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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in KR on 10/25/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 10-2022-0010581 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cheng (US 2006/0278466).
With respect to claim 1, Cheng discloses a steering device (embodiment in fig. 9) of a vehicle, comprising: a screw shaft (206) having two opposite ends connected to wheels (figs. 1, 3; 24, 26) and provided to be axially movable (paragraph 37) in a housing (20); a ball nut (204) engaged with the screw shaft (206); a first nut pulley (214) and a second nut pulley (224) coupled to the ball nut (204); a first motor (210) for applying torque to the ball nut (204) through the first nut pulley (214); and a second motor (220) for applying torque to the ball nut (204) through the second nut pulley (224). (Figs. 1-14, paragraphs 35-50.)
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 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 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Eickholt et al. (US 2018/0354548).
With respect to claim 2-3, Cheng is silent regarding a bearing. Eickholt et al. teaches of a bearing (56, 102) for supporting rotation of the ball nut (58) on the housing is provided between the first nut pulley (82) and the second nut pulley (88); wherein an inner ring (fig. 3) of the bearing (102) is integrally formed (paragraph 30) with the ball nut (58). (Figs. 1-5, paragraphs 13-44.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the bearing structure as described in Eickholt et al. into the invention of Cheng with a reasonable expectation of success in order to properly enable the pulleys to rotate about their axis.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng and Eickholt et al., as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Ognibene (US 2018/0251150).
With respect to claim 4, Cheng, as modified, is silent regarding the bearing in relation to the housing. Ognibene teaches of the housing (fig. 10) includes a first housing (‘first tubular portion’; paragraph 166) supported by an outer ring of the bearing (185; paragraph 149 discloses there can be ‘a number of bearings’ which includes a singular bearing) on one axial side (fig. 10) and a second housing (‘second tubular portion’; paragraph 166) supported by the outer ring 185; paragraph 149 discloses there can be ‘a number of bearings’ which includes a singular bearing) of the bearing on another axial side (fig. 10). (Fig. 10, paragraphs 149, 165-187.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the housing structure as described in Ognibene into the invention of Cheng, as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce the size of the actuator. (Paragraph 170.)
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Menjak et al. (US 6,691,819).
With respect to claims 5-7, Cheng is silent regarding a sensing unit for the ball nut. Menjak et al. teaches of a sensing unit (32) for sensing a rotational angle of the ball nut (78) (col. 4, lines 15-46); wherein the sensing unit includes a first gear (84) and a second gear (85) rotated in conjunction with rotation of the ball nut (78) and a sensor (32) sensing a rotational angle of the first gear (84) and the second gear (85); wherein the first gear (84) and the second gear (85) are formed to have different diameters (fig. 2). (Figs. 1-3, cols. 2-5, col. 6, lines 1-48.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the sensing structure as described in Menjak et al. into the invention of Cheng with a reasonable expectation of success so that roadfeel attributable to variations in the road surface that cause the steerable wheels to "pull" to one side or the other may be eliminated or at least substantially minimized. (Col. 4, lines 15-46.)
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Ognibene (US 2018/0251150).
With respect to claims 11 and 13, Cheng is silent regarding the screw shaft having a chamfered portion. Ognibene teaches of the screw shaft includes a first shaft portion (325; fig. 14) having a screw engaged with the ball nut (165) and a second shaft portion (85; fig. 14) having at least one chamfered portion (85) formed on an outer circumferential surface; wherein a bushing (30; paragraph 64) supported by the chamfered portion (85) and circumferentially supported by the housing (20; paragraph 66) is coupled to the second shaft portion (85). (Figs. 1-3, 14-16, paragraphs 82-94, 107-139.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the screw shaft structure as described in Ognibene into the invention of Cheng with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow the shaft to slide along a mating surface formed in the first head. (Paragraph 82.)
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng and Eickholt et al., as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Yasuda et al. (US 2022/0063705).
With respect to claim 12, Cheng, as modified, discloses the first shaft portion (325; fig. 14) and second shaft portion (85; fig. 14) are formed from the same body (fig. 14). Yasuda et al. teaches of a first shaft portion (28) and second shaft portion (29) coupled by friction welding (paragraph 51). (Figs. 1-9, paragraphs 49-108.) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the screw shaft structure as described in Yasuda et al. into the invention of Cheng with a reasonable expectation of success in order to enhance coaxiality of a portion having a rack toothed portion and a portion having a ball screw portion. (Paragraph 36.) In addition, Applicant's claim of “friction welding" is a product-by-process claim. Determination of patentability is based on the product itself, and not dependent upon the method of production. See MPEP 2113. The product of Applicant’s product-by- process claim is the same as or an obvious variant of the process in Cheng, as modified.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 8 includes the limitations of the sensing unit further includes a third gear (213) rotated in conjunction with rotation of either the first nut pulley (142) or the second nut pulley (143), and wherein the first gear (211) and the second gear (212) are engaged with the third gear (213). (Fig. 3.) The closest prior art Menjak et al. (US 6,691,819) does not disclose a third gear rotated with either nut pulley and in contact with the first and second gear.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited on the PTO-892 form disclose similar features of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A ENGLISH whose telephone number is (571)270-7014. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Saturday.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached on 571-270-5985. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/JAMES A ENGLISH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614