for evenly distributing forces along the curved surface, thus reducing localized stress concentration and durability.
Regarding claim 8, Olson, as modified, does not explicitly teach that the outer bearing surface arcs through 180. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aperture of Sanftleben et al. to use an outer bearing surface that arcs through 180, so as to achieve an optimal balance between maximizing contact area and minimizing stress on the recovery connection, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. See, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Moreover, Applicant should note that nothing of record, nor known in the art, suggests that using the specific claimed range or value yields any previously unexpected results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. US 20150137485 A1 – comprises a cap having an expanded pad and an apparatus having a towing pipe provided with the cap. The cap includes a body having opened ends and an expanded pad attached to an inner circumferential surface of the body. The expanded pad does not close the opened ends of the body before being heated, expands when being heated, and closes the opened ends of the body after being heated. The body includes a ring-shaped ring plate and a plurality of legs that protrudes from one side of the ring plate and spaces apart from each other along a circumference of the ring plate. When the expanded pad is heated, ends of the legs are bent radially outwardly by expansion of the expanded pad.
Harrison et al. US 20040041416 A1 – comprises a tow nut for a vehicle bumper assembly having an engagement portion by which a tow eye may be connected thereto and an attachment portion by which the tow nut may be attached to the assembly, characterized in that the tow nut is provided, between the engagement and attachment portions, with a zone of weakness whereby relative movement between the engagement portion and the assembly is permitted, under an impact condition.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohamed Medani whose telephone number is (703)756-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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.
/Mohamed M Medani/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/JACOB D KNUTSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611