DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of specie I, figures 1-4 in the reply filed on 3/27/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that examiner has not provided that the inventions are independent, this is not persuasive since as stated in the specification the different species require different structural limitations and furthermore the structure is not similar and contradicting, see figure 1-4 and then figure 6 where 22 is blocking the path claimed in claim 1. Furthermore applicant can easily state that the embodiments are obvious and restriction can be withdrawn for this 1st aspect. The traversal is on the ground that no serious burden to examiner is not persuasive because each specie require different rejection by different prior art references. It is noted that applicant has provided separate classification, separate status in the art and different field of search is required to show burden is not persuasive since as stated above different prior art (different search with in class) have to be used to provide different rejections (different or separate status in the art).
Applicants statement that at least claim 1 is generic is not true applicant should review the description of species of figures 6 and 8 (e.g. see claim 1, “a first ridge-free path extends axially from the distal end through in axially extending gap between adjacent ridge segments of the plurality of first ridge segments to continuous annular ridge”). Applicant should also review all species and claims.
In conclusion claims withdrawn are 8-12 and 19-22 as stated by applicant, since applicant has elected claims 1-6, 13-16 and 18.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-16 and 18 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sedlar et al (US. 9062774).
Sedlar discloses a radial shaft seal element comprising a support ring (e.g. support ring 15), at least one seal body (e.g. 18) mounted on the support ring, the seal body including a sealing portion (e.g. portion capable of contacting a cylindrical shaft, see figures) configured to assume a cylindrical shape (e.g. intended use limitation, the seal of Downes is capable of this and see MPEP 2113-2114 and/or method limitation given little weight in an apparatus claim, see MPEP 2113-2114) and bear against a cylindrical shaft to be sealed and to separate an air side of the radial shaft seal from an oil side of the radial shaft seal (e.g. again shaft, air and oil are considered to be intended use and/or method limitation which is given little or no patentable weight, see MPEP 2113-2114 and the seal of Sedlar is capable of being placed on a shaft having oil and air environment), wherein the seal body includes a distal end (e.g. end 22 ) at the oil side (e.g. end 22 is on a 1st side which can be oil), wherein the sealing portion includes a continuous annular ridge projecting (e.g. 30) from a radially inner surface (e.g. radially inner surface facing the shaft 12) of the sealing portion, the continuous annular ridge (e.g. 30) being configured to bear against the shaft around a circumference of the shaft and seal against a movement of a lubricant from the oil side to the air side (e.g. again the shaft, the air and the oil are considered to be intended use and/or method limitation which is given little or no patentable weight, see MPEP 2113-2114 and the seal of Sedlar is capable of being placed on the shaft having the oil and the air environment), and the sealing portion includes a first recirculating structure (e.g. 40) between the annular ridge and the distal end, the first recirculating structure comprising a plurality of discrete (e.g. each of the 40), circumferentially extending first ridge segments each projecting from the radially inner surface of the sealing portion and being disposed around the sealing portion and being configured to run on an oil film on the shaft (e.g. again oil film is intended use and/or method limitation which is given no or little patentable weight, see MPEP 2113-2114 and the seal of Sedlar is capable of this), wherein an axial spacing (e.g. axial spacing between 40 and 30) between the continuous annular ridge and each of the plurality of first ridge segments varies between a minimum (e.g. d, figure below) and a maximum (e.g. D), and wherein each of the first ridge segments is completely surrounded by a respective first continuous ridge-free portion (e.g. that is the case as seen in figures) of the radially inner surface of the sealing portion, and wherein a first ridge-free path (e.g. path between each of 40 that extends from the end 22 to the continuous annular ridge 30) extends axially from the distal end through an axially extending gap between adjacent ridge segments of the plurality of first ridge segments, to the continuous annular ridge (e.g. see figure below).
Regarding claim 2: Wherein the axially extending gaps (e.g. gaps between each of 40) are located at regions of the minimum spacing (e.g. again figure below, see d and D).
Regarding claim 3: Wherein a chamber (e.g. chamber C between the continuous annular ridge and the first ridge segment and also defined between d and D, figure below) is defined axially between the continuous annular ridge and each of the first ridge segments and circumferentially between adjacent gaps of the axially extending gaps.
Regarding claim 4: Wherein the first one of the first ridge segment has a first length (half of 40) and a second one of the first ridge segment has a second length and wherein the first length is the same (e.g. bisect 40) as or different than the second length.
Regarding claim 5: Wherein the axial spacing varies periodically (e.g. see d and D for all the 40, figure below).
Regarding claim 6: Wherein the first ridge segment lie on a zig-zag (e.g. zig-zag path, figure below) or sinusoidal path.
PNG
media_image1.png
291
401
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-7060. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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 A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights