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 .
This communication is in response to application No. 18/334,513 Linear Actuator and Steering System; filed on 06/41/2023 and amended on 12/18/2025. Claims 1 - 16 are currently pending and have been examined.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vortmeyer (DE 10 2016 200101 A1) in view of Hecker (US 2019/0061812 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
447
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Vortmeyer discloses;
A linear actuator or a steering system linear actuator, comprising:
a housing (housing 2; fig. 1); and
a linear unit (spindle drive 3, spindle 4 and spindle nut 5; fig. 1, paragraph 19) disposed in said housing; said linear unit having a spindle (spindle 4) being axially displaceable in said housing; said
PNG
media_image2.png
260
646
media_image2.png
Greyscale
spindle having two axial ends; and (Fig. 1 illustrates a linear actuator with a spindle 4 having two axial ends located at joint connectors 12 and 13)
said spindle being radially supported on said housing at said axial ends. (fig. 1, illustrates the spindle as supported on both ends by bearing sleeves 8 and 9.)
Vortmeyer does not disclose the spindle being radially supported directly on said housing, however, Hecker teaches;
said spindle (spindle 702; fig. 8, paragraph 71, Hecker) being radially supported directly on said housing (housing 802) at said two axial ends. (Paragraph 71 of Hecker describes the spindle as ending in a guide element 810 which is supported directly by and displaceable in the spindle drive housing, in a linear direction, along the axis of rotation.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Vortmeyer to include a spindle being radially supported directly on the housing at the two axial ends, as taught by Hecker, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to linear actuators. As disclosed by Hecker, it is well known for a linear actuator to include a spindle which is radially supported directly on the housing at the two axial ends. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vortmeyer to include a spindle being radially supported directly on the housing at the two axial ends, as taught by Hecker, as such a modification would simplify the mounting of the linear guide. (Paragraph 72 of Hecker).
Regarding claim 2, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said spindle has axial positions, and said spindle is disposed completely in said housing in all of said axial positions. (fig. 1 illustrates the spindle contained within the housing with bearing sleeve 8 and 9 connected to the ends of the spindle and extending outwards from the housing ends.)
Regarding claim 3, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said spindle has a portion between said two axial ends, and said spindle has a greater diameter at said two axial ends than in said portion between said two axial ends. (The ends of the spindle 4 and supported in bearing sleeves 8 and 9 which are of a larger diameter than the spindle itself.)
Regarding claim 4, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said spindle has support devices (bearing sleeves 8 and 9) each disposed at a respective one of said two axial ends for radial support on said housing. (fig. 1 illustrates the bearing sleeves located at the axial ends of the spindle.)
Hecker also discloses spindle supporting devices in the guide element 810 illustrated in fig. 8 and paragraph 71.)
Regarding claim 5, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said spindle has fixing devices (joint connectors 12 and 13) each disposed at a respective one of said two axial ends for fixing a load transmission device. (fig. 1 illustrates joint connectors 12 and 13 located at the ends of the spindle)
Regarding claim 6, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said fixing devices are configured as fork heads. (fig. 2 illustrates a yoke (12a) attached to the axial end of the spindle.)
Regarding claim 7, Vortmeyer discloses;
said spindle has a spindle body (spindle 4; fig. 1);
said spindle has support devices (bearing sleeves 8 and 9; fig. 1) each disposed at a respective one of said two axial ends for radial support on said housing;
said spindle has fixing devices (joint connectors 12 and 13) each disposed at a respective one of said two axial ends for fixing a load transmission device; and
at least one of said support devices or said fixing devices (joint connectors 12 and 13) each include a respective threaded pin screwed into said spindle body. (Fig. 2 and paragraph 20 describe the screw-on spigot 8 which attaches to the end of the spindle. This spigot is hollow, with an internal thread which accepts the threaded end of the spindle. However, replacing this with a central threaded hole to allow for a central bolt to affix the end component to the spindle would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.)
Regarding claim 14, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said spindle is configured as a double-action spindle. (Fig. 1 of Vortmeyer illustrates the spindle as acting on two, opposing ends, pushing and pulling each end simultaneously.)
Regrading claim 15, Vortmeyer further discloses;
wherein said spindle has twist-prevention devices (bearing sleeve 10) each disposed at a respective one of said two axial ends, said twist-prevention devices cooperating with said housing. (Paragraph 11 describes an anti-twist function of the bearing sleeve, causing the rotational motion of the spindle to translate to longitudinal motion.)
Regarding claim 16, Vortmeyer further discloses;
A steering system or a double-pivot steering system, comprising two track rods (steering linkage; paragraph 19) connected to said spindle of the linear actuator according to claim 1. (Paragraph 19 describes the axial ends of the spindle as connected to a steering linkage by the articulated joint connecting pieces 12 and 13 steering two opposing vehicle wheels.)
PNG
media_image3.png
292
767
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vortmeyer (DE 10 2016 200101 A1) in view of Hecker (US 2019/0061812 A1) and further in view of Grasl (DE 10 2005 025748 A1).
Regarding claim 10 Vortmeyer does not disclose at least one contact face for limiting spindle travel. However, Grasl teaches;
The linear actuator according to claim 1, wherein said spindle has at least one contact face (angled stops 28 and 29; figs. 1 and 2) disposed at each respective one of said two axial ends for limiting travel of said spindle. (Fig. 1 illustrates the end stop 28 which limits the spindle nut travel and the housing end.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Vortmeyer to include at least one contact face disposed at each respective one of said two axial ends for limiting travel of the spindle as taught by Grasl, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to linear actuators. As disclosed by Grasl, it is well known for at least one contact face to be disposed at each respective one of said two axial ends for limiting travel of the spindle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vortmeyer to include at least one contact face disposed at each respective one of said two axial ends for limiting travel of the spindle as taught by Grasl, as such a modification would provide the ability to stop the linear actuator at the limits of its travel.
Regarding claim 11, Grasl further teaches;
wherein said linear unit has a spindle nut (spindle nut 16; fig. 1, Grasl), and said at least one contact face includes two contact faces facing one another and being configured for blocking said spindle nut. (Fig. 1 illustrates two end stops 28a and 29a which limit the travel of the spindle nut along the threaded spindle by interacting with opposite faces of the spindle nut.)
Regarding claim 12, Vortmeyer in view of Grasl discloses;
wherein: said housing has two mutually opposing axial ends (located at joint connectors 12 and 13; Vortmeyer) and protrusions (angled stops 28 and 29; Grasl, figs. 1 and 2) each disposed at a respective one of said two mutually opposing axial ends; and (the modification of Vortmeyer to include the stops of Grasl would place the stops at the opposite axial ends of the spindle housing.)
said two contact faces (two faces of spindle nut 16; Grasl, fig. 1) face away from one another and are configured for striking said protrusions (stops 28 and 29; Grasl, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Vortmeyer discloses two opposing axial openings in the housing, but the bearing sleeves sit in the axial openings and the joint connectors are located external to the housing. However, Grasl teaches;
wherein said housing (housing 2; Grasl, fig. 1) has an axial opening through which a load transmission device (push tube 15) can be introduced into said housing for coupling to a respective one of said two axial ends of said spindle. (Fig. 1 and paragraph 36 of Grasl illustrate a push tube connected to the spindle nut of the threaded spindle of the linear actuator. This push tube passes through the axial end of the housing, a housing cover (18) and wiper (19) in order to mate with the spindle nut.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Vortmeyer to include an axial opening in the housing through which a load transmission device can be introduced for coupling to an axial ends of the spindle as taught by Grasl, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to linear actuators. As disclosed by Grasl, it is well known for a linear actuator to include an axial opening in the housing through which a load transmission device can be introduced for coupling to an axial ends of the spindle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vortmeyer to include an axial opening in the housing through which a load transmission device can be introduced for coupling to an axial ends of the spindle as taught by Grasl, as such a modification would provide the ability to reduce the amount of environment contamination. (Paragraph 50 of Grasl).
Claim(s) 8, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vortmeyer (DE 10 2016 200101 A1) in view of Hecker (US 2019/0061712 A1) and further in view of Keller (US 2022 0112940 A1).
Regarding claim 8 Vortmeyer in view of Hecker discloses;
wherein said spindle has separate sliding portions (guide element 810; fig. 8, paragraph 71, Hecker) each disposed in a region of a respective one of said two axial ends and
Vortmeyer in view of Hecker, does not disclose separate sealing portions each disposed in said region of a respective one of said two axial ends. However, Keller teaches;
separate sealing portions (seals 65; fig. 4, Keller) each disposed in said region of a respective one of said two axial ends. (Keller illustrates two seals around the main body of the piston 60 which is attached at the axial end of the threaded spindle 41.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Vortmeyer in view of Hecker to include separate sealing portions each disposed in a region of a respective axial end as taught by Keller, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to linear actuators. As disclosed by Keller, it is well known for a linear actuator to include separate sealing portions each disposed in a region of a respective axial end. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vortmeyer in view of Hecker to include separate sealing portions each disposed in a region of a respective axial end as taught by Keller, as such a modification would provide the ability to seal the inner chamber for the exterior environment. (paragraph 36 of Keller).
Regarding claim 9, Vortmeyer in view of Hecker and Keller, discloses;
which further comprises at least two circumferentially running sliding guide strips disposed next to one another in each respective one of said sliding portions. (Vortmeyer, Hecker and Keller all disclose thrust surfaces located between the housing and the support device at the axial end of the spindle. Vortmeyer describes a bearing sleeve (8 and 9) of a polygonal shape allowing the bearing to slide in a longitudinal direction owing to the rotational motion of the spindle. Keller utilizes a circular shape matched with a guide extension thrust face (66) to keep the piston from tilting in the housing as it is moved longitudinally through the rotation of the spindle. The references do not disclose two, separate guide strips, but do illustrate a guiding surface of sufficient width to allow for two separate guide strips which would provide for longitudinal movement while also preventing a tilting of the support structure at the axial end of the spindle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to separate the wide guide surfaces of either Vortmeyer, Hecker or Keller into two separate guide strips, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.)
Response to Amendment
Objections to claims 10 and 11 have been withdrawn after appropriate amendments as filed on 12/18/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended independent claim 1 to clarify that the spindle is radially supported directly on the linear actuator housing as opposed to a sliding bearing / bushing as illustrated in reference Vortmeyer. However, a new reference Hecker, illustrates a spindle supported by guides which are supported directly on the housing. Fig. 8 of Hecker compares favorably with fig. 2 of the present application.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER whose telephone number is (703)756-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 9:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at 571-272-5109. 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.
/SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/VIVEK D KOPPIKAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612 March 23, 2026