DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed 05/18/26 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending, with claims 18-20 being newly added. Despite Applicant’s arguments, the rejection is maintained. Additional rejections are required for certain new claims as detailed below. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Corcoran
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Corcoran et al. (CA 2126335). Corcoran is directed to surface effect dampers. See Abstract.
Claim 1: Corcoran discloses a damper apparatus [Figs. 2, 5, 9] for reducing a movement of a second part movable relative to a first part [see page 2c], wherein the damper apparatus comprises the following: a first damper component (30) fixedly connected or connectable to the first part [see page 2c]; a second damper component (20, 12) fixedly connected or connectable to the second part and is movable, at least partially or regionally, relative to the first damper component; and a dampening mechanism (14, 32) arranged between the first and second damper components and configured such that a movement of the second damper component relative to the first damper component is or can be reduced, wherein the dampening mechanism comprises a blade or rib structure (14, 32) connected to the first or second damper component with a plurality of protruding regions, which are elastically deflectable at least partially or regionally in a direction of movement of the first damper component relative to the second damper component; and wherein the dampening mechanism comprises a ridge structure (32, 14) connected to the second or first damper component having at least one tooth or protrusion, wherein, at least in a state in which the second damper component is not moved relative to the first damper component, the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure is arranged at least partially or regionally in an intermeshing manner between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure. See Figs. 2, 5, 9.
Claim 2: Corcoran discloses that the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure is positioned between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure such that, upon a movement of the first or second damper component relative to the second or first damper component, at least a portion of the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure is elastically deformed using the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure while simultaneously converting movement energy into elastic deformation work. See Fig. 2.
Claim 3: Corcoran discloses that the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure (5) is formed from a material that is harder compared to the material of the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure (4). See page 6, lines 1-7.
Claim 4: Corcoran discloses that the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure (4), when viewed in a cross-section of the protruding regions, have a geometry that at least partially or regionally tapers in the direction of the ridge structure; and/or wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure, when viewed in the cross-section of the at least one tooth or protrusion, has a geometry that at least partially or regionally tapers in the direction of the blade or rib structure; and/or wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure (5) has a shape which, at least regionally, is at least substantially complementary to the shape of the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure. See Fig. 2.
Claim 5: Corcoran discloses that the blade or rib structure comprises a blade or rib support (16) which is fixedly connected or connectable to the first or second damper component and the plurality of protruding regions connected to the blade or rib support, wherein the blade or rib support is formed from a material that is harder compared to the material of the protruding regions. See Fig. 2. Note: the limitation concerning injection molding is a method of making, not a structural limitation of the apparatus.
Claim 6: Corcoran discloses that in an unloaded state, at least a portion of the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure extends at least substantially in a direction that is at least substantially perpendicular to a direction of movement of the second damper component relative to the first damper component; and/or wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure extends at least substantially in a direction which is at least substantially perpendicular to the direction of movement of the second damper component relative to the first damper component. See Fig. 2 (e.g., peaks of 14).
Claim 7: Corcoran discloses that in an unloaded state, at least a portion of the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure (4) extends at least substantially obliquely in view of a direction that extends perpendicular to a direction of movement of the second damper component relative to the first damper component. See Fig. 2 (e.g., non-peaks of 14).
Claim 8: Corcoran discloses that the ridge structure is configured such that, between two adjacent teeth or protrusions of the ridge structure, a plurality of protruding regions of the blade or rib structure are arranged; and/or wherein a number of the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure between two adjacent teeth or protrusions of the ridge structure varies, or a number of the teeth or protrusions of the ridge structure between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure (4) varies. See Fig. 2 (between adjacent 32 teeth, either 0 or 1 protruding regions).
Claim 9: Corcoran discloses that the first and second damper components are each modular in structure, so that the rib structure and/or the ridge structure are exchangeable as needed and for varying a response behavior and/or a dampening factor of the damper apparatus. See Figs. 2, 5 (sleeve 14 could be replaced).
Claim 10: Corcoran discloses that the damper apparatus is configured as a rotary damper [Figs. 8-11], in which the first damper component is configured as a housing part having an inner well region that is at least substantially circular-cylindrical in cross-section, wherein the housing part with the inner well region serves as a blade or rib support, to which or at which the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure are connected or formed, wherein the second damper component comprises a carrier part that is at least substantially circular-cylindrical in cross-section, which forms the ridge structure with the at least one tooth or protrusion and is at least partially or regionally accommodated in the inner well region of the first damper component, in an exchangeable manner such that the carrier part with the ridge structure is rotatable relative to the first damper component, while the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure (5) is arranged at least partially and/or regionally in an intermeshing manner between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure. See Figs. 8-11.
Claim 11: Corcoran discloses that the damper apparatus is configured as a rotary damper [see Figs. 8-11], in which the first damper component is configured as a housing part having an inner well region (8) that is at least substantially circular-cylindrical in cross-section, wherein the housing part with the inner well region (8) serves as a carrier part which forms the ridge structure with the at least one tooth or protrusion, wherein the second damper component comprises a blade or rib support that is at least substantially circular-cylindrical in cross-section, to which or at which the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure are connected or formed, wherein the circular-cylindrical blade or rib support with the blade or rib structure is at least partially or regionally accommodated in the inner well region of the first damper component, in an exchangeable manner such that the carrier part with the ridge structure is rotatable relative to the first damper component, while the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure is arranged at least partially and/or regionally in an intermeshing manner between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure. See Figs. 8-11.
Claim 12: Corcoran discloses that the first damper component comprises an annular region, which is formed in the circular-cylindrical inner well region such that the inner well region is divided into an outer annular channel and a region that is circular in cross-section and is separated therefrom by the annular region, wherein the teeth or protrusions of the ridge structure are formed on a wall bordering the outer annular channel and on a wall of the annular region facing inward, and wherein the second damper component further comprises an annular blade or rib support, which is arranged so as to complement the outer annular channel of the first damper component in such a way that the annular blade or rib support can be at least partially or regionally accommodated in the outer annular channel of the first damper component, wherein protruding regions of the blade or rib structure are connected or formed to or at the annular blade or rib support on both sides. See Figs. 8-11.
Claim 13: Corcoran discloses that the damper apparatus is configured as a linear damper, wherein the first damper component is configured as a cylindrical housing part (30) having a cavity that is at least substantially circular-cylindrical in cross-section, wherein the housing part with the cavity serves as a blade or rib support, to which or at which the protruding regions of the blade or rib structure (32) are connected or formed, wherein the second damper component (20, 12) comprises a piston (12) that dips at least partially or regionally into the cavity of the cylindrical housing part and comprises a piston rod (20) having a first end region at which a carrier part (12) with the ridge structure (14) that is substantially circular-cylindrical in cross-section is arranged or formed, wherein the piston (11) with the carrier part (9) and the ridge structure (5) can be displaced in the longitudinal direction of the cylindrical housing part (10) relative to the cylindrical housing part (10), while the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure is arranged at least partially and/or regionally in an intermeshing manner between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure, wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure (5) is configured as a helix structure, being formed at least partially or regionally on the lateral surface of the circular-cylindrical carrier part. See Fig. 2.
Claim 14: Corcoran discloses that the damper apparatus is configured as a linear damper [see Fig. 7], in which the first damper component comprises two opposing blade or rib supports, which are configured so as to form a form-fit sliding guide enabling translation for a rod-shaped carrier part of the second damper component, wherein each blade or rib support of the first damper component comprises a blade or rib structure having a plurality of protruding regions, and wherein the rod-shaped carrier part of the second damper component comprises a ridge structure having a plurality of teeth or protrusions arranged on opposite lateral surfaces of the rod-shaped carrier part in such a way that, when the rod-shaped carrier part is moved by the sliding guide, with simultaneous elastic deflection of the protruding regions, they pass by one another in an intermeshing manner. See Fig. 7.
Claim 15: Corcoran discloses that a distance between the two opposing blade or rib supports is variable in order to define a dampening factor of the damper apparatus [see Fig. 7 (e.g., depending on number of washers 34]; and/or wherein at least one of the two blade or rib supports lying opposite one another is slidably mounted relative to the rod-shaped carrier portion by way of a guide running obliquely to the direction of movement of the rod-shaped carrier part, and such that, upon a movement of the rod-shaped carrier part in a first direction by the sliding guide, the at least one blade or rib support is present in a first position, and, upon a movement of the rod-shaped carrier part in a second direction opposite the first direction by the sliding guide, the at least one blade or rib support is displaced into a second position and/or is present in a second position, wherein, in the second position of the at least one blade or rib support, a distance between the two opposing blade or rib supports is greater than in the first position of the at least one blade or rib support. See Fig. 7.
Claim 16: Corcoran discloses that the plurality of protruding regions are in a form of blades, ribs, or knobs. See Figs. 2, 5, 7, 9.
Claim 17: see claim 1 above.
Claim 18: see claim 1 above. Corcoran further discloses that the tooth is positioned in a gap between adjacent protruding portions, which are separately formed structures. See Fig. 5 (protrusions 32 are separately formed).
Claim 19: Corcoran discloses that each of the plurality of discrete protruding regions has a defined base region where it connects to the support surface and a free end region that is spaced apart from the support surface, and wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure extends into a space between the free end regions of two adjacent protruding regions when the second damper component is not moved relative to the first damper component. See Fig. 5.
Chorkey
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chorkey (U.S. Patent No. 3,975,007). Chorkey is directed to a resilient mounting structure. See Abstract.
Claim 18: Chorkey discloses a damper apparatus for reducing a movement of a second part movable relative to a first part, wherein the damper apparatus comprises: a first damper component (12) fixedly connected or connectable to the first part; a second damper component (14) fixedly connected or connectable to the second part and movable, at least partially or regionally, relative to the first damper component; and a dampening mechanism (13) arranged between the first and second damper components and configured such that a movement of the second damper component relative to the first damper component can be reduced, wherein the dampening mechanism comprises a blade or rib structure (25, 21) connected to the first or second damper component, the blade or rib structure comprising a plurality of discrete protruding regions which extend outwardly from a support surface and are elastically deflectable at least partially or regionally in a direction of movement of the first damper component relative to the second damper component [see Fig. 4; col. 4, lines 55-68 (“deflection”)]; and wherein the dampening mechanism comprises a ridge structure (21, 25) connected to the second or first damper component, the ridge structure comprising at least one tooth or protrusion that, at least in a state in which the second damper component is not moved relative to the first damper component, is arranged at least partially or regionally in an intermeshing manner between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure such that the at least one tooth or protrusion is positioned in a gap defined between said two adjacent protruding regions, wherein the plurality of discrete protruding regions are separately formed structures extending from the support surface. See Figs. 1-7.
Claim 19: Chorkey discloses that each of the plurality of discrete protruding regions has a defined base region where it connects to the support surface and a free end region that is spaced apart from the support surface, and wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure extends into a space between the free end regions of two adjacent protruding regions when the second damper component is not moved relative to the first damper component. See Figs. 1-7.
Claim 20: Chorkey discloses that the blade or rib structure is formed by a molding process [note: method of making] such that the plurality of discrete protruding regions are integrally formed with the support surface as distinct structural elements, and wherein the ridge structure comprises a plurality of teeth or protrusions that are integrally formed with a carrier part of the ridge structure, such that the dampening mechanism provides dampening through elastic deflection of the discrete protruding regions by the teeth or protrusions during relative movement between the first and second damper components rather than through compression of a continuous elastomeric surface. See Figs. 1, 4; col. 4, lines 55-68.
McPherson
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McPherson (U.S. Patent No. 8,038,133). McPherson is directed to a coaxial tube damper. See Abstract.
Claim 18: McPherson discloses a damper apparatus for reducing a movement of a second part movable relative to a first part, wherein the damper apparatus comprises: a first damper component (14) fixedly connected or connectable to the first part; a second damper component (16) fixedly connected or connectable to the second part and movable, at least partially or regionally, relative to the first damper component; and a dampening mechanism (18) arranged between the first and second damper components and configured such that a movement of the second damper component relative to the first damper component can be reduced, wherein the dampening mechanism comprises a blade or rib structure (at 18) connected to the first or second damper component, the blade or rib structure comprising a plurality of discrete protruding regions which extend outwardly from a support surface and are elastically deflectable at least partially or regionally in a direction of movement of the first damper component relative to the second damper component; and wherein the dampening mechanism comprises a ridge structure (at 18) connected to the second or first damper component, the ridge structure comprising at least one tooth or protrusion that, at least in a state in which the second damper component is not moved relative to the first damper component, is arranged at least partially or regionally in an intermeshing manner between two adjacent protruding regions of the blade or rib structure such that the at least one tooth or protrusion is positioned in a gap defined between said two adjacent protruding regions, wherein the plurality of discrete protruding regions are separately formed structures extending from the support surface. See Fig. 6; col. 5, line 65 – col. 6, line 6 (parts 14, 16 and 18 have “complimentary shapes that minimize longitudinal movement of the parts 14, 16, 18”).
Claim 19: McPherson discloses that each of the plurality of discrete protruding regions has a defined base region where it connects to the support surface and a free end region that is spaced apart from the support surface, and wherein the at least one tooth or protrusion of the ridge structure extends into a space between the free end regions of two adjacent protruding regions when the second damper component is not moved relative to the first damper component. See Fig. 6.
Claim 20: McPherson discloses that the blade or rib structure is formed by a molding process [note: method of making] such that the plurality of discrete protruding regions are integrally formed with the support surface as distinct structural elements, and wherein the ridge structure comprises a plurality of teeth or protrusions that are integrally formed with a carrier part of the ridge structure, such that the dampening mechanism provides dampening through elastic deflection of the discrete protruding regions by the teeth or protrusions during relative movement between the first and second damper components rather than through compression of a continuous elastomeric surface. See Fig. 6; col. 5, line 65 – col. 6, line 6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/18/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant traverses the 102-rejection due to Corcoran because there is allegedly no “intermeshing” between corresponding protrusions/ribs and, even if so, there is achieved only due to “compression-induced deformation” of an otherwise “smooth outer surface” of elastic sleeve 14. See Remarks, page 14.
In response, first, Figure 5 depicts an intermeshing between the protrusions 32 and the protrusions of the elastic sleeve 14. This state is clearly achieved and meets each and every limitation of the claim language. Second, while the elastomeric sleeve 14 does not initially have protrusions [see Fig. 4], upon being compressed axially, protrusions are formed on the outer surface of the sleeve [see Fig. 5]. With the exception of dependent claim 20, which explicitly recites “rather than through compression…,” the claims do not contain any limitation preventing the particular static state of the damper in Figure 5 from constituting a proper 102 reference. After the sleeve is compressed and the protrusions are formed in the sleeve 14 (as seen in Figure 5), they are intermeshed with the ridges 32, and deflect to at least some degree as the damper continues its stroke.
While claim 20 contains the necessary negative limitation to overcome this reference, additional prior art references are used to address claims 18-20 separately.
For the foregoing reasons, all pending claims remain rejected as detailed above.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL R SAHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-3838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm PST.
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.
VISHAL SAHNI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3657
/VISHAL R SAHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 June 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights