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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 200 in figure 5, this issue was noted in the previous office action relative to figures 5 and 6 however only figure 6 was fixed in the most recent amendment, see remarks below. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 16 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Upon further review of claim 16 it has been found that lines 18-21 are redundant of lines 14-17. One of the redundant recitations should be removed from the claim.
Claim 26, “the first and second foils” in line 4 should either be - -the first and biasing foils- - or to be more consistent with the feature being claimed the claim recitation could read - -the top foil and the first and second biasing foils- -.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 25 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.
In addressing the previous rejection of claim 25 under 25 USC 112(b) Applicant has amended the claim to define “a wavy pattern including peaks and valleys” however claim 16 already includes the recitation of “at least one peak”. It is not clear if this peak from claim 16 would be included in the new set of peaks and valley recited in claim 25 or if there are two subsets of peaks. The latter part of claim 25 appears to then be defining the same relationship between the peak and the surface recited at the end of claim 16. By claim 16 reciting that there is “at least one peak” it is suggestive that the biasing foil in the claim is a standard wavy pattern biasing foil and thus the newly added recitations of claim 25 would appear to not be further limiting. If Applicant is attempting to limit the at least one peak of claim 16 to be inclusive of more peaks that have the same feature then the peaks of claim 25 should not be introduced as if they are a new separate set of peaks but rather the claim should state that the at least one peak includes multiple peaks within the relief region that are spaced from the relief region. If the intent of claim 16 is to reference a standard wave pattern bump foil by the recitation “at least one peak” then claim 25 would not be further structurally limiting but rather would be stating the purpose of the relief surface and no additional structure would be set forth and thus claim 25 should be deleted.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 7-17, 21, 22, 24 and 26 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 1, the claim as previously amended includes indicated allowable subject matter from claim 5. Claim 1 requires the combination of features including the biasing foil having peaks within the relief region, the peaks being defined as the feature of the biasing foil that contacts the inner diameter of the housing element, and the peaks must be spaced from the relief surface. Figure 14 of the previously applied document to Omori appears to show this but what would be correspond peaks in the relief region contact the adjacent housing surface and there is no peak that is within the region that does not contact the surface. Figure 15 is a deformed configuration with a peak in the relief region, item 14, however the reference states that there is contact within this region.
With regards to claim 16 the prior art of record does not disclose a bearing arrangement with two biasing foils as claimed with the first biasing foil including the same configuration as explained relative to claim 1 above.
With regards to claim 17 the prior art of record does not disclose the combination of features including the step of disposing two adjacent peaks within the relief region.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s remarks focus on the antecedent basis issue previously raised and the inclusion of additional structure to overcome the issue with the previous “configured to” language. However in the rejection of claim 25 these are no long issues and the issue is one related to the scope of the claim and how it is meant to be interpreted in light of the recitations of claim 16 from which it depends.
With regards to the drawing Applicant states that 200 in figure 5 has been changed to 220, however previous figure 5 had two reference characters 200, only one of which has been amended to recite “220”, the other reference character 200 remains and should be deleted from the figure.
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 JAMES PILKINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-5052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7-3.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/JAMES PILKINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617