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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “means for establishing a reset position” in claim 9 and dependent claims (because A – the claim limitation uses the term “means”; B-linked by the transition word “for”, and C-no structural limitations are recited, that may perform said function.).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. “means for establishing a reset position” is therefore interpreted as a conventional fastener including a head and a shank, per Para [0034] of the specification.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schoon (US 2019/0120259 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Schoon teaches a steering gear (10) for a power steering system, comprising:
a housing (20) defining a fluid chamber (25);
a piston (35) disposed within the fluid chamber and configured for movement within the fluid chamber along a first axis (50) responsive to movement of an associated steering wheel and fluid pressure on first and second axial ends of the piston to cause corresponding movement of an associated steering linkage (Para [0013]), the piston defining a fluid bore (36) extending through the piston along a second axis (202) from the first axial end of the piston to the second axial end of the piston (Figure 3); and,
an end of travel relief system comprising:
a first poppet valve (210) having a sleeve (250) configured to be received within a first axial end of the fluid bore, the sleeve of the first poppet valve having an inboard end disposed within the fluid bore and an outboard end extending outward from the fluid bore and defining a valve seat (252) between the inboard and outboard ends of the sleeve of the first poppet valve (Figure 3);
a valve stem (270) disposed within the sleeve of the first poppet valve, the valve stem of the first poppet valve having an inboard end defining a poppet (265) configured for engagement with the valve seat in the sleeve of the first poppet valve and an outboard end
defining a stem (272) configured to extend beyond the outboard end of the sleeve of the first poppet valve when the poppet of the valve stem of the first poppet valve engages the valve seat in the sleeve of the first poppet valve (Figure 3);
a second poppet valve (210’) having a sleeve (250’) configured to be received within a first axial end of the fluid bore, the sleeve of the first poppet valve having an inboard end disposed within the fluid bore and an outboard end extending outward from the fluid bore and defining a valve seat (252’) between the inboard and outboard ends of the sleeve of the first poppet valve (Figure 3);
a valve stem (270’) disposed within the sleeve of the first poppet valve, the valve stem of the first poppet valve having an inboard end defining a poppet (265’) configured for engagement with the valve seat in the sleeve of the first poppet valve and an outboard end
defining a stem (272’) configured to extend beyond the outboard end of the sleeve of the first poppet valve when the poppet of the valve stem of the first poppet valve engages the valve seat in the sleeve of the first poppet valve (Figure 3); and,
reset position establishment means (first to third tools, Para [0023]- [0026]) for establishing a reset position of the first poppet valve and a reset position of the second poppet valve (Figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 15, Schoon teaches that the housing includes a bore (30) through which the reset position establishment means may be inserted into the fluid bore in the piston (Figure 1).
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.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoon (US 2019/0120259 A1) in view of Rabe (US 4,648,307 A).
Schoon teaches that a portion of the sleeve of the first poppet valve between the inboard and outboard ends of the sleeve of the first poppet valve has a larger outer diameter than the inboard and outboard ends of the sleeve of the first poppet valve (Figure 3). However, Schoon does not teach the press-fit connection.
Rabe teaches that the portion of the sleeve of the first poppet valve configured to be received within the fluid bore of the piston and engage the piston in a press fit (Col. 6, Lines 30-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Schoon’s system, in view of Rabe, with a press-fit connection to assure that the threaded portion will not be deformed (Col. 6, lines 50-52 of Rabe).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoon (US 2019/0120259 A1) in view of Stroud (US 4,773,303 A).
Schoon teaches the steering gear of claim 15. However, Schoon does not teach that the reset position establishment means includes a plurality of threads configured to engage a corresponding plurality of threads in the housing.
Stroud teaches that the reset position establishment means includes a plurality of threads (204) configured to engage a corresponding plurality of threads (194) in the housing (Figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Schoon’s system, with Stroud’s adjuster, to have a better control over the adjusting means.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 17-20 are allowed.
Claims 10 and 12-14 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: Claims 1 and 17 recite a reset body configured for movement along a third axis, perpendicular to the second axis, into the fluid bore between the first poppet valve and the second poppet valve.
Claim 10 recites that the sleeve of the first poppet valve includes a fluid port extending from a radially outer surface of the sleeve of the first poppet valve to an interior fluid passage of the sleeve of the first poppet valve.
Claim 12 recites that the valve stem of the first poppet valve includes a groove configured to receive a retainer clip configured to limit movement of the valve stem of the first poppet valve relative to the sleeve of the first poppet valve in an inboard direction.
Claim 13 recites that the piston defines an opening extending from a radially outer surface of the piston into the fluid bore, the opening configured to receive the reset position establishment means.
Since the prior art (e.g. Schoon) teaches end of travel relief system that lack said features, the prior art does not anticipate the claimed subject matter.
For illustration purposes, Fig 4 of the examined disclosure shows the end of travel relief system, which is different than the end of travel relief system taught by the prior art of record (Fig. 1 of Schoon and Fig. 1 of Gilbert, etc.).
Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to a skilled artisan to have modified the prior art in order to arrive at the claimed invention without resorting to impermissible hindsight.
Claims 2-8 and 18-20 are allowed as depending from an allowed parent claim (see above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the attached PTO-892 form teaches end of travel relief systems for power steering systems of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm.
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, VALENTIN NEACSU can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611