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 1-4 are pending.
Claims 1-3 are amended.
Claim 4 is new.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “an uneven surface.. of the outer joint member” and “an uneven surface…of the inner member” (described in claims 1-4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the specification), are not identified by a reference number, as such they are not associated with any drawing. This results ambiguity as to if the uneven surfaces are different from or the same structure as the face spline 29 and face spline 30 of the face spline structure X (described in paragraph 22 of the specification, and ultimately clarified by newly added claim 4). It is suggested by the Examiner to amend the specification to identify the uneven surfaces with reference number 29 and 30, for greater clarity and consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “having double row outer raceway surfaces formed on an inner peripheral surface” in lines 3-4 is grammatically incorrect. It is suggested by the Examiner to change the recitation to “having a double row of outer raceway surfaces formed on an inner peripheral surface, for greater clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4 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.
Regarding Claim 1, the recitation “an inner member having the double row inner raceway surfaces formed on an outer peripheral surface”, in lines 5-6, is indefinite because it lack prior antecedent basis, because the previously introduced double row inner raceway surfaces in lines 2-3, relate to a different part. It is suggested by the Examiner to change the recitation to “an inner member having a double row of inner raceway surfaces formed on an outer peripheral surface”, in lines 5-6, for greater clarity.
Claims 4 recites the limitation "the uneven surface of the inner member of the wheel bearing is a face spline” and “the uneven surface of the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint is a face spline” in lines 1-4, (the uneven surfaces are described without reference characters in paragraphs 8 and 9 (and included in limits of claims 1-4), while face splines are identified by reference characters 29 [of inner member of hub] and 30 [of outer joint] and described throughout the specification in paragraphs 7, 19- 23, 25-28 and shown in Figures). The recitations of claim 4 equating uneven surfaces to face splines are indefinite, having ambiguous support from the specification, because the specification is unclear if the uneven surfaces are different from or the same structure as the face splines, without assigning the uneven surfaces the same reference characters as the face splines (see paragraph 3 of this document).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by JP-2008284920-A to Kuroda (“Kuroda”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kuroda (English Translation “ET” pages 1-9, Figs 1-4) discloses a wheel bearing device (ET Page 3, Para 5 beginning “TECH-SOLUTION In the wheel bearing device”, line 1, Fig 1) comprising: a wheel bearing ( Fig 1) including an outer member (2) having a double row of outer raceway surfaces (26, 27, Fig 1) formed on (Fig 1) an inner peripheral surface, an inner member (1 “hub wheel” having 20 “inner cylindrical wall”, Fig 1) having a double row of inner raceway surfaces (28, 29, Fig 1) formed on (Fig 1) an outer peripheral surface so as to face (Fig 1) the double row outer raceway surfaces, and a plurality of rows of rolling elements (two of 30 “ball/rolling element”) interposed between (Fig 1) the double row outer raceway surfaces of the outer member and the double row inner raceway surfaces of the inner member; and a constant velocity universal joint (3 Fig 2) having an outer joint member (5 “outer rings”), an inner joint member (6), and a torque transmission member ( Page 5, Para 7 lines 2-6 “a plurality of torque transmissions between 5 and 6, including: 7 “ball”, 8 “cage”, where “6 is spline fitted by press-fit into 6a ‘shaft hole inner diameter’, shaft [not shown], to transmit torque”, see also Page 5 Para 7 Fig 2, 3, 4) that transmits torque (Page 6 Para 5 , Para 6; to Page 7, Para 1, Page 7, Para 2 “outer ring 5 and hub ring are aligned”, Page 7 Para 5: “transmission of rotational torque…“ ) between the outer joint member and the inner joint member, wherein the inner member of the wheel bearing comprises an uneven surface (42 “convex portion” i.e. protruding portion and concave in between 42 [on to 31a “end of 31 “caulking portion” of 1 “hub ring”[; formed by pressing and forming the M “uneven fitting structure” including45 “face spline” of 5 “outer ring” on to 31a “end of 31 “caulking portion” of 1 “hub ring”, page 7 para 1-7, Page 6, Para 6, Fig 1-4) in which a plurality of protrusions (convex portions/i.e. protrusions, formed between 42, Fig 1, Page 7, Para 3) and recesses (42 “concave portion”) are alternately formed in a circumferential direction on an axial end surface () on an inboard side, the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint comprises an uneven surface (M “uneven fitting structure”, “concave-convex fitting structure M” having 45 “face spline”, 45 “face spline”, Page 6, Para 6, Page 7, Para 5) in which a plurality of protrusions (41 “convex part” extending radially with 41a “top having a sharp edge”, Page 6 , Para 6 Fig 3-4) and recesses (43 “ridges extending radially”, Page 6, Para 6, Fig 3, Fig 3-4) are alternately formed (41 ridges “alternately arranged” Page 6, Para 6, line 3, Fig 3) in a circumferential direction on a portion (Fig 3) that faces (Fig 2, 4), in an axial direction, the uneven surface of the inner member of the wheel bearing, a recess-and-protrusion fitting structure (M “uneven fitting structure, Page 6, para 6, 7 Para 5), which couples (Page 6 Para 5, Page 7 para 2, 4) the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint and the inner member of the wheel bearing in a torque transmittable manner (Page 7 Para 5), is formed by the uneven surface of the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint and the uneven surface of the inner member of the wheel bearing being meshed with (“fitted” “tight fitted” Page 6, Para 5; “tight fitted” Page 7, Para 2) each other, and an inner peripheral surface of the inner member of the wheel bearing and an outer peripheral surface of the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint are fitted to () each other.
Regarding Claim 2, Kuroda discloses the wheel bearing device according to claim 1, wherein the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint has a protruding part (17 “shaft alignment protrusion”, Page 7, Para 2, Fig 2, 4) protruding farther toward (Fig 4) an outboard side than the uneven surface (45 “face spline”) of the outer joint member, the protruding part being provided on an inner diameter side (D1 outer diameter of 17, fits into D inner diameter of 47 circular hole in 20 of 1, Page 7, Pars 2,Fig 4) of the uneven surface the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint, and an outer peripheral surface (Fig 4) of the protruding part of the outer joint member and the inner peripheral surface of the inner member of the wheel bearing are fitted to each other (Page 7, Para 2, shown Fig 1,4).
Regarding Claim 3, Kuroda discloses the wheel bearing device according to claim 1, further comprising a cylindrical part (1 hub ring with 20 “cylindrical portion“ with 47 “circular hole”, Page 7, Para 2, Fig 1 ) protruding farther toward (Fig 1, radially outer edge of 31 caulking portion protrudes axially outward to right of a part of formed spline/concave/convex surfaces in M, on 31a, Fig 1) the inboard side than the uneven surface of the inner member, the cylindrical part being provided on the inner member at an outer diameter side of the of an uneven surface (31 extends radially outward shown Fig 1) of the inner member of the wheel bearing, and an inner peripheral surface of the cylindrical part of the inner member and the outer peripheral surface of the outer joint member are fitted to each other (as described in paragraph 10 of this document).
Regarding Claim 4, Kuroda discloses the wheel bearing device according to claim 1, wherein the uneven surface of the inner member of the wheel bearing is a face spline (formed to fit to concave/convex surfaces of 45, as described in paragraph 10 of this document) in which the plurality of protrusions and recesses extend in a radial direction, and the uneven surface of the outer joint member of the constant velocity universal joint is a face spline (45, described in paragraph 10 of this document) in which the plurality of protrusions and recesses extend in a radial direction.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: FUKUSHIMA (JP-2009115292-A), HIRAI (JP-2009149141-A, JP-2009292422-A, JP-2009293686-A, JP-2010042733-A, JP-2010042764-A), Tomoue (JP-2010047042-A) and KIMURA (WO-2012172942-A1) disclose wheel bearing devices having uneven surfaces and face splines connecting the hub inner ring to the constant velocity universal joint.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 01/26/2026, with respect to claim 3 rejection under 35 USC § 112 (b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim 3 rejections under 35 USC § 112 (b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of resulting from amendments to claims 1, 2 and 3 and addition of new claim 4, for which a new set of rejections in contained 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights