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 .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-10, 11-17 are pending.
Claims 11-17 were previously withdrawn.
Claims 1, 3-4 are amended.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over JP-2008062901-A to Kawase (“Kawase”), and further in view of US-9291202-B2 to Von Schleintiz (“Von Schleintiz”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kawase (FOR “T”, English Translation “ET” and Figs 1-3) discloses a wheel hub assembly (101, Fig 1) for an electric vehicle (italicized limits: intended use, not limiting), comprising: a wheel hub unit (101) comprising: a radially outer ring (105) comprising an inner axial end (Fig 1) with a first metal surface (Annotated Fig 1 “AF1”); a radially inner ring (102 “inner ring” of “wheel hub”, without surface hardening, typically a med carbon steel with Mohs hardness of 4) comprising an inner axial end (AF1) with a third metal surface ([per instant application specification para 5 a third metal coupling surface”], AF1); and a plurality of rolling bodies (102 “double row ball bearing” including 107, 108 “raceway surfaces”, 103, 104 “rolling elements”) interposed between (AF1) the inner ring and the outer ring; a suspension pillar (not shown, ET Page see dashed contour AF1) comprising an axial end (AF1) with a second metal surface (of 105 at face of 117 flange, AF1) butt coupled (BRI: two axial ends abutting/ coupled surfaces without overlap; to knuckle [i.e. suspension pillar] not shown, ET Page 7 Para 5, beginning “The outer ring 105…”, ET, AF1 shows dashed outline where Knuckle would be) to the first metal surface of the radially outer ring; a constant velocity joint (106 “Constant velocity/universal joint”, with a surface hardening, typically a steel material Mohs hardness of 4-6) comprising an axial end (AF1) with a fourth metal surface ( AF1) butt coupled (BRI: two axial ends abutting/ coupled surfaces without overlap;107 abuts 111 swaged portion of 101 hub, AF1) to the third metal surface of the radially inner ring; and a roughened surface (roughened, hardened surface including 150 “a plurality of protrusions” uniformly dispersed [Fig 2c] on 116a “(abutting surface” of 116 shoulder of 115 “joint outer ring”, [i.e. on fourth metal surface] that abuts 111 “Crimping portion of 101 hub’ that reduces the static friction coefficient …” thus preventing stick slip and stick slip noise at the contact portion” between 116a and 111, i.e. prevents micro-slipping between the third metal surface and the fourth metal surface so as to at least reduce noise within the wheel hub assembly]; Page 8 Para 3 beginning “This point will be further…“, Fig 2a-d), Page 8 Par 5 beginning “In this structure…”, see dotted pattern Fig 2c, Fig 2d, Page 9 Para 2 beginning “As a specific method…”).
Kawase does not disclosed a coating comprising: a plurality of hard particles uniformly dispersed in the coating and comprising a Mohs hardness greater than a hardness of the second metal surface and greater than a hardness of the fourth metal surface; and one of an organic matrix and an inorganic matrix, wherein the coating covers at least one of the first metal surface and the third metal surface and is configured to prevent micro-slipping between the first metal surface and the second metal surface and/or between the third metal surface and the fourth metal surface so as to at least reduce noise within the wheel hub assembly.
PNG
media_image1.png
540
603
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Von Schleinitz discloses a coating comprising (a friction enhancing lacquer including irregularly shaped abrasive particles of a titanium-boron compound with a Mohs hardness of 8 or 9 Mohs [or Corundum AL203 with a Mohs hardness of 9 Mohs, Col 6 lines 35-40],greater than a hardness of bearing and ring surfaces on which it is applied and abuts [Col 4 lines 20-32, Col 9 lines 1-19) [typically steel], requiring no initial surface preparation/machining; Col 2 lines 17-23, 30-37, Fig 1). comprising: a plurality of hard particles (irregularly shaped abrasive particles of a titanium-boron compound, and anticorrosive Zinc power [with thickness 40 µm, Col 5 lines 62-67, Col 6 lines 1-3], the particle content between 10 to 20% weight [i.e. particles are dispersed in the lacquer prior to applying, Col 3 lines 24-29], a grain/particle size between 5 to 150 µm [Col 3 lines 56-61], and a thickness 15 to 70 µm [Col 4 lines 16-19]) uniformly dispersed (Fig 1) in the coating and one of an organic matrix and an inorganic matrix (a matrix including epoxy resin lacquer [i.e. inorganic] or a polyurethane lacquer [i.e. organic] Col 2 lines 48-50), wherein the coating covers at least one of the first metal surface and the third metal surface (specifically, the third metal surface, Col 4 lines 5-32, Col 9 lines 1-19) and is configured to prevent micro-slipping (Abstract, Col 1, lines 43-62), between first and second machined parts (coating applied to a first machined part [fourth metal surface], then partially adheres to second machine part [third metal surface] upon pressing/abutting , thus applies to the third and fourth metal surfaces so as to at least reduce noise within the wheel hub assembly, Col 1 lines 20-32, Col 4 lines 5-32 (Specifically, the coating is configured to prevent micro-slipping between bearing and ring [i.e. the third metal surface and the fourth metal surface] so as to reduce relative motion between, and thus stick slip and reduce noise therein between (Abstract, Col 1 lines 43-62) within the wheel hub assembly).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub assembly having a first, second, third and fourth metal surface, wherein the fourth metal surface is hardened and abuts the third metal surface, and is configured to prevent micro-slipping therein between and to reduce noise in the hub assembly, and the coating comprising a plurality of hard particles of 8 or 9 Mohs, uniformly dispersed in the coating and one of an organic matrix and an inorganic matrix, wherein the coating covers the third metal surface and is configured to prevent micro-slipping therein between to reduce noise between the fourth and third surfaces, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub assembly having a first, second, third and fourth metal surface, wherein the fourth metal surface is hardened and abuts the third metal surface, and is configured to prevent micro-slipping therein between and to reduce noise in the hub assembly of Kawase, and the teaching of the coating on a fourth metal surface comprising a plurality of hard particles of 8 or 9 Mohs, uniformly dispersed in the coating and one of an organic matrix and an inorganic matrix to, wherein the coating covers the third metal surface, and the coating configured to prevent micro-slipping therein between and to reduce noise between the fourth and third surfaces of Von Schleinitz, to modify friction enhanced surface of the fourth metal surface, such that it is a coating on a fourth metal surface comprising a plurality of hard particles of 8 or 9 Mohs, uniformly dispersed in the coating and one of an organic matrix and an inorganic matrix to, wherein the coating covers the third metal surface, and the coating configured to prevent micro-slipping therein between and to reduce noise between the fourth and third surfaces (like Von Schleinitz), being an alternative friction enhancement (to that of Kawase), the coating hardness greater than a hardness of the fourth metal surface and the third metal surface (the coating covers the fourth and third metal surface with the motivation employ a friction enhancement coating on the fourth metal surface, that requires no initial surface preparation/machining; Von Schleinitz (Col 2 lines 17-23, 30-37) having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 1, wherein the hard particles comprise irregularly shaped abrasive particles with a Mohs hardness of at least 9 (as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub of claim 1, wherein the coating covers at least one of the second metal surface and the fourth metal surface (specifically the coating covers the fourth metal surface, as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 5, wherein the coating comprises the organic matrix (as described in paragraph 65 of this document, the coating comprises a thickness of between 20 µm and 100 µm (15 to 70 µm as described in paragraph 6 of this document), the organic matrix comprises at least one of one or more polyurethane-based polymers, one or more epoxy-based polymers, and one or more acrylic-based copolymers (specifically a polyurethane based polymer as described in paragraph 6 of this document), and the hard particles comprise 10% and 50% of a total weight of the coating (10-20% as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 1, wherein the coating covering at least one of the first metal surface and the third metal surface (specifically the third metal surface as described in paragraph 6 of this document) comprises the inorganic matrix (as described in paragraph 6 of this document), the inorganic matrix comprises one of a metal (Zinc powder for anticorrosive, as described in paragraph 6 of this document) and a metal alloy (hard particles of corundum i.e. Al203 a metal alloy, as described in paragraph 6 of this document), and the hard particles are dispersed in the coating before the coating is applied to at least one of the first metal surface and third metal surface (specifically particles are dispersed in coating, then coating is applied to fourth metal surface and then adheres to third metal surface, as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 6, wherein the hard particles comprise dimensions between 15 pm and 60 pm (5 to 150 µm inclusive of 15 to 60 µm, as described in paragraph 6 of this document) and the hard particles comprise one of corundum, alumina, and silicon carbide (specifically, the hard particles comprise corundum as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 7, wherein the matrix comprises a zinc layer comprising a thickness of between 20 pm to 100 pm (40 µm as described in paragraph 6 of this document), and the hard particles comprise between 10% and 50% of a total weight of the coating (10 – 22 % as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 7, wherein the hard particles comprise dimensions between 15 pm and 60 pm (5 to 150 µm inclusive of 15 to 60 µm, as described in paragraph 6 of this document), and the hard particles comprise one of corundum, alumina, and silicon carbide (specifically corundum as described in paragraph 6 of this document).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP-2008062901-A to Kawase (“Kawase”), and further in view of US-9291202-B2 to Von Schleinitz, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US-20100301666-A1 to Shibata (“Shibata”).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 2, including a coating comprising one of the organic matrix or the inorganic matrix (specifically an inorganic matrix), but does not disclose the matrix further comprises one of a UV light-cured varnish and an JR light-cured varnish.
Shibata (third embodiment, Fig 8, Para 45 discloses a wheel hub assembly, a coating comprising a UV light-cured varnish (specifically a UV light-cured varnish: 17, “cures in seconds [i.e. quickly], “UV curable coating” “rust preventive” “acrylic resin” [i.e. UV light-cured varnish”], Para 8-19, 38 Fig 8).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub assembly and the coating comprising one of a UV light-cured varnish, a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub assembly of the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz and teaching of the coating comprising a UV light-cured varnish of Shibata, to modify the matrix (of the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz) such that coating includes a UV light-cured varnish, with the motivation enable the coating to be quickly cured (Shibata Col 38) having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP-2008062901-A to Kawase (“Kawase”), and further in view of US-9291202-B2 to Von Schleinitz, as applied to claim 2, and further in view of US-20210017376-A1 to Grismala (“Grismala”).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz discloses the wheel hub assembly of claim 2, discloses an inorganic matrix but does not disclose wherein one of the organic matrix or the inorganic matrix further comprises an anaerobic sealant paste, wherein the hard particles are dispersed in the coating before the coating is applied to at least one of the first metal surface and third metal surface (method limit in product claim, not limiting: “the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production., MPEP 2113) method limits in apparatus claim, not limiting (MPEP 2113),.
Grismala discloses a coating wherein one of the organic matrix or the inorganic matrix further comprises an anaerobic sealant paste (Para 24.)
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub assembly and the anaerobic sealant paste, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub assembly of the combination of Kawase and Von Schleinitz and the teaching of the anaerobic sealant paste of Grismala, to modify the wheel hub assembly such that it includes a anaerobic sealant paste (like Grismala) with the motivation to seal the connection between the first metal surface and third metal surface to ensure the connection has a thermally stable, durable seal preventing dirt and debris from entering therein between, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: The references cited on PTO-892 disclose one or more of: a wheel hub assembly including inner and outer rings, suspension pillar, CV joint, coatings to enhance friction, prevent corrosion, including organic and inorganic matrix, UV or IR light cured varnish, hard particles, of various materials, sizes and thicknesses and percent weights.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks , filed 04/30/2026, with respect to rejection of claims 1-10 under 35 USC §112 (b) have been fully considered, in light of amendments to claims 1, 3 and 4 and arguments regarding claim 5, are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-10 under 35 USC §112 (b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5-7 and 10 under 35 USC §103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection resulting from amendment of claim 1, to which a new set of rejections in included herein.
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 EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Joe Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights