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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because: In Figure 1 reference characters 300 “wheel spoke” [specification Para 81] and 303 “spoke strip”, [specification Para 108] have a shared callout pointing to a single radial spoke. In Figure 12, callout for reference character 302 “spoke plate(s), [specification Para 93], point instead to an inner radial side of 100C “third insert(s)”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: 300 “wheel spoke” and 302 “spoke plate”, do not conform to generally known nomenclature, because specification in paragraph 3 provides an ambiguous definition of “wheel spoke”, that could mean either a “wheel disc/spider “or an individual spoke member. Specification paragraph 25 , and 108 describes Fig 12 as having “the wheel spoke [300] including multiple spoke plates” [302]; [thus wheel spoke conforming to generally known nomenclature for a wheel disc/spider, and spoke plate conforming to generally known nomenclature for an individual spoke of a wheel]. Similarly, paragraph 93 describes Fig 1 having a wheel spoke having 5 spoke plates [conforming to generally known nomenclature for a wheel disc/spider having multiple an individual spokes of a wheel disc/spider]. ; and 302 “a plurality of spoke plates”, does not conform to generally known nomenclature, because they are not a plate like but rather radially extending support members connecting a hub to a rim. It is suggested by the Examiner that “ wheel spoke: be changed in the specification to “wheel disc” and “spoke plates” be changed to “spokes”, for greater clarity (see also paragraphs 6-7 of this document).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner Note: Claims 3 and 14, recite method limits in a product claim [i.e. product by process], thus are interpreted as not limiting. (method limit in product claim, [i.e. product by process], not limiting: "The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production", (MPEP 2113)). Examiner suggests changing the wording describing method steps [listed below], to wording describing the structure, if Applicant desires them to be limiting.
Claim 3, line 2 recites the method limit: “Integrally processed and formed through a double-shot injection molding process.”
Claim 14, lines 2-3 recites the method limit: “processes through an integrated molding process.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
Specifically, regarding claims 1, 8, 15 and 16:
the term “wheel spoke” in claims 1, 8, 15 and 16 is used by the claim to mean “wheel disc” or “spider”, while the accepted meaning of the term “spoke”; and
the term “spoke plates” in claim 16 is used by the claim to mean “ wheel spoke/spoke” while the accepted meaning is wheel disc”.
The terms just described are indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the terms (see paragraphs 2 and 3 of this document). In the rejections following these terms have been replaced in the claim limits, with the generally know nomenclature for clarity: i.e. “wheel spoke” appears as “wheel disc” and “spoke plates” appear as “spokes”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 7-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US-2018/0354295-A1 to Nylund (“Nylund”).
Regarding Claim 1, Nylund (embodiment Figs 4-12) discloses an insert (18), used for a vehicle wheel (12 Para 3), wherein the vehicle wheel comprises a wheel rim (14), a wheel disc (not shown, implicit to connect rim to axle, Para 52), and a tire (16), and the insert (18 “shielding component”, Para 50, 60) comprises: a body (radially inward portion of 18, 52 “body” having 72 “reinforcement element” therein, aligned radially Para 57-62, 66-69, Figs 7, 10, 12, 21), provided on the wheel rim and/or the wheel disc (Fig 7,12, 21) and a protection portion (radially outward portion of 18, 52 without 72 “reinforcement element” therein, with arcuate shape extending radially inward toward tire, 57-62, 71-72 Figs 7, 9, 10, 12, 21) provided on the body (connected thereto via 74 fasteners Fig 6, 7, 9) wherein at least part of the protection portion shields an outer surface of the tire (84 radially outer region at 86 “top edge” of 52, Paragraphs 5, Para 57-65 lines 9-10, 71-72, Fig 7, 9, 10, 12, 21).
Regarding Claim 2, Nylund discloses the insert of claim 1, wherein a material of the body is a hard material (urethane with 72 reinforce element [i.e. reinforcement rib], Para 65-69, Figs 7, 10, 12) and a material of the protection portion is a soft material (urethane without reinforcement element, absorbs impacts and readily deforms [i.e. soft], Para 65 Figs 7, 12).
Regarding Claim 3, Nylund discloses the insert of claim 2, wherein the body and the protection portion are integrally processed and formed through a double-shot injection molding process (italicized limits are not limiting see paragraph 4 of this document; Nylund discloses the shield is integrally molded with reinforcing rib Para 66-67, 69, Fig 7, 9 10, 12),
Regarding Claim 7, Nylund discloses the insert of claim 1, wherein the protection portion comprises a first section (majority of radially inward protection portion, not overlapping tire, Para 71, Fig 7, 12, 21), and a second section (radially outward section ending at 86 “top edge” of protection portion, Para 71, Fig 5, 9, 10, 12) that are connected, wherein the first section covers an outer surface of the body, and at least part of the second section shields the outer surface of the tire (as described in paragraph 10 of this document).
Regarding Claim 8, Nylund discloses the insert of claim 1, wherein the body is installed on the wheel disc (via 34 “mounting assembly”, 44 arcuate segments via 40 “tabs”, Para 55, 56, 68 Figs 6-7), wherein the body is connected to the wheel disc through a fastener (74 “fasteners”, Fig 6); and/or, a contact face of the body and a contact face of the wheel disc are connected by adhesive.
Regarding Claim 9, Nylund discloses the insert of claim 1, wherein an inner surface of the body is provided with a reinforcing rib (72 “reinforcing element”, Para 66-69, Fig 10,12).
Regarding Claim 10, Nylund discloses a protection device, comprising at least one insert (Para 51) of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, Nylund discloses the protection device of claim 10, wherein there are a plurality of inserts (Para 60 52 “body”) and the plurality of inserts are spaced in a circumference direction of a vehicle wheel (Fig 9, 14, 21).
Regarding Claim 12, Nylund discloses the protection device of claim 11, wherein the plurality of inserts have a same shape and size (Para 58, Fig 9, 14, 21).
Claim(s) 1, 10 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by DE-2322043-A to Kretschmer (“Kretschmer”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kretschmer (Figs 2-4, Google Translation FOR “R” images FOR “S”, Pages 1-2) discloses an insert (1 “decorative panel”), used for a vehicle wheel (Fig 2), wherein the vehicle wheel comprises a wheel rim (2), a wheel disc 1 (with spokes and openings having air flow indicated by arrows so directed Fig 3), and a tire (Fig 3), and the insert comprises: a body (1), provided on the wheel rim (Fig 2-4) and/or the wheel disc ; and a protection portion (a radially outermost portion of 1 partially covering tire surface near rim flange, Fig 3 ), provided on the body, wherein at least part of the protection portion shields an outer surface of the tire (ET Page 2, Para 3, line 17).
Regarding Claim 10, Kretschmer discloses a protection device, comprising at least one insert of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 15, Kretschmer discloses a vehicle wheel (Fig 2), comprising: a wheel rim (2), a wheel disc (between, connecting to rim Fig 3), and a tire (Fig 3), wherein the tire is sleeved on an outer circumference wall of the wheel rim (Fig 3); and the protection device of claim 10.
Regarding Claim 16, Kretschmer discloses the vehicle wheel (Fig 2) of claim 15, wherein the wheel disc comprises a plurality of spokes (with spokes and openings having air flow indicated by arrows so directed Fig 3) a window region (7 “openings”) is defined between the wheel rim and any two adjacent spokes, a body (1) and/or a protection portion (with spokes and openings having air flow indicated by arrows so directed Fig 3) are defined with a stream guidance region (11 directs the air flow (see arrows Fig 3, 4) out 12 “air gap/slot” and out 7 opening between angled 6 spoke like elements directs airflow inward towards to 12, Page 1 of FOR “R” google translation, lines 24-26 beginning “the swirled flow area…”), and the stream guidance region runs through an insert in a thickness direction of the insert (see arrows directed into 7 openings Fig 3 ,4), such that the stream guidance region is in communication with the window region (see arrows Fig 3, 4).
Regarding Claim 17, Kretschmer discloses the vehicle wheel (Fig 2) of claim 16, wherein at least part of a circumference wall of the stream guidance region tilts (11 is tilted, 6 spoke like elements are angled Figs 3, 4) in a direction towards a center of the stream guidance region, to form a stream guidance face (axially inner tilted part of 1 at 11, and inner inclined walls of 6 spoke like elements forming opening in insert wall .
Regarding Claim 18, Kretschmer discloses a vehicle (implicit that a vehicle wheel is to be used on a vehicle), comprising the vehicle wheel (Fig 2) of claim 15.
Regarding Claim 19, Kretschmer discloses a vehicle (implicit that a vehicle wheel is to be used on a vehicle), comprising the vehicle wheel (Fig 2) of claim 16.
Regarding Claim 20, Kretschmer discloses a vehicle (implicit that a vehicle wheel is to be used on a vehicle), comprising the vehicle wheel (Fig 2) of claim 17.
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, 4-6, 10 -11 and 13 -14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN-106541776-A to Bewinter (“Bewinter”), further in view of DE-3631489-A1 to Bugl (“Bugl”).
Regarding Claim 1, Bewinter (Figs 1-3, English Translation “ET”, Pages 1-3) discloses an insert (6, 6’ inserts, , ET, Page 2, last paragraph beginning “shown for a vehicle…”, Fig 1b), used for a vehicle wheel (implicit having a wheel rim with a tire), wherein the vehicle wheel comprises a wheel rim (2,3), a wheel disc (4 spoke disc), and a tire (ET page 2, last para beginning “shown for a vehicle according…” lines 1-3), and the insert comprises: a body (Fig 1b, 2), provided on the wheel rim and/or the wheel disc.
Bewinter does not disclose a protection portion, provided on the body, wherein at least part of the protection portion shields an outer surface of the tire (ET Page 2, last Para 3, beginning line 17).
Bugl discloses an insert (1 “decorative panel”) having a protection portion (“The part of the” 1 [decorative panel[/”trim protruding radially beyond” 3 “rim flange forms a closed ring surface 6, which cover the tire surface 9 as far as it extends over it”. ET page 2, last paragraph beginning “As can be seen from Fig. 1…”, Fig 1), provided on the body (Fig 1), wherein at least part of the protection portion shields an outer surface of the tire a radially outermost portion of 1 partially covering tire surface near rim flange (as just described, shown Fig 1).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the insert of Bewinter and the insert having a protection portion of Bugl 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 insert of Bewinter and the teaching of the insert having a protection portion of Kretschmer, to modify the insert of Bewinter, such that it has a protection portion (like Kretschmer), with the motivation to protect a portion of the tire from direct sunlight, and damage e.g. from falling rocks, Page 2 top paragraph continuing from page 1, beginning “this object is achieved in that the …”, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Bewinter and Bugl discloses the insert of claim 1, wherein an arc-shaped transition face (at outer rim flange near callout for reference character 7, Fig 1) is formed between an inner circumference wall (Fig 1) of the wheel rim and an outer surface of the wheel rim (Fig 1), the body or the protection portion is provided with a support protrusion (7 “clamping elements” inserted into recesses in the rim ET Page 2, last paragraph beginning “As can be seen from Fig. 1…”, lines 1-4), and an outer surface of the support protrusion is constructed as an arc shape (shape matching arc of outer rim flange, such that the outer surface of the support protrusion is attached to the transition face.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Bewinter and Bugl discloses the insert of claim 4, wherein a groove (recess is formed between the transition face and the outer surface of the tire, clamping protrusion (7 being a “clamping element” implicitly with a protruding shape that inserts into recesses connecting to the insert, Page 2 , last paragraph lines 1-4, Fig 1, as described in previous paragraph) is formed on the outer surface of the support protrusion, and the clamping protrusion is clamped in the groove (as just described).
Regarding Claim 6, discloses the insert of claim 4, wherein there are a plurality the combination of Bewinter and Bugl of support protrusions (7 “clamping elements” implies a plurality, described in previous paragraph 4) in the art and the plurality of support protrusions are spaced along a circumference direction of the wheel rim ( the protrusions, being a plurality, would obviously distributed a plurality of elements circumferentially along a circular part, as is known to those skilled in the art to do so).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Bewinter and Bugl discloses a protection device, comprising at least one insert (1 “decorative panel”, being a protection device, by having a protection portion, described in paragraph 31) of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Bewinter and Bugl discloses the protection device of claim 10, wherein there are a plurality of inserts and the plurality of inserts are spaced in a circumference direction of a vehicle wheel (6, 6’, Bewinter ET, Page 2, last paragraph beginning “shown for a vehicle…”, ).
Regarding Claim 13, Jones discloses the protection device of claim 11, wherein any two adjacent inserts have different shapes and/or sizes (6 has a small area, and 6’ has a large area, (Fig 1b) .
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Bewinter and Bugl discloses the protection device of claim 11, wherein the plurality of inserts are connected to each other (6, 6’ inserts, , ET, Page 2, last paragraph beginning “shown for a vehicle…”, Fig 1b) and processed through an integrated molding process (bolded limits are not limiting see paragraph 4 of this document).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Kretschmer (DE-2322043-A), Haase (US-20150069822-A1), Nakamura (CN-1640693-A), Jones (CN-104837646-A), Pereyra-Garcia Bustamante (CN-110816153-A, DE-102017211695-A1), Bartneck ( DE-102018203805-A1), Hosaka (JP-2019142460-A), Griffiths (EP-0022741-A2), Chenault (WO-2020227593-A1), and Zhu (CN-109927480-A) disclose vehicles, vehicle wheels and/or wheel covers, or inserts.
Conclusion
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