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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 is 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.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “wherein said resilient element is made of a steel which is plastically deformable when said piston assembly is first arranged in said damping cylinder and which is capable of presenting elastic spring back when said piston assembly is removed from said damping cylinder” is not clear. The limitation “plastically deformable when said piston assembly is first arranged” implies a plastic deformation upon installation in the cylinder. A plastic deformation has been interpreted or defined as a permanent change in the shape or structure of a material when subjected to stress beyond its elastic limit. Unlike elastic deformation, which is reversible, plastic deformation causes a material to retain its new shape even after the applied force is removed. Claim 5 appears to require wherein the resilient element is plastically deformed, or permanently changed and then present elastic qualities “springing back” when the applied force is removed. The limitation “presenting elastic spring back” implies an elastic deformation, not a plastic deformation. It is not clear how the spring can “spring back” after a permanent deformation without being plastically deformed again.
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.
Claims 1-3, 11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Gold (US-4742996)
Regarding claim 1, Gold discloses a damper assembly (10) for a hydraulic shock absorber (col. 6, lines 23-24, capable of pneumatic or hydraulic operation), the damper assembly comprising a damping cylinder (12) and a piston assembly (14) being arranged in said damping cylinder and axially movable with respect thereto (fig 1), the piston assembly comprising: a piston (14) having an outer cylindrical surface comprising an annular groove (fig 3, 42 and/or fig 4, 64); a friction element (fig 3, 48 and/or fig 4, 60) arranged in said annular groove of said piston (fig 3 and/or fig 4); and a resilient element (fig 3, 46 and/or fig 4, 58) arranged inside said annular groove between an inner wall of said annular groove and said friction element (fig 3, 48 and/or fig 4, 60) and arranged to force the friction element towards an inner surface of the damping cylinder ( and least col. 5, lines 29-39 and/or lines 54-68), wherein said friction element is made from metal and comprises a coating made of a low friction material (at least col. 5, lines 37-39, metal web and Teflon).
Regarding claim 2, Gold discloses wherein said resilient element is configured to exert a radial force on said friction element when said piston assembly is arranged in said damping cylinder (col. 5 lines 30-54, at least wherein 46/48 provide a seal and therefore a radial force against 12).
Regarding claim 3, Gold discloses wherein said resilient element is plastically deformable when said piston assembly is first arranged in said damping cylinder (figs 3 and 4, and at least wherein any resilient element is plastically deformable when subjected to stress beyond its elastic limit).
Regarding claim 3, it has also been interpreted that upon insertion of the piston 14 into the cylinder 12, the piston resilient element is deformed at least in a sense that the radius of the resilient element is smaller than it was before insertion. Gold has disclosed wherein the resilient element (46/58) maintains a seal with the inner cylinder wall 12, therefore the resilient elements 46/58 are plastically deformed to a radius smaller than before insertion at least until they are removed from the cylinder.
Regarding claim 11, Gold discloses wherein said low friction material of said coating is polytetrafluoroethylene (at least col. 5, lines 37-39, Teflon).
Regarding claim 13, Gold discloses a hydraulic shock absorber (at least figs 1, 5, 6 and col. 6, lines 23-24, wherein pneumatic or hydraulic operation is disclosed).
Regarding claim 14, Gold discloses a damping cylinder (12) and a piston assembly (14), the piston assembly comprising a piston (14) having an outer cylindrical surface comprising an annular groove (fig 3, 42 and/or fig 4, 64), a friction element (fig 3, 48 and/or fig 4, 60) made from metal comprising a coating made of a low friction element (at least col. 5, lines 37-39, metal web and Teflon), and a resilient element (fig 3, 46 and/or fig 4, 58), the method comprising the steps of arranging said resilient element in said annular groove of said piston such that at least a portion of said resilient element is in contact with an inner wall or surface of said groove (figs 3-4); arranging said friction element in said annular groove (42 and/or 64), whereby a first side of said friction element at least partially is in contact with the resilient element and a second, opposing side of said friction element protrudes from said outer cylindrical surface of said piston (figs 3-4, wherein 46/48 and 58/60 protrude from 14 and against the inner surface of 12), thereby forming said piston assembly (at least figs 3-4); and inserting said piston assembly into said damping cylinder (at least figs 3-4 wherein the piston has been inserted), wherein the step of inserting said piston assembly into said damping cylinder causes said resilient element to plastically deform (it has been interpreted that upon insertion of the piston 14 into the cylinder 12, the piston resilient element is deformed at least in a sense that the radius of the resilient element is smaller than it was before insertion).
Regarding claim 15, Gold discloses wherein the step of inserting said piston assembly into said damping cylinder causes said friction element to be pressed further into said annular groove and thereby exerting a force on said resilient element, by which force said resilient element plastically deforms (figs 3-4 and col. 5, lines 29-68 at least wherein the sleeve and the elastic ring may have a slight bulging periphery to assure, in cooperation with the inherent elasticity of the ring, a tight seal and easy movability of the piston 14 within the housing 12).
Regarding claim 16, Gold discloses wherein prior to the step of inserting said piston assembly into said damping cylinder, said resilient element does not exert a force on said friction element (figs 3-4 and col. 5, lines 29-68 at least wherein before assembly or vulcanization of the resilient element and friction element, it has been interpreted that no force is exerted.)
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.
Claims 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gold (US-4742996) in view of Marien (US-2886385).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Gold discloses as set forth above but lacks a metal resilient element and is not specific as to the deformation type of the resilient element. Marien teaches a plastically deformable (at least wherein any resilient element is plastically deformable when subjected to stress beyond its elastic limit) metal resilient element (figs 1 and 2, 60) arranged in annular groove (13) wherein when radially compressed will contract with a resilient springlike action to exert an equal outward radial load around its entire periphery pushing friction elements (18) and (19) against a cylinder wall. Marien also teaches wherein when (60) is radially compressed it forms a loaded expansion unit expanding portion (60b/18/19) (Marien col. 3, lines 40-75).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Gold and Marien disclose and teach wherein said resilient element is made of a steel (Marien col. 2, line 47, flat ribbon spring steel) which is plastically deformable when said piston assembly is first arranged in said damping cylinder (Marien, fig 1 and 3, at least wherein any resilient element is plastically deformable) and which is capable of presenting elastic spring back when said piston assembly is removed from said damping cylinder (Marien, figs 1 and 3, at least wherein it has been interpreted that upon removal spring 60 would present some form of elasticity).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Gold and Marien disclose and teach wherein said resilient element comprises a steel strip (Marien col. 2, line 47, flat ribbon spring steel).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Gold and Marien disclose and teach wherein said steel strip (60) is a curved steel strip which (Marien, figs 1 and 3), when the piston assembly is first mounted in the damping cylinder, plastically deforms adopting a flattened shape (at least wherein it has been interpreted that when 60 flexes, the ribbons flatten at least a certain amount).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Gold and Marien disclose and teach wherein said annular groove (Marien, at least 13) has a width that is equal to or slightly larger than the maximum width of said steel strip (60, figs 1 and 3).
Regarding claims 3-8, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct a resilient element expansion spring out of metal at least to improve the strength and heat tolerance characteristics of the ring, thus improving wear and tear and prolonging life of the ring. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the metal expansion spring of Marien as it provides a dual function of expander and separator in a ring assembly wherein sealing rings are urged radially outward and are held in separated relation by a self-expanding spring ring which does not depend upon engagement with a ring groove to exert its expanding force on the sealing rings (Marien, col. 4, lines 7-29).
Claims 1-3 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Funato (US-20120304855) in view Gold (US-4742996).
Regarding claim 1, Funato discloses a damper assembly (1) for a hydraulic shock absorber (fig 1), the damper assembly comprising a damping cylinder (2) and a piston assembly (4) being arranged in said damping cylinder and axially movable with respect thereto (fig 1), the piston assembly comprising: a piston (4) having an outer cylindrical surface comprising an annular groove (fig 3, 39); a friction element (10) arranged in said annular groove of said piston (fig 3); and a resilient element (fig 3, 11) arranged inside said annular groove between an inner wall of said annular groove and said friction element (fig 3) and arranged to force the friction element towards an inner surface of the damping cylinder ( figs 1, 3, and least [0033-0034], wherein an elastic restoring force of 11 presses an inner peripheral surface 10c of the sealing ring 10, biasing 10 toward an outer side), wherein said friction element comprises a coating made of a low friction material ([0034], PTFE).
Funato discloses wherein the friction element is made from a synthetic resin ([0034]) but lacks wherein the friction element is made from metal. Gold teaches wherein a hydraulic damper (10) comprises a piston 14, a resilient element (46), and a friction element (48) made from metal and comprising a coating made of a low friction material (Gold, at least col. 5, lines 37-39, metal web and Teflon).
Regarding claim 11, Funato and Gold discloses and/or teach wherein said low friction material of said coating is polytetrafluoroethylene (Funato, [0034] PTFE and Gold at least col. 5, lines 37-39, Teflon PTFE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to subsite the resin PTFE ring of Funato with a metal reinforced, PTFE coated friction ring of Gold at least in order to improve the strength and heat tolerance characteristics of the ring, thus improving wear and tear and prolonging life of the ring.
Regarding claim 2, Funato discloses wherein said resilient element (11) is configured to exert a radial force on said friction element when said piston assembly is arranged in said damping cylinder (at least fig 3 and [0033], wherein an elastic restoring force of 11 presses an inner peripheral surface 10c of the sealing ring 10, biasing 10 toward an outer side).
Regarding claim 3, Funato discloses wherein said resilient element (11) is plastically deformable when said piston assembly is first arranged in said damping cylinder (fig 3, and at least wherein any resilient element is plastically deformable when subjected to stress beyond its elastic limit).
Regarding claim 12, Funato discloses wherein said piston assembly (4) further comprises a sealing member (at least 21) arranged in a second annular groove (at least 41) in the outer cylindrical surface of said piston (fig 3), at either side of said annular groove comprising said friction element (10) and said resilient element (fig 3).
Regarding claim 13, Funato discloses a hydraulic shock absorber (at least fig 1 and [0016], hydraulic cylinder 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 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: As to claims 9 and 10, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious wherein said resilient element comprises a steel strip with a central rib and said annular groove comprises stepped opposing side surfaces such that an outer portion of the annular groove has a width that is larger than an inner portion of the annular groove, and wherein end portions of said steel strip comprising said central rib rest on said stepped side surfaces.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K HSIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6259. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5, Monday-Friday.
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.
/JAMES K HSIAO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3616