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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed December 12, 2025, with respect to claims 9-10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, claims 9-10 Rejections have been withdrawn.
Further on, claims 9-10 are objected as allowable prior art
Applicant’s amendments/arguments/remarks filed December 12, 2025, with respect to claims 1-6 and 8 rejections, have been fully considered but they are unpersuasive as explained below.
Applicant respectfully asserts that the cited prior art fails to meet the limitations in amended claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully submits that the reason amended claim 1 does not differentiate from the cited prior art is because the amended claim 1 don’t include the limitations “…wherein the abutment of the first lid and the second lid defines a gap outboard of the annular groove…” as defined in allowable objected claim 9.
Disposition of Claims
Claims 1-6 and 8-20 are pending in this application.
Claims 11-20 are allowable over the prior art.
Claims 9-10 are objected as allowable prior art.
Claims 1-6 and 8 are rejected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-20 are allowable over the prior art.
Claims 9-10 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.
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 1-2, 4-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (THOMAS – US 3,205,875 A).
Regarding claim 1, THOMAS (Figs. 1-2 and 4) discloses:
An apparatus (engine casing or housing 10: Fig. 2) to be disposed within a seal wall (rear wall 11: Fig. 2) comprising:
a bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1) including a hole (bore 17: Figs. 1-2) to receive a rod (shaft 12: Figs. 1-2) extending through the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1); and
a disk portion (cover plate 16: Figs. 1-2) concentric with the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1),
the disk portion (cover plate 16: Figs. 1-2) including:
a first enclosed slot (elongated arcuate groove 51: Fig. 1) spaced apart from the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1) by a first radial displacement (elongated arcuate groove 51 is positioned at a first radius from bushing 18: Fig. 1); and
a second enclosed slot (arcuate groove 63: Fig. 1) spaced apart from the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1) by a second radial displacement (arcuate groove 63 is positioned at a second radius from bushing 18, where the first radius is larger than the second radius with respect to bushing 18: Fig. 1), the first radial displacement (elongated arcuate groove 51 is positioned at a first radius from bushing 18: Fig. 1) different than the second radial displacement (arcuate groove 63 is positioned at a second radius from bushing 18, where the first radius is larger than the second radius: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, THOMAS disclose the apparatus according to claim 1, and further on THOMAS also discloses:
wherein the disk portion (cover plate 16: Figs. 1-2) and the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1) are integral.
Regarding claim 4, THOMAS disclose the apparatus according to claim 1, and further on THOMAS also discloses:
wherein the first enclosed slot (elongated arcuate groove 51: Fig. 1) is arc-shaped and has a first angular displacement (First angle position: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, THOMAS disclose the apparatus according to claim 4, and further on THOMAS also discloses:
wherein the first enclosed slot (elongated arcuate groove 51: Fig. 1) is a first slot and the disk portion (cover plate 16: Figs. 1-2) includes a third slot (elongated arcuate groove 50: Fig. 1), the third slot having the first angular displacement (First angle position: Fig. 1) at the first radial displacement (elongated arcuate groove 51 is positioned at a first radius from bushing 18: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, THOMAS disclose the apparatus according to claim 5, and further on THOMAS also discloses:
wherein the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1) defines a first axis bisecting the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1), the first slot (elongated arcuate groove 51: Fig. 1) and the third slot (elongated arcuate groove 50: Fig. 1) being symmetrical about the first axis.
Regarding claim 8, THOMAS disclose the apparatus according to claim 1, and further on THOMAS also discloses:
wherein the bushing portion (bushing 18: Fig. 1) defines a first axis bisecting the first enclosed slot (elongated arcuate groove 51: Fig. 1) and a second axis bisecting the second enclosed slot (arcuate groove 63: Fig. 1), the first axis perpendicular to the second axis.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (THOMAS – US 3,205,875 A), in view of (Jorn – US 3,781,073 A).
Regarding claims 3, THOMAS disclose the apparatus according to claim 1.
But THOMAS does not explicitly and/or specifically meet the following limitations:
an elastomer seal disposed within the first enclosed slot (regarding claim 3).
a first lid; and a second lid abutting the first lid, an abutment of the first lid and the second lid defining an annular groove, the annular groove retaining the disk portion (regarding claim 9).
However, regarding limitations (A)-(B) above, Jorn (Figs. 13-14 and 21-22) discloses/teaches the following:
An apparatus (bearing, joint or knuckle, between a steering rod and a lever or arm connected to a wheel in an automotive steering linkage) to be disposed within a seal wall comprising: a bushing portion (Bushing Portion 901: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 below) including a hole (hole 951: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 below) to receive a rod (shaft 43: Figs. 13-14) extending through the bushing portion (Bushing Portion 901); and a disk portion (Disk Portion 981: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 below) including an enclosed slot (slot 69: Fig. 21) spaced apart from the bushing portion (Bushing Portion 901), the disk portion (Disk Portion 981) being concentric with the bushing portion (Bushing Portion 901).
PNG
media_image1.png
661
949
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22
An elastomer seal {The shell is perforated at 69 and is covered over its unperforated portions of the inner surface with an elastomeric film 70 as previously described. The annular flange 65 is provided along its opposite axial surfaces with metal rings 71 and 72 which are also perforated, the perforations being circular holes. The outer surfaces of these rings are covered with elastomeric linings 73 and 74. The flange 65 also has embedded therein an intermediate ring 75 which likewise is perforated. The rubber layers 70, 73 and 74 are produced by penetration of the elastomeric mass through the holes 69 and constitute a uniform film} disposed within the enclosed slot (slot 69: Fig. 21).
A first lid (First lid 991: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 above); and a second lid (Second lid 992: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 above) abutting the first lid (First lid 991: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 above), an abutment of the first lid (First lid 991: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 above) and the second lid (Second lid 992: Examiner Annotated Jorn Figs. 21-22 above) defining an annular groove, the annular groove retaining the disk portion (Disk Portion 981)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of THOMAS incorporating an elastomer seal as taught by Jorn to serve as vibration or shock dampers to resist/minimize the shear forces.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ruben Picon-Feliciano whose telephone number is (571)-272-4938. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9:00 am-6:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lindsay M. Low can be reached on (571)272-1196. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RUBEN PICON-FELICIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/GRANT MOUBRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747