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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the word “a” must be inserted prior to the term “shift” in Line 3. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4 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 1 recites “forming, on a front surface of the vehicle wheel, a cutting surface . . . by performing lathe turning” in Lines 2-4. It is unclear whether “forming . . . by lathe turning” means a forming step (e.g., deformation or merely forming (i.e., bringing into existence) by cutting the surface. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 1 recites “forming, on a front surface of the vehicle wheel, a cutting surface having a contour shape following a target contour shape that defines shift of a target position in an axial direction of the vehicle wheel relative to a position in a radial direction of the vehicle wheel, by performing lathe turning on the front surface along the target contour shape at a feed speed at which cutting marks radially adjacent to each other are radially connected to each other” in Lines 2-6. It is unclear what is required by “a contour shape following a target contour shape that defines shift of a target position in an axial direction of the vehicle wheel relative to a position in a radial direction of the vehicle wheel.” It is unclear whether “following” requires some type of action or merely that the surface is cut to resemble a target contour shape. Furthermore, it is unclear how the target contour shape defines “shift” of a target position. Further still, it is unclear what is meant by the shift being in an axial direction relative to a position in a radial direction. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the front surface” in Line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 1 recites “a second side of the first fillet” in Lines 11-12. Yet, the claim does not set forth a first side of the first fillet. As such, it is unclear whether there is a first side required or not. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 1 recites “a radially second side of the first flat portion” in Lines 13-14. Yet, the claim does not set forth a radially first side of the first flat portion. As such, it is unclear whether there is a radially first side required or not. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 2 recites “a radially second side of the recess-projection portion” in Lines 3-4. Yet, the claim does not set forth a radially second side of the recess-projection portion. As such, it is unclear whether there is a radially first side required or not. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 2 recites “a radially second side of the second flat portion” in Lines 5-6. Yet, the claim does not set forth a radially first side of the second flat portion. As such, it is unclear whether there is a radially first side required or not. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 2 recites “a radially second side of the front surface” in Lines 6-7. Yet, the claim does not set forth a radially first side of the front surface. As such, it is unclear whether there is a radially first side required or not. Appropriate correction required.
Claim 3 recites “i) a width of the first flat portion in the radial direction is equal to or less than a second predetermined distance, the second predetermined distance being either a distance between the recessed portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the first flat portion or a distance between the projection portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the first flat portion; and ii) a width of the second flat portion in the radial direction is equal to or less than a third predetermined distance, the third predetermined distance being either a distance between the recessed portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the second flat portion or a distance between the projection portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the second flat portion.” The distance measurement is vague as to how it is actually measured. Additionally, it is unclear as to how the recitation of “and connected to the first flat portion” impacts the distance. Appropriate clarification required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shinba (US Pub. No. 2020/0164444 A1), or alternatively rejected, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aschwanden et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0164444 A1).
(Claims 1 and 2) Shinba discloses a manufacturing method of a vehicle wheel (Figs. 1-17), the manufacturing method comprising forming, on a front surface of the vehicle wheel, a cutting surface having a contour shape, as best understood, that follows a target contour shape that defines shift of a target position in an axial direction of the vehicle wheel relative to a position in a radial direction of the vehicle wheel, by performing lathe turning on the front surface along the target contour shape at a feed speed at which cutting marks radially adjacent to each other are radially connected to each other (Figs. 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-17), wherein: the target contour shape includes a first fillet portion having an arcuate shape and extending from a radially first side end of the front surface, a first flat portion having a linear shape and connected to a radially second side of the first fillet portion, and a recess-projection portion connected to a radially second side of the first flat portion and having a recess-projection shape in which recessed portions and projection portions are provided alternately; a width of the first flat portion in the radial direction is equal to or more than twice an amount of feed per rotation in the lathe turning but equal to or less than a first predetermined distance; and the first predetermined distance is either a distance between the recessed portions radially adjacent to each other or a distance between the projection portions radially adjacent to each other. That is, the target contour shape may be a target but the claim fails to set forth that the workpiece is actually machined to form said target shape. The term “following” with regards to a target shape does not equate to the machining the surface in such a manner. As such, the target contour shape further includes a second flat portion having a linear shape and connected to a radially second side of the recess-projection portion, and a second fillet portion having an arcuate shape and connected to a radially second side of the second flat portion, the second fillet portion extending to a radially second side end of the front surface; and a width of the second flat portion in the radial direction is equal to or more than twice the amount of feed per rotation in the lathe turning but equal to or less than the first predetermined distance.
In the alternative, if the width of the flats relative to the feed speed are required, Shinba discloses that the feed speed is a result-effective variable because it impacts whether shapes on the wheel may be connected or not (¶¶ 0043-0044). As such, at a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the feed rate within the range claimed in order to optimize shape configuration of being connected or not connected. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955) (“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”). Furthermore, at a time prior to filing it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the target shape configuration as mere design choice. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669 (CCPA 1966) (holding that the configuration of the claimed itemwas a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed item was significant).
(Claim 3) As best understood, at least either of a following conditions i) and ii) is satisfied: i) a width of the first flat portion in the radial direction is equal to or less than a second predetermined distance, the second predetermined distance being either a distance between the recessed portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the first flat portion or a distance between the projection portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the first flat portion; and ii) a width of the second flat portion in the radial direction is equal to or less than a third predetermined distance, the third predetermined distance being either a distance between the recessed portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the second flat portion or a distance between the projection portions radially adjacent to each other and connected to the second flat portion (Figs. 1-17).
(Claim 4) Each of the recessed portions and the projection portions constituting the recess-projection portion has an arcuate shape (Fig. 17).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN RUFO whose telephone number is (571)272-4604. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs.
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, Singh Sunil can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/RYAN RUFO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Prosecution Insights