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 .
This communication is in response to application No. 18/458,217; Steer-By-Wire Road Wheel Actuator Ball Screw Anti-Rotation Mechanism; filed on 08/30/2023. Claims 1 - 19 are currently pending and have been examined.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 9 and 11 refer to a slider member, but the Specification instead describes a slider (80). It is unclear if the slider and the slider member are the same thing or if the slider member is only a portion of the slider. For the purpose of examination, the slider and the slider member will be interpreted as equivalent to each other.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
PNG
media_image1.png
439
1150
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1-5, 9, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinger (DE 10 2020 102 212 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Klinger discloses;
A steer-by-wire steering system for a vehicle comprising:
a rack (drive rod 4; fig. 2) moveable in an axial direction; and
an anti-rotation mechanism (rotation lock 5; figs. 2,3, paragraph 22) disposed proximate an outer surface of the rack at the mounting location of the rack, the anti-rotation mechanism comprising: (Fig. 2 illustrates the anti-rotation device as position above, and external to the steering rack.)
a yoke (carrier element 12) having a bearing journal (axis of bearing 13) extending therefrom;
a bearing (roller bearings 10a,b) disposed on the bearing journal of the yoke; and
a running plate structure (groove wall 8a,b) disposed within a rack housing (housing 2) and extending in a longitudinal direction of the rack, wherein the bearing and the yoke are positioned to move along a surface of the running plate structure during movement of the rack in the axial direction. (Paragraph 22 describes the outer ring to the rolling bearings as moving along the groove walls.)
Regarding claim 2, Klinger discloses;
a first plate segment (grooved wall 8a; fig. 3); a second plate segment (grooved wall 8b); and an end segment connecting the first plate segment and the second plate segment. (Fig. 3 illustrates walls 8a / 8b as connected to each other at the ends.)
Regarding claim 3, Klinger discloses;
the first plate segment and the second plate segment are parallel to each other to form a U-shaped component. (Fig. 3 illustrates walls 8a and 8b as parallel to each other and connected at either end, forming a U-shape.)
Regarding claim 4, Klinger discloses;
wherein the first plate segment (grooved wall 8a) has a first inner running plate surface, wherein the second plate segment (grooved wall 8b) has a second inner running plate surface, wherein a distance between the first inner running plate surface and the second inner running plate surface is greater than an outer diameter of the bearing, wherein the outer diameter of the bearing includes a curved surface in contact with the running plate structure. (Fig. 3 illustrates two inner running plate surfaces of the grooved walls (8a, 8b) which face inward with the roller bearings located between them. These inner running plate surface are spaced further apart than the diameter of the roller bearings. Further, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the outer diameter of the bearings of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient, in this case curved. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.)
Regarding claim 5, Klinger discloses;
wherein the running plate structure is an integrally formed component. (Fig. 3 illustrates the running plate as a surface of the housing.)
Regarding claim 9, Klinger discloses;
a biasing member (torsion spring 14) in contact with the yoke; (Klinger positions the roller bearings through the use of torsion spring (14) to apply a torque to the yoke during operation.)
a slider member (roller bearing 10b) to apply a torque on the yoke during operation. (Klinger applies torque through the use of two roller bearings and a torsion spring. Paragraph 12 discloses the use of sliding elements in prior art. DE 10 2017 103 975 A1 describes an anti-rotation device which utilizes sliding surfaces to resist rotation of the rack during operation. It would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to shape a torque application member, which applies torque to the yoke through the biasing member, of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. )
Regarding claim 12, Klinger discloses;
A steer-by-wire steering system for a vehicle comprising:
a rack (drive rod 4; fig. 2) moveable in an axial direction; and
an anti-rotation mechanism (rotation lock 5; figs. 2,3, paragraph 22) disposed proximate an outer surface of the rack at the mounting location of the rack, the anti-rotation mechanism comprising: (Fig. 2 illustrates the anti-rotation device as position above, and external to the steering rack.)
a yoke (carrier element 12) having a bearing journal (axis of bearing 13) extending therefrom;
a bearing (roller bearings 10a,b) disposed on the bearing journal of the yoke; and
a running plate structure (groove wall 8a,b) disposed within a rack housing (housing 2) and extending in a longitudinal direction of the rack, wherein the bearing is positioned to move along a surface of the running plate structure during movement of the rack in the axial direction. (Paragraph 22 describes the outer ring to the rolling bearings as moving along the groove walls.)
wherein the running plate structure comprises:
a first plate segment (grooved wall 8a; fig. 3); a second plate segment (grooved wall 8b); and an end segment connecting the first plate segment and the second plate segment. (Fig. 3 illustrates walls 8a / 8b as connected to each other at the ends.)
a biasing member (torsion spring 14) in contact with the yoke; (Klinger positions the roller bearings through the use of torsion spring (14) to apply a torque to the yoke during operation.)
a slider member (roller bearing 10b) to apply a torque on the yoke during operation. (Klinger applies torque through the use of two roller bearings and a torsion spring. Paragraph 12 discloses the use of sliding elements in prior art. DE 10 2017 103 975 A1 describes an anti-rotation device which utilizes sliding surfaces to resist rotation of the rack during operation. It would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to shape a torque application member, which applies torque to the yoke through the biasing member, of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. )
Regarding claim 13, Klinger discloses;
wherein the first plate segment (grooved wall 8a) has a first inner running plate surface, wherein the second plate segment (grooved wall 8b) has a second inner running plate surface, wherein a distance between the first inner running plate surface and the second inner running plate surface is greater than an outer diameter of the bearing. (Fig. 3 illustrates two inner running plate surfaces of the grooved walls (8a, 8b) which face inward with the roller bearings located between them. These inner running plate surface are spaced further apart than the diameter of the roller bearings.)
Regarding claim 14, Klinger discloses;
wherein the running plate structure is an integrally formed component. (Fig. 3 illustrates the running plate as a surface of the housing.)
PNG
media_image2.png
387
560
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 6-8, 10-11, 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinger in view of Burckert (DE 10 2017 103 975 A).
Regarding claim 6, Klinger, paragraph 5, describes a threaded spindle and nut but does not disclose a rotating ball nut. However Burckert teaches;
wherein the rack is axially driven by a rotating ball nut. (Burckert, paragraph 4 describes the rack as a combination of a ball nut and spindle with the ball thread arranged on the rack. The rotating nut driving the movement of the rack.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Klinger to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut as taught by Burckert, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle steering racks. As disclosed by Burckert, it is well known for vehicle steering racks to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Klinger to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut as taught by Burckert, as such a modification would provide the ability to power a steering rack with a servo motor. (Paragraph 4 of Burckert).
Regarding claim 7, Klinger in view of Burckert does not disclose a second ball nut, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to duplicate the ball nut, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Further, such a modification would be expected to yield predictable results and the steering rack would continue to function as intended.
Regarding claim 8, Klinger in view of Burckert discloses;
wherein the anti-rotation mechanism is located on the rack between the pair of rotating ball nuts. (The addition of a second ball nut would place the ball screw of the rack and the anti-rotation mechanism between the two ball nuts.)
Regarding claim 10, Klinger discloses a biasing member (torsion spring 14; Klinger) but does not disclose a groove in which the biasing member is positioned or an axially extending portion of the yoke. However, Burckert teaches;
wherein the biasing member is positioned within a groove defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke. (Klinger describes two holes for locating the ends of the biasing member. Burckert teaches a yoke which encompasses the rack and extends in an axial direction. By combining the clamping yoke of Burckert with the roller bearings, running plates and spring of Klinger, the torsion spring would be wound around the yoke with one end fixed to the yoke and the other end fixed to the rack. Adding a groove to the yoke such that the spring winding was positioned within the groove would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the yoke of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Klinger to include a groove wherein the biasing member is positioned, defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke, as taught by Burckert, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle steering racks. As disclosed by Burckert, it is well known for a vehicle steering rack to include a groove wherein the biasing member is positioned, defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Klinger to include a groove wherein the biasing member is positioned, defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke, as taught by Burckert, as such a modification would provide the ability to bias the ant-rotation mechanism against the induced twist of the steering rack.
Regarding claim 11, Klinger discloses;
wherein the axially extending portion of the yoke defines a retention hole to locate and fix an end of the biasing member, (Klinger, paragraph 22 and fig. 2, describes the torsion spring as located at its ends in bores 17 and 18 in the yoke and rack respectively.)
Klinger does not disclose a yoke clamped to the rack with a mechanical fastener. However, Burckert teaches;
wherein the yoke is clamped to the rack with a mechanical fastener. (Burckert discloses a yoke (clamping rings 3, 4) which encompasses the rack but do not clamp to it. A biasing force is applied to the yokes by a mechanical fastener. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to rearrange the clamping of the yokes (clamping rings 3, 4; Burckert) such that they clamped to the rack and moved with the rack, since it has been held that, absent any showing of unexpected results, rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Such a modification would be expected to yield predictable results and the steering rack would continue to function as intended.)
Regarding claim 15, Klinger, paragraph 5, describes a threaded spindle and nut but does not disclose a rotating ball nut. However Burckert teaches;
wherein the rack is axially driven by a rotating ball nut. (Burckert, paragraph 4 describes the rack as a combination of a ball nut and spindle with the ball thread arranged on the rack. The rotating nut driving the movement of the rack.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Klinger to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut as taught by Burckert, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle steering racks. As disclosed by Burckert, it is well known for vehicle steering racks to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Klinger to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut as taught by Burckert, as such a modification would provide the ability to power a steering rack with a servo motor. (Paragraph 4 of Burckert).
Regarding claim 16, Klinger, paragraph 5, describes a threaded spindle and nut but does not disclose a pair of rotating ball nut. However Burckert teaches;
wherein the rack is axially driven by a pair of rotating ball nuts. (Burckert, paragraph 4 describes the rack as a combination of a ball nut and spindle with the ball thread arranged on the rack. The rotating nut driving the movement of the rack. Burckert does not disclose a second ball nut, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to duplicate the ball nut, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Further, such a modification would be expected to yield predictable results and the steering rack would continue to function as intended.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Klinger to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut as taught by Burckert, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle steering racks. As disclosed by Burckert, it is well known for vehicle steering racks to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Klinger to include a steering rack which is axially driven by a rotating ball nut as taught by Burckert, as such a modification would provide the ability to power a steering rack with a servo motor. (Paragraph 4 of Burckert).
Regarding claim 17, Klinger in view of Burckert discloses;
wherein the anti-rotation mechanism is located on the rack between the pair of rotating ball nuts. (The addition of a second ball nut would place the ball screw of the rack and the anti-rotation mechanism between the two ball nuts.)
Regarding claim 18, Klinger discloses a biasing member (torsion spring 14; Klinger) but does not disclose a groove in which the biasing member is positioned or an axially extending portion of the yoke. However, Burckert teaches;
wherein the biasing member is positioned within a groove defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke. (Klinger describes two holes for locating the ends of the biasing member. Burckert teaches a yoke which encompasses the rack and extends in an axial direction. By combining the clamping yoke of Burckert with the roller bearings, running plates and spring of Klinger, the torsion spring would be wound around the yoke with one end fixed to the yoke and the other end fixed to the rack. Adding a groove to the yoke such that the spring winding was positioned within the groove would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the yoke of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Klinger to include a groove wherein the biasing member is positioned, defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke, as taught by Burckert, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to vehicle steering racks. As disclosed by Burckert, it is well known for a vehicle steering rack to include a groove wherein the biasing member is positioned, defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Klinger to include a groove wherein the biasing member is positioned, defined by an axially extending portion of the yoke, as taught by Burckert, as such a modification would provide the ability to bias the ant-rotation mechanism against the induced twist of the steering rack.
Regarding claim 19, Klinger discloses a portion of the yoke defines a retention hole to locate and fix an end of the biasing member, (Klinger, paragraph 22 and fig. 2, describes the torsion spring as located at its ends in bores 17 and 18 in the yoke and rack respectively.)
Klinger does not disclose an axially extending portion of the yoke, which defines a retention hole to locate and fix an end of the biasing member. However, Burckert teaches;
wherein the axially extending portion of the yoke defines a retention hole to locate and fix an end of the biasing member. (Klinger describes two holes for locating the ends of the biasing member. Burckert teaches a yoke which encompasses the rack and extends in an axial direction. By combining the clamping yoke of Burckert with the roller bearings, running plates and spring of Klinger, the torsion spring would be wound around the yoke with one end fixed to the yoke and the other end fixed to the rack.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER whose telephone number is (703)756-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 9:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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.
/SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614