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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 18-20, in the reply filed on September 26, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 18-37 are under examination.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant’s purpose or intended use language is recited in the independent claims’ preambles, and like most preambles is simply a statement of purpose or intended use, not a separate claim limitation. See Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. ScheringPlough Corp., 320 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“[A] preamble simply stating the intended use or purpose of the invention will usually not limit the scope of the claim, unless the preamble provides antecedents for ensuing claim terms and limits the claim accordingly.”).
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 18, 21, 24-25, 28-30 and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fogal (US 2007/0126279).
Claim 18: Fogal discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring (abstract). The method includes extruding a tube (¶ 39), making cuts through the tube and forming a circular balance ring body with two cut ends (¶¶ 39, 52-54; figs. 9-11), partially filling the tube with a fluid (¶¶ 42, 52-54), and joining the cut ends together to form a balance ring with at least one annular chamber therein (¶¶ 52-54; figs. 9-11).
Claim 21: Fogal discloses welding the cut ends to each other (¶ 53).
Claim 24: Fogal discloses extruding the tube into a linear shape (¶ 39).
Claim 25: Fogal discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring (abstract). The method includes forming a tube having first and second ends (¶¶ 39, 52-54; figs. 9-11), partially filling the tube with a fluid (¶¶ 42, 52-54), and joining the first and second ends together to form a balance ring defining an internal annular chamber that retains the fluid (¶¶ 52-54; figs. 9-11).
Claim 28: Fogal discloses welding the ends to each other (¶ 53).
Claim 29: Fogal discloses extruding the tube (¶ 39).
Claim 30: Fogal discloses cutting through the tube to form the first and second ends (¶ 39).
Claim 33: Fogal discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring (abstract). The method includes forming a balance ring body having open ends (¶¶ 39, 52-54; figs. 9-11), partially filling the balance ring body with a fluid (¶¶ 42, 52-54), and joining the open ends together to form a balance ring defining an internal annular chamber that retains the fluid (¶¶ 52-54; figs. 9-11).
Claim 34: Fogal discloses forming the balance ring body having open ends comprises extruding a tube (¶ 39).
Claims 25, 28-29 and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639).
Claim 25: Messaoudi discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring (abstract). The method includes forming a tube having first and second ends (¶¶ 44, 137-144), partially filling the tube with a fluid (¶¶ 137-144), and joining the first and second ends together to form a balance ring defining an internal annular chamber that retains the fluid (¶¶ 137-144; figs. 6-8).
Claim 28: Messaoudi discloses welding the ends to each other (¶ 142).
Claim 29: Messaoudi discloses extruding the tube (¶¶ 44, 144).
Claim 33: Messaoudi discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring (abstract). The method includes forming a balance ring body having open ends (¶¶ 137-144; figs. 6-8), partially filling the balance ring body with a fluid (¶¶ 137-144), and joining the open ends together to form a balance ring defining an internal annular chamber that retains the fluid (¶¶ 137-144; figs. 6-8).
Claim 34: Messaoudi discloses forming the balance ring body having open ends comprises extruding a tube (¶¶ 44, 144).
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.
Claims 18 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639) alone, or alternatively, in view of Fogal (US 2007/0126279).
Claim 18: Messaoudi discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring for a washing machine (abstract). The method includes extruding a tube (¶¶ 44, 144), and forming a circular balance ring body with two ends (¶¶ 142-144; figs. 6-8), partially filling the tube with a fluid (¶¶ 137-142), and joining the cut ends together to form a balance ring with at least one annular chamber therein (¶¶ 137-142; figs. 6-8). Although one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from figs. 6-8 and paragraphs 137-144 that the ends of the tube of Messaoudi have been cut, Messaoudi does not explicitly state that the ends are cut. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to cut the ends of the extruded tube of Messaoudi to release the tube from the extruder and/or size the pieces of extruded tube to fit the washing machine.
Alternatively, in the same field of endeavor of manufacturing fluid-filled balance rings, Fogal discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring that includes extruding a tube (¶ 39), making cuts through the tube and forming a circular balance ring body with two cut ends (¶¶ 39, 52-54; figs. 9-11), partially filling the tube with a fluid (¶¶ 42, 52-54), and joining the cut ends together to form a balance ring with at least one annular chamber therein (¶¶ 52-54; figs. 9-11). As taught by Fogal, cutting the extruded tube achieves an extruded tube of a desired length (¶ 52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to have cut the ends of the extruded tube of Messaoudi to form an extruded tube of a desired length, as taught by Fogal.
Claim 21: Messaoudi discloses welding the cut ends to each other (¶ 142).
Claim 22: Messaoudi is silent as to the claimed shape. However, Fogal discloses that the ring may have any shape as long as it does not inhibit the flow of the material (¶ 40). Moreover, there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent (see Eskimo Pie Corp. vs. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23 and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim 23: Modified Messaoudi is silent as to when the cuts are made. However, whether the cuts are made prior to, or after completing the loop, the end result would be the same. There is no invention in changing the order of method steps without new or unexpected results. See In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results).
Claim 24: Fogal discloses extruding the tube into a linear shape (¶ 39).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639) alone, or alternatively, in view of Fogal (US 2007/0126279), as applied to claim 18 above, further in view of Kim (US 2008/0110212).
Claims 19-20: Messaoudi is silent as to the claimed viscosity range. However, Kim discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring for a washing machine including fluids that fall within, or overlap, the claimed ranges (abstract). As taught by Kim, including fluids within or overlapping the claimed viscosity ranges “exhibit a balancing function and thus minimize the vibration and noise of the washing machine” (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to have selected fluids in the method of Messaoudi with viscosities within the claimed ranges in order to minimize the vibration and noise of the washing machine.
Claims 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639) in view of Kim (US 2008/0110212).
Claims 26-27: Messaoudi is silent as to the claimed viscosity range. However, Kim discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring for a washing machine including fluids that fall within, or overlap, the claimed ranges (abstract). As taught by Kim, including fluids within or overlapping the claimed viscosity ranges “exhibit a balancing function and thus minimize the vibration and noise of the washing machine” (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to have selected fluids in the method of Messaoudi with viscosities within the claimed ranges in order to minimize the vibration and noise of the washing machine.
Claims 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639), as applied to claim 29 above, alone or alternatively in view of Fogal (US 2007/0126279).
Claim 30: Although one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize from figs. 6-8 and paragraphs 137-144 that the ends of the tube of Messaoudi have been cut, Messaoudi does not explicitly state that the ends are cut. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to cut the ends of the extruded tube of Messaoudi to release the tube from the extruder and/or size the pieces of extruded tube to fit the washing machine.
Alternatively, in the same field of endeavor of manufacturing fluid-filled balance rings, Fogal discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring that includes extruding a tube (¶ 39), making cuts through the tube and forming a circular balance ring body with two cut ends (¶¶ 39, 52-54; figs. 9-11), partially filling the tube with a fluid (¶¶ 42, 52-54), and joining the cut ends together to form a balance ring with at least one annular chamber therein (¶¶ 52-54; figs. 9-11). As taught by Fogal, cutting the extruded tube achieves an extruded tube of a desired length (¶ 52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to have cut the ends of the extruded tube of Messaoudi to form an extruded tube of a desired length, as taught by Fogal.
Claim 31: Messaoudi is silent as to the claimed shape. However, Fogal discloses that the ring may have any shape as long as it does not inhibit the flow of the material (¶ 40). Moreover, there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent (see Eskimo Pie Corp. vs. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23 and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim 32: Modified Messaoudi is silent as to when the cuts are made. However, whether the cuts are made prior to, or after completing the loop, the end result would be the same. There is no invention in changing the order of method steps without new or unexpected results. See In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639), as applied to claim 34 above, in view of Fogal (US 2007/0126279).
Claim 31: Messaoudi is silent as to the claimed shape. However, Fogal discloses that the ring may have any shape as long as it does not inhibit the flow of the material (¶ 40). Moreover, there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent (see Eskimo Pie Corp. vs. Levous et al., 3 USPQ 23 and In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the application to have selected any ring shape in the method of Messaoudi as long as it does not inhibit the flow of the material, as taught by Fogal.
Claims 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messaoudi (US 2018/0030639), as applied to claim 33 above, further in view of Kim (US 2008/0110212).
Claims 36-37: Messaoudi is silent as to the claimed viscosity range. However, Kim discloses a method of manufacturing a fluid-filled balance ring for a washing machine including fluids that fall within, or overlap, the claimed ranges (abstract). As taught by Kim, including fluids within or overlapping the claimed viscosity ranges “exhibit a balancing function and thus minimize the vibration and noise of the washing machine” (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to have selected fluids in the method of Messaoudi with viscosities within the claimed ranges in order to minimize the vibration and noise of the washing machine.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY THROWER whose telephone number is (571)270-5517. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm MT M-F.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at 571-270-1487. 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.
/LARRY W THROWER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754