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 Amendment
The amendment filed 11/20/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 5, 9 have been amended and claim 2 has been cancelled. Therefore, claims 1 and 3-9 are now pending in the application.
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 (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 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 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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima (JP – S63176156 U, from IDS) and further in view of SATO (US – 2008/0143029 A1).
As per claim 1, Nakajima discloses Vibration Isolation Support Apparatus For Construction Machine comprising:
an inner member (8, 10, Fig: 1-2);
wherein the inner member (8, 10) comprises a cup member 10, Fig: 1-2) open toward the main rubber elastic body (*, Fig: 1-2),
an end of the main rubber elastic body (top portion of 8, Fig: 1-2) in an axial direction is inserted and installed to the cup member (10, Fig: 1-2), a bottom wall of the cup member (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2) is superimposed to an end surface of the main rubber elastic body in the axial direction without being bonded (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2), and
a circumferential wall of the cup member (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2) expands toward an opening side (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2), and the circumferential wall, at least in an opening portion, is arranged as a deformation regulation part (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2) which has a gap in a state of being separated with respect to the main rubber elastic body toward an outer circumference to be externally inserted (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2),
wherein the circumferential wall of the cup member is arranged in a stepped cylindrical shape having a step difference in middle (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2),
an opening side of the circumferential wall with respect to the step difference is arranged as the deformation regulation part (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2), and
a bottom side of the circumferential wall with respect to the step difference is arranged as a proximal part closer to an outer circumferential surface of the main rubber elastic body than the deformation regulation part (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2).
Nakajima discloses all the structural elements of the claimed invention but fails to explicitly disclose an outer cylindrical member; and
a main rubber elastic body, in a cylindrical shape, and connecting the inner member and the outer cylindrical member.
SATO discloses Vibration Isolator And Method Of Mounting comprising:
an outer cylindrical member (12, Fig: 1); and
a main rubber elastic body (16, Fig: 1), in a cylindrical shape, and connecting the inner member and the outer cylindrical member (12, Fig: 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the discloses Vibration Isolation Support Apparatus of the Nakajima to make the outer cylindrical member and a main rubber elastic body, connecting the outer cylindrical member as taught by SATO in order to connect the dynamic damper containing the mass and the elastic connector to the inner tube and to provide the dynamic damper integrally as a part of the apparatus.
As per claim 3, Nakajima discloses wherein the deformation regulation part of the cup member (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2) is arranged in a tapered shape whose diameter increases from a bottom side toward the opening side (Attached figure and Fig: 1-2).
PNG
media_image1.png
680
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 5, SATO further discloses wherein the main rubber elastic body is formed with a groove open (Attached figure and Fig: 1)on an end surface in the axial direction to which the bottom wall of the cup member is superimposed (28, Attached figure and Fig: 1), and an end of the groove is open on [[an]]the outer circumferential surface of the main rubber elastic body (Attached figure and Fig: 1).
As per claim 7, SATO further discloses wherein a shaft member (Attached figure and Fig: 1) is bonded to an inner circumferential surface of the main rubber elastic body (16, Attached figure and Fig: 1), and
Nakajima discloses the inner member is configured by fixing the cup member to the shaft member (Fig: 1-2).
As per claim 8, SATO further discloses wherein by fixing the cup member to the shaft member, the main rubber elastic body is pre-compressed between the cup member and the outer cylindrical member (the first end of the connecting member is fixed to the inner peripheral side of the inner tube by press-fitting, [0019], Fig: 1).
As per claim 9, SATO further disclose wherein the main rubber elastic body (16, Fig: 1) is formed with a groove open (Attached figure and Fig: 1) on an end surface in the axial direction to which the bottom wall of the cup member is superimposed (28, Fig: 1), and the groove is configured as comprising:
an annular groove part extending in an annular shape around the shaft member (Attached figure and Fig: 1); and
an outer circumferential groove part extending from the annular groove part toward the outer circumference to open on [[an]]the outer circumferential surface of the main rubber elastic body (Attached figure and Fig: 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
576
608
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima (JP – S63176156 U, from IDS) as modified by SATO (US – 2008/0143029 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishimura (JP – H10141437 A, from IDS).
As per claim 4, Nakajima as modified by SATO discloses all the structural elements of the claimed invention but fails to explicitly disclose wherein a stopper part in a flange shape protruding toward the outer circumference is provided at an opening end of the cup member, and the stopper part is arranged to face, in the axial direction, an installation plate part installed to the outer cylindrical member.
Nishimura discloses Cylindrical Vibration-Proof Support Body comprising:
a stopper part (80, Fig: 1, 4) in a flange shape protruding toward the outer circumference is provided at an opening end of the cup member (Fig: 1, 4), and the stopper part is arranged to face, in the axial direction (Fig: 1, 4), an installation plate part installed to the outer cylindrical member (42, Fig: 1, 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the discloses Vibration Isolation Support Apparatus of the Nakajima as modified by SATO to make the stopper part in a flange shape protruding toward the outer circumference is provided at an opening end of the cup member, and the stopper part is arranged to face, in the axial direction, an installation plate part installed to the outer cylindrical member as taught by Nishimura in order to provide large spring rigidity in the direction of right angle of a shaft.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim6 is 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.
Prior art and teaching references fail to disclose a groove depth dimension of the end of the groove open on the outer circumferential surface of the main rubber elastic body is greater than a height dimension of the mounting part in the axial direction.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARK, filed 11/20/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3, 5 and 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nakajima (JP – S63176156 U, from IDS) and further in view of SATO (US – 2008/0143029 A1) and Nishimura (JP – H10141437 A, from IDS).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAN M AUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-5792. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:30 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
/SAN M AUNG/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616