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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goto et al. (WO 2010074229 A1).
Re claim 1, Goto et al. disclose a damping device, comprising: a superelastic element (11) made of an austenitic shape memory alloy; and an energy-absorbing element (10) adjacent to the superelastic element, wherein the energy- absorbing element is made of a material selected from the group consisting of a shape memory alloy, a malleable metal or alloy, and a viscoelastic polymer; wherein deformation of the energy-absorbing element is restrained by the superelastic element. (Fig. 6, Machine Translation – Page 3, 9th Par.)
Re claim 2, Goto et al. disclose wherein the austenitic shape memory alloy is a nickel titanium alloy. (Machine Translation – Page 3, 9th Par.)
Re claim 8, Goto et al. disclose wherein the superelastic element (11) and the energy-absorbing element (10) have elongate bodies, and wherein the superelastic element and the energy-absorbing element are attached at two spaced apart locations (13).
Re claim 16, Goto et al. disclose a method of making a damping device, comprising: fabricating a first element (41) from a first austenitic shape memory alloy; fabricating a second element (40) from a material selected from the group consisting of a martensitic shape memory alloy, a second austenitic shape memory alloy, a malleable metal or alloy, and a viscoelastic polymer; and assembling the first and second elements together, such that deformation of the second element is restrained by the first element. (Abstract, Fig. 10)
Re claim 19, Goto et al. disclose wherein the first element (41) and the second element (40) are rings, and wherein the assembling comprises fitting the second element inside the first element. (Fig. 10)
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 3-6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto et al. (WO 2010074229 A1) in view of Care et al. (US 2011/0150378 A1).
Re claim 3, Goto et al. do not teach wherein the superelastic element is a first ring, and the energy-absorbing element is a second ring; wherein second ring is fitted inside the first ring, such that the first ring surrounds and encloses the second ring. Care et al. teach wherein a superelastic element (40) is a first ring, and an energy-absorbing element (34) is a second ring; wherein second ring is fitted inside the first ring, such that the first ring surrounds and encloses the second ring. (Fig. 11, Par. [0040]-[0042]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first and second rings as taught by Care et al. to provide damping in a bearing assembly.
Re claim 4, Goto et al. as modified teach a third ring (Goto et al. – 11, Care et al. – 40) fitted inside the second ring (Goto et al. – 10, Care et al. – 34), wherein the third ring is a second superelastic element made of the austenitic shape memory alloy.
Re claim 5, Goto et al. as modified do not teach wherein the first ring and the second ring each have a thickness ranging from 5 to 15 percent of an outer diameter of the first and second rings, where the thickness is measured between an inner diameter and the outer diameter of each of the first and second rings. Care et al. teaches wherein dampers in different positions may have different properties such as thickness. ([0041]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide different properties based on the application as taught by Care et al.
Re claim 6, Goto et al. as modified teach wherein the first ring and the second ring have non- circular shapes. (Care et al. – [0040])
Re claim 10, Goto et al. do not teach wherein one of the superelastic element and the energy- absorbing element is under an initial strain of at least 1 percent, and the other of the superelastic element and the energy-absorbing element is under an initial oppositely-signed strain. Care et al. teach wherein a superelastic element (40) is a first ring, and an energy-absorbing element (34) is a second ring; wherein second ring is fitted inside the first ring, such that the first ring surrounds and encloses the second ring. (Fig. 11, Par. [0040]-[0042]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the first and second rings as taught by Care et al. to provide damping in a bearing assembly. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide one of the superelastic element and the energy- absorbing element is under an initial strain of at least 1 percent, and the other of the superelastic element and the energy-absorbing element is under an initial oppositely-signed strain since elements fitting together in contact would have an initial strain of at least 1 percent as an attachment means.
7. Claims 11, 12, 14, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto et al. (WO 2010074229 A1).
Re claim 11, Goto et al. teach a damping device, comprising: a first superelastic element (41); and a second superelastic element (40) restrained by the first superelastic element; wherein the first and second superelastic elements are made of austenitic shape memory alloys. (Fig. 10 – Translation – Abstract, Pg. 8, 4th Par.)
Goto et al. do not teach wherein one of the first superelastic element and second superelastic element is under an initial strain of at least 1 percent and the other of the first superelastic element and the second superelastic element is under an initial oppositely-signed strain of at least 1 percent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide one of the superelastic element and the energy- absorbing element is under an initial strain of at least 1 percent, and the other of the superelastic element and the energy-absorbing element is under an initial oppositely-signed strain since elements fitting together elements as an attachment means such as an interference fit is well known in the art and would result in an initial strain of at least 1 percent.
Re claims 12, Goto et al. as modified teach wherein the first and second superelastic elements (41, 40) are in the form of concentric rings, one of which is fitted inside the other one.
Re claims 14, Goto et al. as modified teach wherein the first superelastic element and the second superelastic element (41, 40) are concentrically positioned tubes attached at opposite axial ends. (Translation –Pg. 8, 4th Par.)
Re claims 18, Goto et al. do not teach introducing initial strains in the first element or the second element and assembling the first and second elements together with the introduced initial strains. Goto et al. teach wherein austenitic shape memory alloys create stress induced martensite. (Translation - Pg. 3, 2nd Par.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide initial strains in the first or second elements since elements fitting together elements as an attachment means such as an interference fit is well known in the art and would result in an initial strain.
Re claims 20, Goto et al. do not teach introducing initial strains in the first element or the second element prior to fitting the second element inside the first element; wherein when the first and second elements are in an unstrained configuration, an outer diameter of the second element is greater than an inner diameter of the first element; wherein the initial strains are introduced in the first element or the second element to fit the second element inside the first element; and wherein when the second element is fitted inside the first element, the outer diameter of the second element is equal to the inner diameter of the first element and at least one of the first element and the second element comprise a microstructure having stress induced martensite. Goto et al. teach wherein austenitic shape memory alloys create stress induced martensite. (Translation - Pg. 3, 2nd Par.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide initial strains in the first or second elements since elements fitting together elements as an attachment means such as an interference fit is well known in the art and would result in an initial strain.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 9, 13, 15, 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hodgson, Zhi and Kim teach similar damping devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-7127. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday - Friday 7:00AM-3:00PM.
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, 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.
/MELANIE TORRES WILLIAMS/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
MTW
December 12, 2025