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 the Claims
Claims 16-18 and 20-21 are pending in the application.
Claim 18 was previously withdrawn from current consideration as being drawn to a non-elected species.
Claims 16-17 and 20-21 remain under current consideration by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Appropriate correction is required.
Re Claim 17: Claim 17 should be amended as follows since the deleted language is already recited in claim 16, from which claim 17 depends:
--17. The gearbox according to claim 16, wherein the connection structure and [[a]] bushing body are connected to each other, , and [[a]] the reserved gap is formed between the bushing body and the carrying member.--
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 21 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.
Re Claim 21: Claim 21 recites the limitation “wherein a size of the reserved gap is greater than or equal to 0.” It is not clear how the size of a “reserved gap” can be “equal to 0”. What would this mean? If the size of a gap is equal to 0, then there is no gap at all. Does this mean that claim 21 does not actually require a “reserved gap” at all? If so, this would made claim 21 an improper dependent claim because it would not further limit claim 16, from which it depends. In fact, it would broaden claim 16 because it would no longer require a “reserved gap”, which is required in claim 16.
For examination purposes, for this Office Action only, the Examiner will interpret this limitation to mean that the “reserved gap” can be very small, but must still be present.
Clarification and correction are required.
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Re Claim 20: Claim 20 recites “wherein the flange pad and the bushing body are integrally structured, or the flange pad and the bushing body are separably structured.” This fails to further limit claim 16, from which claim 20 depends, because these are the only two possible options for the arrangement between the “flange pad” and the “bushing body”. It is only possible for the flange pad and the bushing body to be either “integrally structured” (i.e. formed as an integral part or in a single piece) or to be “separably structured” (i.e. formed as separate pieces). Since there are no other possible relationships, claim 20 has the same scope as claim 16 and thus fails to further limit claim 16.
Clarification and correction are required.
Re Claim 21: Claim 21 recites the limitation “wherein a size of the reserved gap is greater than or equal to 0.” As discussed in the rejection above, this limitation fails to further limit claim 16, from which it depends, and in fact appears to broaden claim 16. Since a gap size being “equal to 0” would amount to no gap being present at all, claim 21 has a broader scope than claim 16.
Clarification and correction are required.
Examiner notes that any prior art rejections made in this Office Action are made in view of the claims, as best understood by the Examiner, in view of the above 35 USC 112 rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 16-17, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 217107832, cited by Applicant in the IDS filed 07/24/2025) in view of Wagner (US Patent 4,732,519).
PNG
media_image1.png
437
1352
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 16: Zhou discloses a gearbox (see Fig. 1) comprising a thrust pad (the combination of thrust pads 3 joined together in a ring; see Fig. 1), a carrying member (1), and a fastening apparatus (42), wherein the fastening apparatus is configured to connect the thrust pad (3) to the carrying member (1), wherein the thrust pad (3) is provided with a first recess (at 41) and a communication hole (the gap between adjacent thrust pads 3; see Fig. 4) communicating with the first recess (41), the carrying member (1) is provided with a threaded hole (44), an aperture of the communication hole is greater than an aperture of the threaded hole, the fastening apparatus comprises a bolt (42), an end cap (43) of the bolt is disposed in the first recess (41), a screw of the bolt (42) is threaded into the threaded hole (44; see Fig. 4).
Zhou fails to explicitly disclose wherein the fastening apparatus further comprises a connection structure; such that the screw of the bolt passes through the connection structure; and the connection structure is able to be clamped between the end cap and the carrying member; and wherein the thrust pad further comprises a second recess, the first recess and the second recess communicate with two sides of the communication hole respectively, an area of a bottom of the first recess and an area of a bottom of the second recess are each greater than an opening area of the communication hole, and an opening of the second recess faces the carrying member; and wherein the connection structure comprises a flange pad and a bushing body, the flange pad is disposed in the first recess, the bushing body is disposed in the communication hole, the flange pad is clamped between the end cap and the bottom of the first recess, and a reserved gap is formed between the bushing body and one of the carrying member or the flange pad.
Wagner teaches the use of a fastening apparatus (10), for connecting a thrust pad (for example, as show for rocker cover arm 44 in combination with grommet 16) to a carrying member (for example, as shown for second workpiece 46; see note above related to these functional elements), wherein the thrust pad (44, 16) is provided with a first recess (provided at the top surface of rim 40, particularly within the rim formed at raised annular abutment 35; see annotated Fig. 5 above) and a communication hole (the internal bore of grommet 16, receiving washer sleeve 32 of the washer 14) communicating with the first recess, the carrying member (46) is provided with a threaded hole (48), an aperture of the communication hole is greater than an aperture of the threaded hole (see Fig. 5), the fastening apparatus comprises a bolt (12) and a connection structure (14), an end cap (18, 20) of the bolt is disposed in the first recess (see Fig. 5), a screw (26) of the bolt passes through the connection structure (14) and is threaded into the threaded hole (48), and the connection structure (14) is able to be clamped between the end cap (18, 20) and the carrying member (46), and wherein the thrust pad (44, 16) further comprises a second recess (the lower outwardly-flared portion of grommet 16, shown at notched portion 47; Fig. 5), the first recess and the second recess communicate with two sides of the communication hole respectively, an area of a bottom of the first recess and an area of a bottom of the second recess are each greater than an opening area of the communication hole, and an opening of the second recess faces the carrying member (46); and the connection structure (14) comprises a flange pad (34) and a bushing body (32), the flange pad (34) is disposed in the first recess (see Fig.5), the bushing body (32) is disposed in the communication hole (see Fig. 5), the flange pad (34) is clamped between the end cap (18, 20) and the bottom of the first recess, and a reserved gap (see annotated Fig. 5 below) is formed between the bushing body (32) and one of the carrying member (46) or the flange pad, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
PNG
media_image2.png
552
887
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the fastening apparatus further comprises a connection structure; such that the screw of the bolt passes through the connection structure; and the connection structure is able to be clamped between the end cap and the carrying member; and wherein the thrust pad further comprises a second recess, the first recess and the second recess communicate with two sides of the communication hole respectively, an area of a bottom of the first recess and an area of a bottom of the second recess are each greater than an opening area of the communication hole, and an opening of the second recess faces the carrying member; and the connection structure comprises a flange pad and a bushing body, the flange pad is disposed in the first recess, the bushing body is disposed in the communication hole, the flange pad is clamped between the end cap and the bottom of the first recess, and a reserved gap is formed between the bushing body and one of the carrying member or the flange pad, as taught by Wagner, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
Re Claim 17: Wagner further teaches the use of a fastening apparatus (10), wherein the connection structure (14) comprises a flange pad (34) and a bushing body (32) that are connected to each other, the flange pad (34) is disposed in the first recess (see Fig. 5), the bushing body (32) is disposed in the communication hole (see Fig. 5), the flange pad (34) is clamped between the end cap (18, 20) and a bottom of the first recess, and a reserved gap (see annotated Fig. 5 above) is formed between the bushing body (32) and the carrying member (46), for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the connection structure comprises a flange pad and a bushing body that are connected to each other, the flange pad is disposed in the first recess, the bushing body is disposed in the communication hole, the flange pad is clamped between the end cap and a bottom of the first recess, and a reserved gap is formed between the bushing body and the carrying member, as taught by Wagner, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
Re Claim 20, as best understood by the Examiner: Wagner further teaches the use of a fastening apparatus (10), wherein the flange pad (34) and the bushing body (32) are integrally structured, or the flange pad and the bushing body are separably structured, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the flange pad and the bushing body are integrally structured, or the flange pad and the bushing body are separably structured, as taught by Wagner, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
Re Claim 21, as best understood by the Examiner: Wagner further teaches the use of a fastening apparatus (10), wherein the gap (see annotated Fig. 5 above) is greater than or equal to 0, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the reserved gap is greater than or equal to 0, as taught by Wagner, for the purpose of allowing for an amount of axial play.
Response to Arguments
Note: First, Examiner acknowledges that the previous references to “Rittler” in the previous Office Action mailed 06 February 2026 were mistaken and that Applicant was correct to replace “Rittler” with “Zhou”. All references to “Rittler” in the rejections above have been removed and have been replaced with “Zhou”. Examiner further notes that the prior art rejections in the current Office Action do NOT amount to a new rejection since the rejection made under 35 U.S.C. 103 remains the same as that cited on page 6 of the previous Office Action, which did properly cited Zhou (CN 217107832, cited by Applicant in the IDS filed 07/24/2025).
Applicant's arguments filed 28 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Accordingly, the arguments related to the previous rejections related to Wagner as previously applied under 35 U.S.C. 102 are moot, as they do not apply to the current rejection(s) set forth in this Office Action. Even still, the Examiner will address several of these arguments to the extent that they may be relevant to the currently-applied 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections.
Applicant has argued that “the raised annular abutment 35 and the rocker arm cover 44 disclosed in Wagner are two mutually independent components, and the raised annular abutment in no way forms an integral part of the body of the rocker arm cover 44.” Applicant has thus concluded that “the recess formed at the raised annular abutment 35 is not equivalent to the first recess in amended claim 16.” In response, Examiner notes that, in the rejection above, the “thrust pad” of Wagner is considered to be comprised of the rocker cover arm 44 in combination with grommet 16. Thus a recess formed in the grommet 16 can be considered a recess formed in the “thrust pad”. There is no requirement in the claim for the “thrust pad” be only a single, integral, unitary component and thus there is no reason that the combination of the rocker cover arm 44 and the grommet 16 cannot be equated to the “thrust pad”. Further, there is no requirement in the claim that the “first recess” must be permanently formed in every state of the thrust pad. Therefore, the fact that the recess is formed in the grommet 14 only in a state where it is compressed with the washer 14 is not relevant when considering the scope of the claim. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive.
Applicant has further asserted that “the fastener 12, the rim 34 and the flange 40 of Wagner are all disposed entirely outside the rocker arm cover 44, rather than being confined within the recess structure integrally formed from the body of the thrust pad.” This argument is deficient to the argument discussed above, as it does not take into account the proper scope of either the claim or the rejection. As discussed above, since the grommet 14 is considered to be a part of the “thrust pad”, a recess formed therein can be considered a recess formed in the thrust pad. Further, the claim does not require the recess to be a “recess structure integrally formed from the body of the thrust pad.”
Applicant is reminded that, although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant has further argued that “the notched portion 47 and the raised annular abutment 35 fail to form an annular cantilever structure on the thrust pad.” Once again, this argument is not commensurate in scope with the claim, as no “annular cantilever structure” is recited or required by any of the claims.
Applicant has further argued that “the rim 34 of Wagner does not contact the rocker arm cover 44.” In this argument, Applicant is once again equating only the rocker arm cover 44 to the “thrust pad”, rather than the combination of the rocker cover arm 44 and the grommet 16. Since the rim 34 contacts the grommet 16, it can be considered to contact the “thrust pad”.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments related to Zhou regarding its disclosure of a “gearbox”, Examiner notes that the structure shown in Fig. 1 can be considered a “gearbox” since it comprises the components associated with a gearbox, namely a thrust pad (3) and a carrying member (thrust plate 1). If there are further structural requirements related to the term “gearbox”, then they must be recited in the claims in order to properly distinguish over the prior art structure. Once again, Applicant is reminded that, although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Further, Applicant is reminded that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Applicant’s remaining arguments regarding Zhou related to the technical features of claim 16 only take into account the disclosed structure of Zhou itself, rather than the teachings of both Zhou and Wagner together. Once again, Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 MATTHEW R MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3067. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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.
/MATTHEW R MCMAHON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights