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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 16 and 23-24 are objected to for the following reasons: the language of “which separate preload unit”, “which end face”, and “which predetermined preload force” is grammatically unclear. The claims should read “wherein the separate preload unit”, “wherein the end face”, and “wherein the predetermined preload force” for proper interpretation. For examination purposes, the claims will be interpreted as suggested above.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-17, 19-25, and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Magnus (US 20020189888).
Regarding claim 16, Magnus discloses a power steering assembly 18 ([0018]) for electromechanical power steering in a motor vehicle, comprising:
a steering gear ([0005]-[0006]), wherein the steering gear is configured to transmit a rotational movement introduced by a steering device 100 through an input side 400 of the steering gear, to an output side 202, 302 of the steering gear, and wherein the power steering assembly is configured to convert a movement derived from the output side of the steering gear into a rotational movement of at least one wheel 200, 300 of the motor vehicle about a steering axle ([0019]-[0020], Fig. 2);
an adjustable absorption unit 194 for at least partial absorption of road-induced shocks received through the at least one wheel 200, 300 of the motor vehicle ([0027]-[0029], Fig. 9); and
a separate preload unit (the preload unit is the assembly of elements 144, 182, 188, and 190), wherein the separate preload unit is configured to interact with the adjustable absorption unit such that a predetermined preload force is applied to the adjustable absorption unit ([0029], Fig. 9).
Additionally, regarding the limitation of “an adjustable absorption unit for at least partial absorption of road-induced shocks received through the at least one wheel of the motor vehicle”. Magnus discloses the structural limitation of the claim. The absorption unit 194 of Magnus will inherently serve to absorb road-induced shocks received through the wheels and delivered to the driver input shaft of the steering column.
Regarding claim 17, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit comprises at least one first compensation washer 188 ([0028], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 19, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit comprises a preload nut 182 ([0029], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 20, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit is configured to interact with the adjustable absorption unit 194 such that the predetermined preload force is adjustable via two components 144, 182 engaging with one another substantially continuously via a thread and a counter-thread ([0029]).
Regarding claim 21, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit and the adjustable absorption unit 194 are at least partially movable in relation to one other, in an assembled state, in an axial direction ([0029], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 22, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit is secured in the assembled state to prevent rotation in a circumferential direction, via a securing pin 150 engaging with a groove 164 ([0027], Fig. 9, “Pin 150 is configured with a slot 163 positioned thereon to allow a portion of retainer 152 to be received therein while maintaining pin 150 slidably disposed in an aperture formed in housing 162 to engage an outside surface of a sleeve 144 when screw 154 is fixed against retainer 152 by tightening screw 154 in threaded aperture 158. Sleeve 144 has a channel 164 configured on a periphery thereof to allow axial translation of sleeve 144 while limiting rotation thereof.”).
Regarding claim 23, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit has an end face, wherein the end face forms a contact surface for directly bearing against the adjustable absorption unit 194 (Fig. 9; the washers 188 and 189 each have an end face which abuts against the absorption unit 194), for applying the predetermined preload force to the adjustable absorption unit.
Regarding claim 24, Magnus discloses a method for configuring a power steering assembly 18 for electromechanical power steering in a motor vehicle ([0018]-[0019]), comprising:
integrating an adjustable absorption unit 194 for the at least partial absorption of road-induced shocks received through a wheel 200, 300 of the motor vehicle into a conversion path of a steering movement of the power steering assembly ([0027]-[0029], Fig. 9);
providing a separate preload unit (the preload unit is the assembly of elements 144, 182, 188, and 190); and
finally setting a predetermined preload force, wherein the predetermined preload force is applied to the adjustable absorption unit 194, wherein the separate preload unit compresses the adjustable absorption unit 194 ([0029], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 25, Magnus discloses wherein, as the separate preload unit, a first compensation washer 188 is provided adjacent to the adjustable absorption unit 194 for preloading the adjustable absorption unit by targeted compression ([0028]-[0029], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 27, Magnus discloses wherein, as the separate preload unit, a preload nut 182 is provided adjacent to the adjustable absorption unit 194 for preloading the adjustable absorption unit by targeted compression ([0029], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 28, Magnus discloses wherein the predetermined preload force is set by rotating a first component 182 with a thread of the separate preload unit and a second component 144 with a counter-thread engaging with the first component 182 with respect to one another ([0029], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 29, Magnus discloses wherein the separate preload unit is finally secured to prevent rotation in a circumferential direction ([0027], Fig. 9, “Sleeve 144 has a channel 164 configured on a periphery thereof to allow axial translation of sleeve 144 while limiting rotation thereof.”).
Regarding claim 30, Magnus discloses wherein securing is achieved by providing a securing pin 150 that engages with a groove 164 in the circumferential direction in a form-fitting manner ([0027], Fig. 9, “Pin 150 is configured with a slot 163 positioned thereon to allow a portion of retainer 152 to be received therein while maintaining pin 150 slidably disposed in an aperture formed in housing 162 to engage an outside surface of a sleeve 144 when screw 154 is fixed against retainer 152 by tightening screw 154 in threaded aperture 158. Sleeve 144 has a channel 164 configured on a periphery thereof to allow axial translation of sleeve 144 while limiting rotation thereof.”).
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 18 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magnus in view of Duffy (US 4485883).
Regarding claim 18, Magnus teaches wherein the separate preload unit further comprises at least one second compensation washer 190 ([0028], Fig. 9).
Magnus does not expressly teach the second compensation washer having a second thickness of which differs from a first thickness of the first compensation washer.
However, Duffy teaches a power steering system with a preload unit which uses washers 124, 128 of different thicknesses (Col. 2, lines 55-62, Fig. 3 of Duffy).
Magnus teaches a device which differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of washers of undisclosed widths for the washers of different widths. Washers of different widths within preload units for power steering systems are known in the art and are taught by Duffy. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the washers of different widths from Duffy for the washers of Magnus and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Additionally, in Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the washers of Magnus of different widths from each other. A change in washer widths would not significantly change the operation of the device taught by Magnus since Magnus teaches that the nut 182 is adjusted to change the preload imparted onto the spring 194 by axially compressing the spring ([0029], Fig. 9). A change in washer width would merely adjust how much the nut 182 must be tightened in order to establish the desired preload.
Regarding claim 26, Magnus teaches wherein, a second compensation washer 190 is provided adjacent to the adjustable absorption unit 194 for preloading the adjustable absorption unit by targeted compression ([0028]-[0029], Fig. 9),
Magnus does not expressly teach wherein, the second compensation washer has a second thickness that differs from a first thickness of the first compensation washer.
However, Duffy teaches a power steering system with a preload unit which uses washers 124, 128 of different thicknesses (Col. 2, lines 55-62, Fig. 3 of Duffy).
Magnus teaches a device which differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of washers of undisclosed thicknesses for the washers of different thicknesses. Washers of different thicknesses within preload units for power steering systems are known in the art and are taught by Duffy. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the washers of different widths from Duffy for the washers of Magnus and the results of the substitution would have been predictable.
Additionally, in Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the washers of Magnus of different widths from each other. A change in washer widths would not significantly change the operation of the device taught by Magnus since Magnus teaches that the nut 182 is adjusted to change the preload imparted onto the spring 194 by axially compressing the spring ([0029], Fig. 9). A change in washer width would merely adjust how much the nut 182 must be tightened in order to establish the desired preload.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
JP 2005212559 teaches a preload mechanism for a power steering assembly with an absorption unit.
US 20030173138 teaches an adjustable preload mechanism for a vehicle steering system.
US 2867129 teaches a power steering system with a preload unit and an adjustable absorption unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL WILLIAM WATKINS whose telephone number is (703)756-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30 am -6:00 pm EST; Friday 8:30 am - 2:00 pm EST.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at (571) 272-2706. 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.
/N.W.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3617
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617