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 .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-16 of Group 1 were elected without traverse.
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn, belonging to unelected Group 2.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because “Figure 2 has error for : PD,
T
L
I
N
K
_
B
A
C
K
and A-A, and outer boundary of font portion of link [shown dashed], which are confusing and seem to imply PD =
T
L
I
N
K
_
B
A
C
K
. It is suggested by Examiner to show PD,
T
L
I
N
K
_
B
A
C
K
,
T
L
I
N
K
_
F
R
O
N
T
,
and planes A-A and B-B on figure having a better orthographic orientation, such as Fig 4. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 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
Claims 10-16 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 Claims 10-16, recite the limitation “the track link assembly” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested by the examiner to change the recitation to “the track link”, for greater clarity and consistency with claim 9.
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(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US-6565161-B2 to Anderton (“Anderton”).
The applied reference has a common applicant and one common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding Claim 1, Anderton discloses a rolled track link (20 “first left track link” [shown on right side of Fig 1], 30 “second left track link, 40 “first right track link, 50 “second right track link; BRI: a link named “rolled track link” as defined by specification paragraph 5, wherein the word “rolled” adds no meaning regarding the method of forming the link) comprising: [shown for 20 “first left track link “ a central portion (Annotated Figure 2 “AF1”); a front portion (AF1), on a front side (AF1) of the central portion (), having a front portion planar upper surface (AF1) and a pin bore (24 “pin boss”, 44 “pin boss”, and 2 other pin bosses [not numbered], each receiving 62 “track pin” Col 2 lines 31-49, Fig 1); and a back portion (AF1) on a back side of the central portion, having a back portion planar upper surface (AF1) that is offset (AF1) from the front portion planar upper surface by a perpendicular distance (PD AF1) along a height (T, AF1, consistent with instant application: specification Para 18 and Fig 2) of the track link, and having a bushing bore (22, 34, 42, 54 “bushing bosses”, each receiving 60 “bushing” with 62 “track pin” therein, Col 2 lines 31-49, Fig 1) wherein, at each point along a length of the track link, a thickness of the track link is uniform (as shown AF1) along a width (BRI: thickness of any widthwise cross section is uniform, as shown Fig 1) of the track link, other than at holes (pin bosses, bushing bosses and windows Fig 1, AF1), including the pin bore and the bushing bore .
PNG
media_image1.png
422
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 1, wherein the track link is formed of rolled steel (italicized limits not limiting [i.e. product by process], not limiting: "The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production", (MPEP 2113), Anderton does not disclose any method of forming the track links, the structure of the track links is disclosed, and per MPEP 2113, the track link patentability does not depend on its method of production).
Regarding Claim 4, Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the central portion varies (AF1 shows central portion having a varying thickness having a concave curved shape).
Regarding Claim 5, Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 1, wherein the central portion includes at least one concave curved surface (AF1shows central portion having a varying thickness having a concave curved shape).
Regarding Claim 7, Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 1, wherein the central portion has at least one bolt hole (90, AF1) that is perpendicular to (AF1) the pin bore (24 “pin boss”, 44 “pin boss”, and 2 other pin bosses [not numbered], Col 2 lines 31-49, Fig 1, AF1); in the front portion and the bushing bore (22, 34, 42, 54 “bushing bosses”, each receiving 60 “bushing” with 62 “track pin” therein, Col 2 lines 31-49, Fig 1, AF1) in the back portion.
Regarding Claim 8, Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 7, wherein the central portion has at least one window (AF1) that is perpendicular to and intersects the at least one bolt hole (90 AF1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderton.
Regarding Claim 6, Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane is about 1.5 mm.
The specific dimension(s) of the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane is/are not an inventive concept, but rather a design choice made from many possible dimensional choices, made as a part of routine design optimization giving proper consideration of use, fit and interaction of adjacent parts, design loads, material and manufacturing requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the dimension of the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane of the track of Anderton, such that is was about 1.5 mm with the motivation to ensure the track link was sufficiently designed to meet the design parameters just described. This combination/modification being done with a reasonable expectation of success and having equivalent function in the combination as in the separately configurations.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 9-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP-H06316280-A to Kato (“Kato”), and further in view of Anderton.
Regarding Claim 1, Kato discloses a rolled track link (4) comprising: a central portion (Annotated Figure 4B “AF4B”); a front portion (AF4B), on a front side of the central portion, having a front portion planar upper surface (AF4B), and a pin bore (P42); and a back portion (AF4B), on a back side of the central portion, having a back portion planar upper surface (AF4B), that is offset (AF4B), from the front portion planar upper surface by a perpendicular distance (PD) along a height (AF4B) of the track link, and, wherein, at each point along a length of the track link, a thickness (Annotated Figure 4A “AF4a”) of the track link is uniform (AF4A) along a width of the track link, other than at holes(bores, windows), including the pin bore.
Kato does not disclose having a bushing in a bushing bore, or that wherein, at each point along a length of the track link, a thickness of the track link is uniform along a width of the track link, other than at holes, including the pin bore and the bushing bore.
PNG
media_image2.png
284
470
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
292
426
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Anderton discloses a bushing (60 “bushing” with 62 “track pin” therein, Col 2 lines 31-49, Fig 1)) and a bushing bore (22, 34, 42, 54 “bushing bosses”, each receiving 60 “bushing”), in front portion of link (AF1), a thickness of the track link is uniform (Fig 4, 5) along a width of the track link, other than at holes, including the pin bores.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the rolled track link and the track link having a bushing in a bushing bore in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the rolled track link of Kato and the track link having a bushing in a bushing bore of Anderton, to modify the link to have the pin in the inner/back portions of the link have a bushing surrounding the pin therein (like Anderton), the bore in the inner/back portion enlarged to fit the bushing therein (like Anderton), thus a bushing boar, and thus at each point along a length of the track link, a thickness of the track link is uniform along a width of the track link, other than at holes, including the pin bore and the bushing bore (like Anderton), with the motivation to reduce wear between the pin and the link, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the front portion is the same as a thickness of the back portion (AF2, Kato: English translation page 6, Para 2 beginning “FIG. 4 shows…”, lines 5-6 : thin portion (1/2 wall thickness [“t” in AF4B], mutually at the left and right positions” [i.e. back portion and front portion, [thus a thickness of the front portion is the same as a thickness of the back portion]).
Regarding Claim 9, Kato discloses a track link (4) formed by rolling (italicized limits not limiting [i.e. product by process], not limiting: "The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production", (MPEP 2113)), a central portion (Annotated Figure 4B “AF4B”); a front portion (AF4B), on a front side of the central portion, having a front portion planar upper surface (AF4B), and a pin bore (P42); and a back portion (AF4B), on a back side of the central portion, having a back portion planar upper surface (AF4B), that is offset (AF4B), from the front portion planar upper surface by a perpendicular distance (PD) along a height (AF4B) of the track link.
Kato does not disclose having a bushing bore.
Anderton discloses and a bushing bore (22, 34, 42, 54 “bushing bosses”, each receiving 60 “bushing” with 62 “track pin” therein, Col 2 lines 31-49, Fig 1), in front portion of link (AF1)
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the rolled track link and the track link having a bushing bore with a bushing with track pin therein, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the rolled track link of Kato and the track link having the track link having a bushing bore with a bushing with track pin therein of Anderton, to modify the link to have the pin in the inner/back portions of the link have a bushing surrounding the pin therein (like Anderton), the bore in the inner/back portion enlarged to fit the bushing therein (like Anderton), thus a bushing boar, with the motivation to reduce wear between the pin and the link, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link formed of rolled steel (italicized limits not limiting [i.e. product by process], not limiting: "The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production", (MPEP 2113), Anderton does not disclose any method of forming the track links, the structure of the track links is disclosed, and per MPEP 2113, the track link patentability does not depend on its method of production).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link a thickness of the front portion is the same as a thickness of the back portion (AF2, Kato: English translation page 6, Para 2 beginning “FIG. 4 shows…”, lines 5-6 : thin portion (1/2 wall thickness [“t” in AF4B], mutually at the left and right positions” [i.e. back portion and front portion, [thus a thickness of the front portion is the same as a thickness of the back portion]).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link does not disclose wherein a thickness of the central portion varies.
Anderton further discloses a wherein a thickness of the central portion varies (AF1 [Anderton] shows central portion having a varying thickness with a concave curved shape).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the track link and the track link having a central portion having a varying thickness with a concave curved shape, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the track link of the combination of Kato and Anderton and the teaching of the track link having a central portion having a varying thickness with a concave curved shape of Anderton, to further modify the track link (of the combination of Kato and Anderton), such that central portion having a varying thickness with a concave curved shape, with the motivation allow a weight reduction of the track link, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link but does not disclose wherein the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane of each track link is about 1.5 mm.
The specific dimension(s) of the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane is/are not an inventive concept, but rather a design choice made from many possible dimensional choices, made as a part of routine design optimization giving proper consideration of use, fit and interaction of adjacent parts, design loads, material and manufacturing requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a dimension of about 1.5 mm, for the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane of the track of the combination of Kato and Anderton, and to modify the track link of the combination of Kato and Anderton such that the perpendicular distance between the front portion plane and the back portion plane of the track has this value of about 1.5 mm, with the motivation to ensure the track link was sufficiently designed to meet the design parameters just described. This combination/modification being done with a reasonable expectation of success and having equivalent function in the combination as in the separately configurations.
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link does not disclose wherein the central portion includes at least one concave curved surface.
Anderton further discloses wherein the central portion includes at least one concave curved surface (AF1 shows central portion having a concave curved shape).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the track link and the track link having a central that includes at least one concave curved surface, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the track link of the combination of Kato and Anderton and the teaching of the track link having a central portion that includes at least one concave curved surface of Anderton, to further modify the track link (of the combination of Kato and Anderton), such that central portion having a varying thickness with a concave curved shape, with the motivation allow a weight reduction of the track link, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link at least one bolt hole (P41, AF4A, AF4B) that is perpendicular to the pin bore in the front portion and the bushing bore in the back portion.
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Kato and Anderton discloses the track link assembly according to claim 15, wherein the central portion of each track link has at least one window (4h, Kato AF4A) that is perpendicular to and intersects (as shown Kato AF4A) the at least one bolt hole (P41, AF4A, AF4B).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Johannsen (US-20170129555-A1, US-20180029653-A1, US-20200070908-A1), Hisamatsu (US-20130169034-A1), Steiner (US-20210024149-A1), Hakes (US-11518456-B2) and Prest (US-11697462-B2) disclose offset track links having one or more of: planar upper surfaces with back, central and front portions, pin and bushing bores, bolt holes, windows, uniform thickness, perpendicular distances between offset, and curved concave surfaces.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Joe 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615