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 .
Response to Arguments
Claims 1-17 and 30-40 are pending. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 19 November 2025, with respect to 1, 6, and 30 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Sahinkaya (US 5,600,955) and Bartsch et al.(US 8,757,212) or Beyerlein (US 2010/0057298).
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) 1-6 and 9-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahinkaya (US 5,600,955) in view of Bartsch et al.(US 8,757,212).
Regarding Claim 1, Sahinkaya discloses a method of operating a hydraulic system that includes a hydraulic device, a hydraulic load, and a differential buffer (Device/Pump, Load/Actuator, Buffer/“RAPS” Stabilizer; Fig. 1), the method comprising:
operating the hydraulic device as a pump to produce an operational differential pressure and a fluctuating differential pressure between a first port and a second port of the hydraulic device, wherein the fluctuating differential pressure is superimposed on the operational differential pressure (In Fig. 1: Pump with first port in Supply Line and second port in Return Line. In Fig. 3: DPPP varies with operational differential pressure/“pressure area of the power piston”, DPM and multiplication of fluctuating differential pressure/“ pump speed oscillation”; Col. 7, Lines 23-31; Fig. 3. Multiplication being superimposed);
applying a total differential pressure across a barrier of the differential buffer exposed to a first fluid volume fluidly connected to the first port and a second fluid volume fluidly connected to the second port, wherein the total differential pressure is less than or equal to a sum of the operational differential pressure and the fluctuating differential pressure (Barrier 3 between first volume/left sub-cavity of 8 and second volume/right-cavity of 8; Col. 6, Lines 50-65; Total differential pressure across 3 has same pressure differential of power piston, which is not more than sum of operational and fluctuating; Col. 7, Lines 1-20; Fig. 2); and
partially in response to the fluctuating differential pressure, displacing a first portion of the barrier, relative to a housing of the differential buffer, to at least partially mitigate the fluctuating differential pressure transmitted to the hydraulic load (Displacing barrier 3 by “XPR” tunes fluctuation/oscillatory pressure of Load/Actuator to eliminate vibrations at actuator supports in housing 8; Col. 4, Lines 25-40; Fig. 1).
Sahinkaya fails to explicitly disclose when the first portion of the barrier is displaced, holding a second portion of the barrier in a fixed position relative to the housing of the differential buffer. However, However, Bartsch et al. teaches when the first portion of the barrier is displaced, holding a second portion of the barrier in a fixed position relative to the housing of the differential buffer (Bartsch: Maximum displacement/first portion occurs at center of diaphragms/barrier 11 with flange/second portion 24 fixed within holding means 32 of housing 34; Col. 4, Lines 5-15; Col. 5, Lines 40-50; Col. 6, Lines 30-60; Fig. 4,11). Bartsch et al. and Sahinkaya are in similar fields comprising pulsation damping in vehicular hydraulic systems. Modifying Sahinkaya with teachings of Bartsch et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention when the first portion of the barrier is displaced, holding a second portion of the barrier in a fixed position relative to the housing of the differential buffer for the purpose of protecting against damaging tensile loadings and maintaining space among a plurality of barriers within the housing (Bartsch: Col. 4, Lines 5-15; Col. 6, Lines 40-55).
Regarding Claim 2, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. discloses the method of claim 1. Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the barrier (3; Fig. 2) is a diaphragm. However, Bartsch et al. further teaches wherein the barrier is a diaphragm (Bartsch: Diaphragms 11/11’ in damping means 4/5 as barriers placed in chambers 12 that reduce pulsation/pressure to 10; Col. 3, Lines 1-35; Fig. 1-2,4,8). Modifying Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. with additional teachings of Bartsch et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the barrier is a diaphragm for the purpose of having elastic compression or expansion to change volume (Bartsch: Col. 3, Lines 34-60).
Regarding Claim 3, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the diaphragm is edged clamped and displacing at least a portion of the diaphragm includes deforming at least a portion of the diaphragm (Bartsch: Diaphragms 11/11’ with clamped edge 24 in holding means 32; Col. 6, Lines 30-50; Fig. 4,11-12. Fig. 3 showing deforming; Col. 2, Lines 20-30; Col. 3, Lines 30-40).
Regarding Claim 4, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the hydraulic load is a hydraulic actuator (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the hydraulic system is an active suspension system (Payload active suspension system; Col. 8, Lines 25-35).
Regarding Claim 6, Sahinkaya discloses a differential buffer for a hydraulic system (See Buffer/“RAPS” Stabilizer in Fig. 1-2) comprising:
a housing (8; Fig. 2);
a first internal volume located in the housing (Left sub-cavity of 8; Fig. 2);
a second internal volume located in the housing (Right sub-cavity of 8; Fig. 2);
a first flow passage fluidly connected to the first internal volume, wherein the first flow passage is configured to fluidly connect to a hydraulic device (Fig. 1: First passage/Left line 1 connected to first volume/left sub-cavity 8 connects to left 9, to Q1, to supply line to hydraulic device/pump);
a second flow passage fluidly connected to the second internal volume, wherein the second flow passage is configured to fluidly connect to the hydraulic device, wherein the first flow passage and the second flow passage are configured to maintain a phase relationship of pressure fluctuations in the first flow passage and the second flow passage (Fig. 1: Second passage/Right line 1 connected to second volume/right sub-cavity 8 connects to right 9, to Q2, to return line to hydraulic device/pump in order to tune with fluctuations/oscillatory pressure; Col. 5, Lines 45-67; Col. 6, Lines 1-5. Tuning by movement of barrier 3, changes volumes/passages, being a phase relationship); and
a barrier separating at least a portion of the first internal volume and at least a portion of the second internal volume, wherein a first portion of the barrier is configured to move relative to the housing based on a pressure difference between the first internal volume and the second internal volume, and wherein the barrier is biased toward a neutral position (Barrier 3 separating first and second volumes/left and right sub-cavities of housing 8 slides and biased to equilibrium; Col. 5, Lines 45-50; Fig. 2).
Sahinkaya fails to explicitly disclose a second, different portion of the barrier is clamped such that it remains fixed relative to the housing when the first portion moves. However, Bartsch et al. teaches a second, different portion of the barrier is clamped such that it remains fixed relative to the housing when the first portion moves (Bartsch: Maximum displacement/first portion occurs at center of diaphragms/barrier 11 with flange/second portion 24 fixed within clamping means 32 of housing 34; Col. 4, Lines 5-15; Col. 5, Lines 40-50; Col. 6, Lines 30-60; Fig. 4,11). Bartsch et al. and Sahinkaya are in similar fields comprising pulsation damping in vehicular hydraulic systems. Modifying Sahinkaya with teachings of Bartsch et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein a second, different portion of the barrier is clamped such that it remains fixed relative to the housing when the first portion moves for the purpose of protecting against damaging tensile loadings and maintaining space among a plurality of barriers within the housing (Bartsch: Col. 4, Lines 5-15; Col. 6, Lines 40-55).
Regarding Claim 9, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 6, further comprising at least one spring, wherein the barrier is a piston, and wherein the at least one spring is configured to bias the piston toward the neutral position (Springs 2 bias barrier piston 3 to equilibrium position; Col. 5, Lines 45-60; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 10, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 6. Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the barrier (3; Fig. 2) includes at least one diaphragm configured to elastically deformed based on the pressure difference. However, Bartsch et al. further teaches the barrier includes at least one diaphragm configured to elastically deformed based on the pressure difference (Bartsch: Diaphragms 11/11’ in damping means 4/5 as barriers placed in chambers 12 that reduce pulsation/pressure to 10; Col. 3, Lines 1-35; Fig. 1-2,4,8). Modifying Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. with additional teachings of Bartsch et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the barrier includes at least one diaphragm configured to elastically deformed based on the pressure difference for the purpose of having elastic compression or expansion to change volume (Bartsch: Col. 3, Lines 34-60).
Regarding Claim 11, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 10, wherein the at least one diaphragm includes a plurality of diaphragms (Bartsch: Diaphragms 11/11’ in holding means 32; Col. 6, Lines 30-50; Fig. 4,11-12).
Regarding Claim 12, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 6, wherein the barrier includes a first pressure area exposed to fluid in the first internal volume and a second pressure area exposed to fluid in the second internal volume, wherein the first pressure area is within 50% of the second pressure area (Barrier 3 with first area towards left 5 in first volume/left sub-cavity 8 and second area towards right 5 in second volume/right sub-cavity 8; Fig. 2. Follows from each side of 3 having the same circular cross-section area “
A
p
r
”; Col. 5, Lines 60-67; Col. 6, Lines 1-30).
Regarding Claim 13, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 12, wherein the first pressure area is substantially equal to the second pressure area (Follows from each side of 3 having the same circular cross-section area “
A
p
r
”; Col. 5, Lines 60-67; Col. 6, Lines 1-30; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 6, wherein the barrier is configured to mitigate pressure fluctuations in the first internal volume and the second internal volume by passive destructive interference (In structure of movement of barrier 3 between first volume/left sub-cavity 8 and second volume/right sub-cavity 8 changing volumes of each sub-cavity; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 14, wherein the pressure fluctuations have a pressure between 0.01 and 50 psi (See fluctuations/oscillations of barrier 3 with 0 to 0.1 psi in Fig. 5; Col. 5, Lines 13-15; Col. 3, Lines 7, Lines 35-55).
Regarding Claim 16, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 14, wherein the pressure fluctuations have a frequency between 0 and 2000 Hz (Frequency 25Hz of fluctuations/oscillations of barrier 3 in Fig. 5; Lines 7, Lines 35-55).
Regarding Claim 17, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. discloses the differential buffer of claim 6. Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the phase relationship is a phase difference of the pressure fluctuations in the first flow passage and the second flow passage (From movement of barrier 3 changing pressure/volume between first passage/left line 1 and second passage/right line 1; Fig. 2) between about 90° and 270°. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of minimizing noise with an equal and opposite reaction force (Col. 2, Lines 1-15; 55-60) such as with 180°, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahinkaya (US 5,600,955) in view of Bartsch et al.(US 8,757,212) and Beyerlein (US 2010/0057298 Al).
Regarding Claim 7, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 6. Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the first flow passage (Fig. 1: First passage/Left line 1) has a first inertance, and wherein the second flow passage (Fig. 1: Second passage/Right line 1) has a second inertance within 50% of the first inertance. However, Beyerlein (US 2010/0057298) teaches wherein the first flow passage has a first inertance and wherein the second flow passage has a second inertance within 50% of the first inertance (Beyerlein: The dimensions of the instable flow passage of either first flow passage 50 and second flow passage 52 are optimized to substantially match fluid inertances; Para. 0030-0035). Beyerlein and Sahinkaya are in similar fields comprising hydraulic power systems. Modifying Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. with teachings of Beyerlein would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the first flow passage has a first inertance and wherein the second flow passage has a second inertance within 50% of the first inertance for the purpose of reducing instability within the system, such as in power steering (Beyerlein: Para. 0032).
Regarding Claim 8, Sahinkaya as modified by Bartsch et al. and Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 7, wherein the first inertance is substantially equal to the second inertance (Beyerlein: The dimensions of the instable flow passage of either first flow passage 50 and second flow passage 52 are optimized to substantially match fluid inertances; Para. 0030-0035).
Claim(s) 30-31, and 34-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahinkaya (US 5,600,955) in view of Beyerlein (US 2010/0057298).
Regarding Claim 30, Sahinkaya discloses a differential buffer for a hydraulic system (Device/Pump, Load/Actuator, Buffer/“RAPS” Stabilizer; Fig. 1) comprising:
a first internal volume (First volume/left sub-cavity of 8 and second volume/right-cavity of 8; Col. 6, Lines 50-65; Fig. 2);
a second internal volume (Second volume/right-cavity of 8; Fig. 2);
a first flow passage fluidly connected to the first internal volume (Fig. 1: First passage/Left line 1 connected to first volume/left sub-cavity 8 connects to left 9, to Q1, to supply line to hydraulic device/pump);
a second flow passage fluidly connected to the second internal volume (Fig. 1: Second passage/Right line 1 connected to second volume/right sub-cavity 8 connects to right 9, to Q2, to return line to hydraulic device/pump in order to tune with fluctuations/oscillatory pressure; Col. 5, Lines 45-67; Col. 6, Lines 1-5. Tuning by movement of barrier 3, changes volumes/passages, being a phase relationship); and
a barrier separating at least a portion of the first internal volume and at least a portion of the second internal volume, wherein the barrier is configured to move based on a pressure difference between the first internal volume and the second internal volume, and wherein the barrier is biased toward a neutral position (Barrier 3 separating first and second volumes/left and right sub-cavities of 8 slides and biased to equilibrium; Col. 5, Lines 45-50; Fig. 2).
Sahinkaya fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first flow passage has a first inertance (Fig. 1: First passage/Left line 1) and wherein the second flow passage (Fig. 1: Second passage/Right line 1) has a second inertance within 50% of the first inertance. However, Beyerlein (US 2010/0057298) teaches wherein the first flow passage has a first inertance and wherein the second flow passage has a second inertance within 50% of the first inertance (Beyerlein: The dimensions of the instable flow passage of either first flow passage 50 and second flow passage 52 are optimized to substantially match fluid inertances; Para. 0030-0035). Beyerlein and Sahinkaya are in similar fields comprising hydraulic power systems. Modifying Sahinkaya with teachings of Beyerlein would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the first flow passage has a first inertance and wherein the second flow passage has a second inertance within 50% of the first inertance for the purpose of reducing instability within the system, such as in power steering (Beyerlein: Para. 0032).
Regarding Claim 31, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 30, further comprising at least one spring, wherein the barrier is a piston, and wherein the at least one spring is configured to bias the piston toward the neutral position (Springs 2 bias barrier piston 3 to equilibrium position; Col. 5, Lines 45-60; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 34, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 30, wherein the first inertance is substantially equal to the second inertance (Beyerlein: The dimensions of the instable flow passage of either first flow passage 50 and second flow passage 52 are optimized to substantially match fluid inertances; Para. 0030-0035).
Regarding Claim 35, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of(Beyerlein: The dimensions of the instable flow passage of either first flow passage 50 and second flow passage 52 are optimized to substantially match fluid inertances; Para. 0030-0035).
Regarding Claim 36, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 30, wherein the barrier includes a first pressure area exposed to fluid in the first internal volume and a second pressure area exposed to fluid in the second internal volume wherein the first pressure area is within 50% of the second pressure area (Barrier 3 with first area towards left 5 in first volume/left sub-cavity 8 and second area towards right 5 in second volume/right sub-cavity 8; Fig. 2. Follows from each side of 3 having the same circular cross-section area “
A
p
r
”; Col. 5, Lines 60-67; Col. 6, Lines 1-30).
Regarding Claim 37, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 36, wherein the first pressure area is substantially equal to the second pressure area (Follows from each side of 3 having the same circular cross-section area “
A
p
r
”; Col. 5, Lines 60-67; Col. 6, Lines 1-30; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 38, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 30, wherein the barrier is configured to mitigate pressure fluctuations in the first internal volume and the second internal volume by passive destructive interference (In structure of movement of barrier 3 between first volume/left sub-cavity 8 and second volume/right sub-cavity 8 changing volumes of each sub-cavity; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 39, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 38, wherein the pressure fluctuations have a pressure between 0.01 and 50 psi (See fluctuations/oscillations of barrier 3 with 0 to 0.1 psi in Fig. 5; Col. 5, Lines 13-15; Col. 3, Lines 7, Lines 35-55).
Regarding Claim 40, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 38, wherein the pressure fluctuations have a frequency between 0 and 2000 Hz (Frequency 25Hz of fluctuations/oscillations of barrier 3 in Fig. 5; Lines 7, Lines 35-55).
Claim(s) 32-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahinkaya (US 5,600,955) in view of Beyerlein (US 2010/0057298 Al) and Bartsch et al. (US 8,757,212).
Regarding Claim 32, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein disclose the differential buffer of claim 30. Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein fail to explicitly disclose wherein the barrier (3; Fig. 2) includes at least one diaphragm configured to elastically deformed based on the pressure difference. However, Bartsch et al. teaches the barrier includes at least one diaphragm configured to elastically deformed based on the pressure difference (Bartsch: Diaphragms 11/11’ in damping means 4/5 as barriers placed in chambers 12 that reduce pulsation/pressure to 10; Col. 3, Lines 1-35; Fig. 1-2,4,8). Bartsch et al. and Sahinkaya are in similar fields comprising pulsation damping in vehicular hydraulic systems. Modifying Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein with teachings of Bartsch et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the barrier includes at least one diaphragm configured to elastically deformed based on the pressure difference for the purpose of having elastic compression or expansion to change volume (Bartsch: Col. 3, Lines 34-60).
Regarding Claim 33, Sahinkaya as modified by Beyerlein and Bartsch et al. disclose the differential buffer of claim 32, wherein the at least one diaphragm includes a plurality of diaphragms (Bartsch: Diaphragms 11/11’ in holding means 32; Col. 6, Lines 30-50; Fig. 4,11-12).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER B OLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3041. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am -4:00pm.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571)270-7938. 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.
/JENNIFER B OLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/FORREST M PHILLIPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837