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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 20210012202 A ("Shin") (for translation purposes US 20220258792 A1 will be used).
Claim 1: Shin teaches a vehicle steering device, comprising: an actuator rod (102) linearly reciprocating in an axial direction (para. 22, lines 1-4); a holder assembly (110) having a first holder (111a; in drawings its referred as 111a but in the specification its referred to as 100a, for consistency the first holder will be referred to as 111a through the rejection) and a second holder (111b) separated by being axially cut and disposed with their respective cut surfaces facing each other (Fig. 4) and coupled to the actuator rod to linearly reciprocate in the axial direction (Fig. 1); a rod housing (101) having the actuator rod embedded therein (para. 22, lines 1-4) and having an inner surface (106) where two opposite surfaces of the holder assembly are supported (Fig. 1; para. 21, lines 2-8); and an elastic member (112) coupled between the cut surfaces of the first holder and the second holder to support the first holder and the second holder toward the rod housing (Fig. 1; para. 22, lines 8-13). wherein a holder groove (431) recessed inward is provided in an outer surface of each of the first holder (111a) and the second holder (111b) (Fig. 6).
Claim 2: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, further comprising a magnet assembly (120) having a magnet (121) embedded therein and coupled to the holder assembly (110) to, together with the actuator rod, linearly reciprocate in the axial direction (para. 21, lines 13-16).
Claim 3: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 2 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, further comprising a sensor assembly (140) coupled to the rod housing to sense a change in a magnetic field of the magnet (121) when the actuator rod linearly reciprocates (para. 21, lines 13-18).
Claim 4: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the actuator rod (102) has a seating surface (412) where an outer circumferential surface is cut, and wherein the holder assembly (110) is seated on the seating surface and is coupled via a fastening member (113) (para. 38, line 1-para. 39, line 2) .
Claim 5: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 4 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein fastening holes (402) are provided being axially spaced apart from each other in the seating surface (412) to couple the fastening member (113) (Fig. 4).
Claim 6: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 5 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the holder assembly (110) has communication recesses (401) formed in the cut surfaces of the first holder and the second holder to communicate with the fastening hole (Figs. 4 and 6).
Claim 7: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein a ring-shaped member (head portion of 113) is provided by being penetrated by the fastening member (113) and being coupled to the communication recesses (401) of the first holder (111a) and the second holder (111b) (Fig. 7; para. 38, lines 1-6).
Claim 8: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 7 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the ring-shaped member (head portion of 113) has a stopping groove (601) recessed to be stepped from an outer circumferential surface, wherein a protrusion is provided on an inner circumferential surface of the communication recess (401), and wherein the protrusion is inserted into the stopping groove (Figs. 6 and 7).
Claim 9: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the cut surfaces of the first holder (111a) and the second holder (111b) have an elastic supporting groove (611) where the elastic member (112) is inserted and supported (para. 41, lines 1-5).
Claim 10: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 9 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the elastic supporting groove (611) is formed as an axially elongated recess (Fig. 6), and wherein the elastic member (112) includes a first convex portion protruding toward the first holder (111a) and a second convex portion protruding toward the second holder (111b) (Figs. 1 and 7).
Claim 11: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 10 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the elastic member (112) includes a plurality of first convex portions (part facing 111a) and a plurality of second convex portions (part facing 11b) continuously and alternately connected in the axial direction (Fig. 7).
Claim 12: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 9 as noted above. Shin further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein two or more elastic supporting grooves (611) axially spaced apart are provided (Fig. 6).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20210012202 A ("Shin") in view of KR 20080107881 A (Yun).
Claim 13: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 12 as noted above. Shin does not teach the vehicle steering device, wherein the elastic member is a coil spring having two opposite ends respectively supported on the elastic supporting groove of the first holder and the elastic supporting groove of the second holder.
However, Yun teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the elastic member (86) is a coil spring having two opposite ends respectively supported (on 84; Fig. 5) on the elastic supporting groove (52 of left) of the first holder and the elastic supporting groove (52 of right) of the second holder. 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 invention of Shin with the features of Yun. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Yun teaches “a coil spring that bring the fluid piece into close contact with the sliding hole, so that even if the fluid piece wears out while sliding for a long period of time, the fluid piece remains in close contact with the sliding hole, preventing a gap from occurring. Therefore, it is possible to maintain an excellent steering feel even when the vehicle is driven for a long period of time, and has the advantage of preventing malfunction and damage caused by a gap between parts.” (page. 10, lines 5-10)
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20210012202 A ("Shin") in view of KR 20180137747 A ("Chae").
Claim 15: Shin teaches the limitations of claim 14 as noted above. Shin does not teach the vehicle steering device, wherein a plurality of holder grooves are provided being axially spaced apart.
However, Chae teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein a plurality of holder grooves (21, 22) are provided being axially spaced apart (Fig. 1). 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 invention of Shin with the features of Chae. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Chae teaches “the above space may be formed as a lubricant pocket (21) in which lubricant is received. Here, the lubricant is a liquid that lubricates the connection between” (para. 35, lines 1-3)
Claim 16: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 15 as noted above. Chae further teaches the vehicle steering device, wherein the holder groove (21, 22) is filled with a lubricant (Fig. 1; para. 35, lines 1-5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amendment to claim 1 incorporates the language from canceled claim 14. Applicant’s arguments against the rejection of original claim 14 are not persuasive, as the claim language under the broadest reasonable interpretation appears to be met by Shin. The outer surface of the parts that are the first holder and second holder each can be considered to have an outer surface that face each other. If the claim language were clarified to focus more on the surface relative to the axial cut, or if the claim specified the outer surface of the combined first and second holder, such amendments to the claims may overcome Shin, although further search and consideration would be required. Respectfully, it is the examiner's position that the arguments are interpreting the claims more narrowly than the breadth of the claims affords.
Conclusion
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 AL-BIRR RAHMAN CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-4661. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 6:00pm.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
/A.R.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3618
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights