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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they are replete with informalities. For example:
Generic Fig. 2
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in paragraph [00150] of the description: 112a and 112b.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters 110, 210, 310, 410, 510, 610 and 710 have both been used to designate the same tensioning assembly in Fig. 2.
First Embodiment shown in Figs. 3-7C
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “150” has been used to designate both a pin and what appears to be the resilient member in both Figs. 5 and 6.
The leader for reference character 130 is not directed to the “first member open end” in Fig. 5 as described in the specification (note Fig. 6).
The leader for reference character 132 is not directed to the “first member base end” in Fig. 5 as described in the specification (note Fig. 6).
The leader for reference character 124 is not directed to the “second member” in Fig. 7A as described in the specification (note Fig. 7B).
The leader for reference character 124 is not directed to the “second member” in Fig. 7C as described in the specification (note Fig. 7B).
Seventh Embodiment shown in Figs. 31-35C
The elements represented by reference characters 50, 62b and 125 in this embodiment fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because they are modified (i.e., distinct) with respect to the elements represented by these same reference characters in at least the embodiment shown in Figs. 3-7C. As such, they should be labeled with distinct reference characters.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in at least paragraph [00276] of the description: 726.
In Fig. 34, reference character 112 should be replaced with reference character 712 to denote the shaft (note Figs. 31-33).
Eighth Embodiment shown in Figs. 36-39
The elements represented by reference characters 50, 62b and 125 in this embodiment fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because they are modified (i.e., distinct) with respect to the elements represented by these same reference characters in at least the embodiment shown in Figs. 31-35C. As such, they should be labeled with distinct reference characters.
The lead line for reference character 820 in Fig. 37 is not directed to the longitudinal axis of the shaft as described in the specification.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “indicator for providing an indication when the wheel axle is in a predetermined position corresponding to a predetermined tension in the track, the indication being based on at least one of (i) a predetermined position of the first member relative to the second member, and (ii) a predetermined position of the resilient assembly relative to the frame” as set forth in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the first member comprises a threaded bushing” as set forth in claim 4 in combination with the shaft “being threadedly connectable at one end to the wheel axle” and “the shaft extending through the first member and being slidably connected thereto” as set forth in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the indicator being “a hard stop reference” as set forth in claim 9 in combination with the shaft “being threadedly connectable at one end to the wheel axle” as set forth in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “pivot member is connectable to the frame via at least two positions to accommodate different sizes of sprocket wheels” as set forth in claim 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Applicant is required to carefully review and revise the drawings relating to the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, ninth and tenth embodiments to ensure there are no other informalities.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because they are replete with informalities. For example, the following informalities with respect to the description of the first, seventh and eighth embodiments have been noted:
In paragraph [00151], the term “axel” should be replaced with the term -- axle -- to correct an apparent typographical error.
In paragraph [00155], the term “frame 20a” should be replaced with the term -- frame 50 -- for clarity inasmuch as reference character 20a was previously used to denote a track system.
In paragraph [00155], the term “frame 20b” should be replaced with the term -- frame 50 -- for clarity inasmuch as reference character 20b was previously used to denote a track system.
In paragraph [00170], the phrase “As illustrated in Figure 7B, the indicator comprises a ‘hard stop’ of a relative movement of the first and second members 122, 124” should be corrected inasmuch as the “hard stop” appears to be illustrated in Fig. 7C instead of Fig. 7B.
In paragraph [00271], the phrase “Figures 31 to 35” should be replaced with -- Figures 31 to 35C -- inasmuch as there is no Figure 35.
In paragraph [00273], the term “free end 716” should be replaced with -- free end 718 -- for consistency with the drawings and because reference character 716 was previously used to denote the connection end.
In paragraph [00273], the term “connection end 718” should be replaced with -- connection end 716 -- for consistency with the drawings and because reference character 718 was previously used to denote the free end.
In paragraph [00282], the term “pointer 770” should be replaced with -- pointer 780 – for consistency with the drawings and because reference character 770 was previously used to denote a tool.
In paragraph [00285], the term “first member 724” should be replaced with -- first member 722 -- for clarity inasmuch as reference character 724 was previously used to denote the second member.
In paragraph [00285] while describing the “retracted position”, the phrase “so that the second member 724 approaches the first member 724 and the resilient member 740 is compressed” contradicts what is shown by the retracted position of Fig. 35A (note paragraph [00126]).
In paragraph [00302] while describing the “retracted position” shown in Fig. 39, the phrase “so that the first and second members 822, 824 come closer and the resilient member 840 is compressed” is not shown in Fig. 39. Specifically, there does not appear to be shown any relative movement of the second member 824 and the first member 822 (and thus compression of the resilient member 840) when moving from the deployed position shown in Fig. 37 to the retracted position shown in Fig. 39.
Applicant is required to carefully review and revise the specification relating to the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, ninth and tenth embodiments to ensure there are no other informalities.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 4, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 4, there is insufficient and inadequate support in the disclosure, either in the specification or in the drawings, for a single embodiment of Applicant’s invention wherein “the first member comprises a threaded bushing” as required in claim 4 in combination with the shaft “being threadedly connectable at one end to the wheel axle” and “the shaft extending through the first member and being slidably connected thereto” as required by independent claim 1. Specifically, there is no description of how the embodiment shown in Figs. 36-39 would function if the bushing is threaded as required by this claim in combination with the shaft being threadedly connected to the wheel axle and the shaft extending through the first member and being slidably connected thereto.
Regarding claim 9, there is insufficient and inadequate support in the disclosure, either in the specification or in the drawings, for a single embodiment of Applicant’s invention wherein the indicator is “a hard stop reference” as required in claim 9 in combination with the shaft “being threadedly connectable at one end to the wheel axle” as required by independent claim 1. Specifically, there is no description of how a “hard stop reference” would be arranged and configured to be used with the embodiment shown in Figs. 36-39.
6. 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.
Claims 4, 10, 13 and 17-20 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 4, the limitation “the first member comprises a threaded bushing” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how shaft can extend through the first member and be slidably connected thereto as required by claim 1 when the first member comprises a threaded bushing.
Regarding claim 10, the limitation requiring the indicator to be a visual reference of “a distance between coils of the spring” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how “a distance between coils of the spring” is considered to be an indication “based on at least one of (i) a predetermined position of the first member relative to the second member, and (ii) a predetermined position of the resilient assembly relative to the frame” as required by claim 1. As such, the metes and bounds of this claim is unascertainable.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation “a free end” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “a free end” refers to the “one end” previously set forth in claim 1 as it appears from Figs. 36-39 or if the “free end” is distinct from the “one end” as implied by the claim construction.
Regarding claim 17, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the retracted position”, “the first end of the pivot member” and “the second end of the pivot member”.
Regarding claim 18, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the deployed position”, “the second end of the pivot member” and “the first end of the pivot member”.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “a frame” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “a frame” refers to “a frame” previously set forth in claim 1 or if it is distinct therefrom as implied by the claim construction.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “at least one axle” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “at least one axle” refers to “a wheel axle” previously set forth in claim 1 or if it is distinct therefrom as implied by the claim construction.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “at least one wheel” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “at least one wheel” refers to “a wheel” previously set forth in claim 1 or if it is distinct therefrom as implied by the claim construction.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “a track” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “a track” refers to “a track” previously set forth in claim 1 or if it is distinct therefrom as implied by the claim construction.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “a tension in the track” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “a tension in the track” refers to “a tension in a track” previously set forth in claim 1 or if it is distinct therefrom as implied by the claim construction.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “a tension in the track” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether “a tension in the track” refers to “a tension in a track” previously set forth in claim 1 or if it is distinct therefrom as implied by the claim construction.
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.
Claims 1-12, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Borst Jr. (US 1,276,319; hereinafter “Borst”).
Regarding claim 1, Borst discloses a tensioning assembly (Fig. 1) for modulating a tension in a track 15 of a vehicle track system (lines 96-103 of page 1), the vehicle track system including a wheel 25 with a wheel axle (unlabeled axle of idler 25 best shown in Fig. 3), the track extending at least partially around the wheel (Fig. 1), the tensioning assembly comprising: a shaft 31 having a longitudinal axis (inherent) and being threadedly connectable (i.e., indirectly connectable) at one end to the wheel axle (adjusting rod 31 is threaded to crosshead 30 as shown in Fig. 3); a resilient assembly at 33 operatively connected to the shaft such that when the shaft is rotated about the longitudinal axis the wheel axle is caused to move away or toward the track to modulate the tension in the track (evident from lines 96-103 of page 1), the resilient assembly comprising: a first member 28 connected to a frame 40 of the vehicle track system, the shaft extending through the first member (Fig. 3) and is slidably connected thereto (evident from Fig. 3 and lines 96-103 of page 1); a second member 30 connected to the shaft between the first member and the wheel axle (Fig. 3); a resilient member 33 resiliently biasing the second member away from the first member (lines 96-98 of page 1); an indicator (e.g., a position of crosshead 30 in longitudinal slot 29 of yoke 28 as shown in Fig. 3 or a distance between the coils of the spring as shown in Fig. 3) for providing an indication when the wheel axle is in a predetermined position corresponding to a predetermined tension in the track, the indication being based on at least one of (i) a predetermined position of the first member relative to the second member (e.g., a position of crosshead 30 in longitudinal slot 29 of yoke 28 as shown in Fig. 3), and (ii) a predetermined position of the resilient assembly relative to the frame.
Regarding claim 2, Borst further discloses the second member comprises a shoulder 30 extending from the shaft (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Borst further discloses a connection between the first member and the frame is configured to provide a loose joint (evident from Fig. 1 which shows the “loose joint” connection permitting movement of crosshead or second member 30 with respect to yoke or first member 28).
Regarding claim 5, Borst further discloses a tool interface portion at 32 connected to the shaft (Fig. 3), the tool interface portion being configured to (i.e., capable of being used) be used with a ratchet and socket tool (evident from Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Borst further discloses the shaft is configured such that rotating the shaft about the longitudinal axis causes the shaft to be translated laterally towards and away from the wheel axle (evident from Fig. 3 and lines 96-103 of page 1).
Regarding claim 7, Borst further discloses the resilient member is made of a material (i.e., material of helical spring 33) having stable and predictable elastic properties over a range of temperature of operation of the vehicle track system (implicit from at least Fig. 3 and lines 96-103 of page 1).
Regarding claim 8, Borst further discloses the resilient member is a spring 33.
Regarding claim 9, Borst further discloses the indicator is a visual reference (e.g., a position of crosshead 30 in longitudinal slot 29 of yoke 28 as shown in Fig. 3 or a distance between the coils of the spring as shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Borst further discloses the resilient member is a spring 33 and the visual reference is a distance between coils of the spring (evident from Fig. 3 and lines 96-103 of page 1 that the distance between the coils of the spring would indicate the amount of compression of the spring and thus a predetermined tension in the track).
Regarding claim 11, Borst further discloses the shaft and the wheel axle are positioned on substantially the same plane (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Borst further discloses the shaft is configured to move between a retracted position and a deployed position (lines 96-103 of page 1), the deployed position corresponding to the predetermined position of the wheel axle (evident from Fig. 3 and lines 96-103 of page 1).
Regarding claim 19, Borst further discloses a track system (Fig. 1) for a vehicle (lines 10-14 of page 1), the track system comprising: a frame 40; at least one axle (unlabeled axle of idler 25 best shown in Fig. 3) movably connected to the frame (evident from lines 96-103 of page 1); at least one wheel 25 connected to the axle (Fig. 3); a track 15 supported by the at least one axle (Fig. 3); the tensioning assembly for adjusting a tension of the track (lines 96-103 of page 1).
Regarding claim 20, Borst further discloses a method for adjusting a tension in a track 15 of a vehicle track system (Fig. 1) by using a tensioning assembly, the method comprising: causing the shaft to be rotated about the longitudinal axis; and determining a tension in the track using the indicator (evident from Fig. 3 and lines 96-103 of page 1 that a position of crosshead 30 in longitudinal slot 29 of yoke 28 as shown in Fig. 3 or a distance between the coils of the spring as shown in Fig. 3 could be used to indicate the tension in the track).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 17 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art shows other examples of tensioning assemblies with threaded shaft connections.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIP T KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7953. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Samuel (Joe) J Morano can be reached at (571)272-6684. 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.
/Kip T Kotter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights