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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/20/2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I “gear spindle device”, claims 1-12, in the reply filed on 8/26/2025 was acknowledged in the previous 9/10/2025 Office Action, wherein the traversal was found non-persuasive and the requirement made FINAL.
Claims 13-15 remain withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The claim 1 limitation “the engagement portion in the axial direction” (line 12 of claim 1) is unclear as to whether the phrase is to refer to the same element as the previous recitation of “the engagement portion extends in an axial direction” (lines 10-11 of claim 1) or to an additional element. If the same, the examiner suggests amending the latter recitation to state --the engagement portion that extends in the axial direction--. If different, the claim must be clarified as such.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the nozzle is configured to inject the coolant in a direction from a second end side of the spindle outer cylinder toward the first end side of the spindle outer cylinder in the axial direction.” (last three lines of claim 1) which is contrary to the disclosure and unclear. Note that applicant’s figure 1 shows nozzles 18A, 18B injecting coolant at angles (rather than in the axial direction as claimed) and further than the injection of each nozzle is toward the end in which each nozzle resides, e.g., 18a injects toward 16a which are both on the same side (rather than from a second end side to a first end side as claimed).
The claim 11 limitation “the engagement portion in the axial direction” (line 12-13 of claim 11) is unclear as to whether the phrase is to refer to the same element as the previous recitation of “the engagement portion extends in an axial direction” (line 11 of claim 11) or to an additional element. If the same, the examiner suggests amending the latter recitation to state --the engagement portion that extends in the axial direction--. If different, the claim must be clarified as such.
The remaining claims depend from the above and are thus similarly unclear/rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-4, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Padgett US3705502.
Claim 1. A gear spindle device (fig.3) for a rolling mill, comprising: a spindle outer cylinder (11a) having, at a first end side, an inner circumferential surface provided with an inner circumferential gear (12a); a spindle inner cylinder (13a) having an outer circumferential surface provided with an outer circumferential gear (15a) which engages with the inner circumferential gear; a seal member (25a) disposed between the spindle outer cylinder and the spindle inner cylinder, for holding a lubricant oil at an engagement portion (portion of 12a and 15a) between the inner circumferential gear and the outer circumferential gear; and a coolant supply unit (28a, 29a) for supplying a coolant toward a region of the spindle outer cylinder (40a or region of 11a near 12a/40a) where the engagement portion extends in an axial direction of the spindle outer cylinder, the coolant supply unit being disposed opposite to the seal member with respect to the engagement portion [--that extends--, see 35 USC 112 rejection] in the axial direction, wherein the coolant supply unit includes a nozzle (29a) configured to inject the coolant toward the spindle outer cylinder in the region, wherein the nozzle is configured to inject the coolant in a direction from a second end side of the spindle outer cylinder toward the first end side of the spindle outer cylinder in the axial direction (in as much as applicant’s own invention does as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejection).
Claim 2. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 1, comprising: a housing (18a) which houses the coolant supply unit and the spindle outer cylinder in the region.
Claim 3. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 2, wherein the housing includes a first wall portion (wall of 18a) having a hole (hole inside 18a) into which a shaft (16a, 17a) fitting with the spindle outer cylinder at a second end side of the spindle outer cylinder in the axial direction is inserted, the hole having a smaller diameter (smallest diameter of 18a) than the spindle outer cylinder (diameter of 11a at largest portion thereof).
Claim 4. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 1, wherein the coolant supply unit is configured to inject the coolant toward the spindle outer cylinder from a position above the spindle outer cylinder (see fig.3).
Claim 7. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 1, wherein, when the spindle outer cylinder is seen in a horizontal direction which is orthogonal to a center axis of the spindle outer cylinder, an angular degree (45 degrees) formed between a center axis of the nozzle (axis going through center of 29a at 45 degrees to horizontal) and the center axis of the spindle outer cylinder (horizontal center axis of 11a) is not smaller than 30 degrees and not greater than 60 degrees.
Claim 8. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 1, wherein, when the spindle outer cylinder is seen in the axial direction, an angular degree (45 degrees) formed between a center axis of the nozzle (axis going through center of 29a at 45 degrees to horizontal) and a horizontal direction (horizontal center axis of 11a) is not smaller than 30 degrees and not greater than 60 degrees.
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 of this title, 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 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Padgett US3705502.
Claim 9. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 1, wherein the examiner took Official Notice in the previous 9/10/2025 Office action that it was extremely well known in the cooling art to provide a temperature sensor to measure a temperature of the area being cooled for the purpose of allowing for more accurate temperature control. Applicant’s subsequent 12/10/2025 response did not adequately traverse the official notice by specifically pointed out why the noticed fact was not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art. Accordingly, the common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art. See MPEP 2144.03C, 37 CFR 1.111(b), Chevenard, 139 F.2d at 713, 60 USPQ at 241 and In re Ahlert, 424 F.2d 1088, 1091, 165 USPQ 418, 429 (CCPA 1970). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify as detailed above, which would necessarily result in a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of the spindle outer cylinder in the formation region of the engagement portion (i.e., since that is the region being cooled by Padgett.
Claim 10. The gear spindle device for a rolling mill according to claim 9, wherein it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to ensure that the temperature sensor be disposed at a position offset from the coolant supply unit in a direction from a second end side toward the first end side of the spindle outer cylinder in the axial direction so as not to block or interrupt the spray pattern. Additionally, note MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) details that rearrangement of parts has been established by case law to be obvious where there is no unexpected result (criticality).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 12 and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. The art of record does not suggest the totality of limitations in independent claim 11, does not provide any teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify toward the entirety of applicant's claims, nor was there any readily apparent cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the prior art to obtain the entirety of applicant’s claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to overcome the clarity rejections as well as to overcome the prior art rejections based on Padgett. This is not persuasive. The claims remain unclear and suggested by the prior art, as is detailed in the reworded rejections above. Further, Padgett suggests the newly amended claims as is detailed in the reworded rejections above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights