DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed 08/03/26 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3-21 are currently pending, with claim 2 being cancelled and claims 18-21 being newly added. In light of the claim amendments, new Drawing Objections and 112 rejections are detailed below. The previous 102 rejections are maintained, partially due to the ambiguity with regard to the new claim language, as detailed below. 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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the damping portion “form[ing] a continuous circumferential wave corresponding to a periodic function… [that is] continuous and interrupted over an entirety of a circumference of the damping portion” but also has “maximum amplitudes…[that] extend beyond contours of the wave shape” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). These two limitations conflict with each other. Figures 1A and 1B show the maximum amplitudes at 16a that extend beyond the contours of the wave shape, but as a result the periodic function is NOT continuous and uninterrupted. “Extending beyond contours of the wave shape” and a wave being “continuous and uninterrupted” are mutually exclusive, hence it cannot (and does not) appear in the Drawings. There is also no support for this new language anywhere in the Detailed Description. No new matter should be entered.
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 the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 now requires a damping portion “form[ing] a continuous circumferential wave corresponding to a periodic function… [that is] continuous and interrupted over an entirety of a circumference of the damping portion” but that also has “maximum amplitudes…[that] extend beyond contours of the wave shape.” These two limitations conflict with each other. Figures 1A and 1B show the maximum amplitudes at 16a that extend beyond the contours of the wave shape, but as a result the periodic function is NOT continuous and uninterrupted. “Extending beyond contours of the wave shape” and a wave being “continuous and uninterrupted” are mutually exclusive, hence it cannot (and does not) appear in the Drawings. There is also no support for this new language “continuous and uninterrupted” anywhere in the Detailed Description. No new matter should be entered.
Claims 1 and 3-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 1 now requires a damping portion “form[ing] a continuous circumferential wave corresponding to a periodic function… [that is] continuous and interrupted over an entirety of a circumference of the damping portion” but that also has “maximum amplitudes…[that] extend beyond contours of the wave shape.” These two limitations conflict with each other, making it unclear how both of these features can be present in a single embodiment. Figures 1A and 1B show the maximum amplitudes at 16a that extend beyond the contours of the wave shape, but as a result the periodic function is NOT continuous and uninterrupted. “Extending beyond contours of the wave shape” and a wave being “continuous and uninterrupted” are mutually exclusive, hence it cannot (and does not) appear in the Drawings.
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 17 is 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.
Claim 17 is rejected for multiple reasons. First, most importantly, it is unclear what the units are for the height amplitude H – is it meters, centimeters, millimeters? The quantity “c” in the equation would need to have some dimensions here, but none are provided, leaving it unclear what the units of H is. Second, the equation recited has a power-law/algebraic relationship and is not by itself a periodic function. While the equation may be used to determine certain amplitudes H of the damping portion, it cannot reasonably be considered to “at least approximately follow a contour profile” of a periodic function.
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.
REJECTION #1: Noruschat
Claim(s) 1 and 3-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Noruschat (DE 10 2016 215773) (cited by Applicant). Noruschat is directed to a bump stop for a vibration damper. See Abstract. Note: Noruschat is an “X” reference in the cited German Patent Office Written Opinion.
Claim 1: Noruschat discloses an assembly arrangement for assembling a component on an environment, comprising the following features: an abutment portion at an end of the component; an abutment portion at an end of the environment; a damping portion between the abutment portion at the end of the component end and the abutment portion at an end of the environment, wherein the damping portion forms a continuous circumferential wave shape corresponding to a periodic function, and wherein bearing surfaces at maximum amplitudes of the periodic function extend beyond contours of the wave shape and define discrete abutment regions, and wherein the periodic function is continuous and uninterrupted over an entirety of a circumference of the damping portion. See annotated Figure 3, infra.
PNG
media_image1.png
330
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 3: Noruschat discloses that the bearing surfaces are embodied as flattened bearing supports on the regions of the maximum amplitudes of the periodic function. See annotated Figure 3, supra.
Claim 4: Noruschat discloses that the periodic function is a sine function or cosine function. See Fig. 3.
Claim 5: Noruschat discloses that the periodic function provides at least two maximum amplitudes in both the positive and negative direction of the periodic function over the circumference of the damping portion. See annotated Figure 3, supra.
Claim 6: Noruschat discloses that the periodic function provides at least three maximum amplitudes in both the positive and negative direction of the periodic function over the circumference of the damping portion. See annotated Figure 3, supra.
Claim 7: Noruschat discloses that the damping portion is configured to be at least approximately cylindrical. See Figs. 2, 3.
Claim 8: Noruschat discloses that a hollow-cylindrical, continuous cavity is provided, via which the assembly arrangement can be fixed. See Fig. 2.
Claim 9: Noruschat discloses that a material for the damping portion is selected such that a vibration spectrum is absorbed for the component which causes the component to be damped. See Translation (“elastomeric composition”).
Claim 10: Noruschat discloses that a size and/or geometry of the bearing surface and/or a size of the maximum amplitude can be set. See Figs. 2, 3.
Claim 11: Noruschat discloses that the damping portion is formed in one piece with the abutment portions or is embodied as a separate portion. See Fig. 3.
Claim 12: Noruschat discloses that the assembly arrangement further comprises a contact ring which engages a cylindrical passage opening of the assembly arrangement via a cylindrical appendage. See Fig. 2.
Claim 13: Noruschat discloses that a cylinder region is molded onto the damping portion in the axial direction of the damping portion which is a substantially cylindrical shape. See Fig. 2.
Claim 14: Noruschat discloses that an abutting region can be placed on the damping portion and/or the cylinder region of the damping portion. See Fig. 2.
Claim 15: Noruschat discloses that at least one circumferential arc-shaped contact surface is provided radially on the outer circumference of the cylinder region. See Fig. 2.
Claim 16: Noruschat discloses that three circumferential arc-shaped contact surfaces are provided radially on the outer circumference of the cylinder region. See Fig. 3.
Claim 17: Noruschat discloses that the periodic function which corresponds to the damping portion at least approximately follows a contour profile having a height amplitude H, with the formula recited in the application. See 112 rejection above.
Claim 18: Noruschat discloses an assembly arrangement for assembling a component on an environment, comprising the following features: an abutment portion at an end of the component; an abutment portion at an end of the environment; a damping portion between the abutment portion at the end of the component and the abutment portion at the end of the environment, wherein the damping portion exhibits a shape which at least approximates a periodic function, wherein respective bearing surfaces which form the abutment portions are formed in maximum amplitude regions of the at least approximately periodic function. See annotated Figure 3, infra.
Noruschat further discloses that a cylinder region is molded onto the damping portion along an axial direction of the damping portion [see either Fig. 3 (return element 5) or Fig. 1 (stop 3)], the damping portion having a substantially cylindrical shape, wherein the cylinder region is provided with a centering contact surface [see either Fig. 3 (outer surface of 5) or Fig. 1 (surface of 3 abutting the spring)] in order to center the assembly arrangement in the component and/or in an opening. See Figs. 1, 3.
Claim 19: Noruschat discloses that the shape of the damping portion is a wave-like shape. See Fig. 3.
Claim 20: Noruschat discloses that the respective bearing surfaces are embodied as flattened bearing supports on the maximum amplitude regions of the at least approximately periodic function. See Fig. 3.
Claim 21: Noruschat discloses that the at least approximately periodic function is a sine function or cosine function. See Fig. 3.
REJECTION #2: RU Ref
Claim(s) 1 and 3-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by RU 174743 (hereinafter RU Ref”). RU Ref is directed to a vehicle body support. See Abstract.
Claim 1: RU Ref discloses an assembly arrangement for assembling a component on an environment, comprising the following features: an abutment portion at an end of the component (bottom of 10); an abutment portion at an end of the environment (top of 10); a damping portion (non-peak portions of 10) between the abutment portion at the end of the component end and the abutment portion at an end of the environment, wherein the damping portion forms a continuous circumferential wave shape corresponding to a periodic function, and wherein bearing surfaces at maximum amplitudes of the periodic function extend beyond contours of the wave shape and define discrete abutment regions, and wherein the periodic function is continuous and uninterrupted over an entirety of a circumference of the damping portion. See Figure.
Claim 3: RU Ref discloses that the bearing surfaces are embodied as flattened bearing supports on the regions of the maximum amplitudes of the at least approximately periodic function. See Figure.
Claim 4: RU Ref discloses that the periodic function is a sine function or cosine function. See Figure.
Claim 5: RU Ref discloses that the periodic function provides at least two maximum amplitudes in both the positive and negative direction of the periodic function over the circumference of the damping portion. See Figure.
Claim 6: RU Ref discloses that the periodic function provides at least three maximum amplitudes in both the positive and negative direction of the periodic function over the circumference of the damping portion. See Figure.
Claim 7: RU Ref discloses that it is configured to be at least approximately cylindrical. See Figure.
Claim 8: RU Ref discloses that a hollow-cylindrical, continuous cavity is provided, via which the assembly arrangement can be fixed. See Figure.
Claim 9: RU Ref discloses that a material for the damping portion is selected such that a vibration spectrum of the component which is to be damped is absorbed. See Translation (“elastic material”).
Claim 10: RU Ref discloses that a size and/or geometry of the bearing surface and/or a size of the maximum amplitude can be set. See Figure.
Claim 11: RU Ref discloses that the damping portion is formed in one piece with the abutment portions or is embodied as a separate portion. See Figure.
Claim 12: RU Ref discloses that the assembly arrangement further comprises a contact ring which engages a cylindrical passage opening of the assembly arrangement via a cylindrical appendage. See Figure.
Claim 13: RU Ref discloses that a cylinder region is molded onto the damping portion in the axial direction of the substantially cylindrical shape of the damping portion. See Figure.
Claim 14: RU Ref discloses that an abutting region can be placed on the damping portion and/or the cylinder region. See Figure.
Claim 15: RU Ref discloses that at least one circumferential arc-shaped contact surface is provided radially on the outer circumference of the cylinder region. See Figure.
Claim 16: RU Ref discloses that three circumferential arc-shaped contact surfaces are provided radially on the outer circumference of the cylinder region. See Figure.
Claim 17: RU Ref discloses that the periodic function which corresponds to the damping portion at least approximately follows a contour profile having a height amplitude H, with the formula recited in the application. See 112 rejection above.
Claim 18: see claim 1 above. RU ref further that a cylinder region (7) is molded onto the damping portion along an axial direction of the damping portion, the damping portion having a substantially cylindrical shape, wherein the cylinder region is provided with a centering contact surface (9) in order to center the assembly arrangement in the component and/or in an opening. See Figure.
Claim 19: RU Ref discloses that the shape of the damping portion is a wave-like shape. See Figure.
Claim 20: RU Ref discloses that the respective bearing surfaces are embodied as flattened bearing supports (at 1) on the maximum amplitude regions of the at least approximately periodic function. See Figure.
Claim 21: RU Ref discloses that the at least approximately periodic function is a sine function or cosine function. See Figure.
REJECTION #3: Kawachi
Claim(s) 1 and 3-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawachi et al. (WO 2012/056635). Kawachi is directed to a tank rubber cushion. See Abstract.
Claim 1: Kawachi discloses an assembly arrangement [Figs. 1, 8] for assembling a component on an environment, comprising the following features: an abutment portion at the component end (12); an abutment portion at the environment end (18); a damping portion (48, 50) between the abutment portion at the component end and the abutment portion at the environment end, wherein the damping portion exhibits a shape which at least approximates a periodic function [see Fig. 8], wherein bearing surfaces which form the abutment portions are formed in the region of the maximum amplitudes of the at least approximately periodic function [see Fig. 8 (maximum amplitudes at portions where 48, 50 abuts 12 and 18)]. See Figs. 1, 8.
Claim 3: Kawachi discloses that the bearing surfaces are embodied as flattened bearing supports on the regions of the maximum amplitudes of the at least approximately periodic function. See Fig. 8.
Claim 4: Kawachi discloses that the periodic function is a sine function or cosine function. See Fig. 8.
Claim 5: Kawachi discloses that the periodic function provides at least two maximum amplitudes in both the positive and negative direction of the periodic function over the circumference of the damping portion. See Fig. 8.
Claim 6: Kawachi discloses that the periodic function provides at least three maximum amplitudes in both the positive and negative direction of the periodic function over the circumference of the damping portion. See Fig. 8.
Claim 7: Kawachi discloses that it is configured to be at least approximately cylindrical. See Fig. 8.
Claim 8: Kawachi discloses that a hollow-cylindrical, continuous cavity is provided, via which the assembly arrangement can be fixed. See Fig. 8.
Claim 9: Kawachi discloses that a material for the damping portion is selected such that a vibration spectrum of the component which is to be damped is absorbed. See Fig. 8.
Claim 10: Kawachi discloses that a size and/or geometry of the bearing surface and/or a size of the maximum amplitude can be set. See Fig. 8.
Claim 11: Kawachi discloses that the damping portion is formed in one piece with the abutment portions or is embodied as a separate portion. See Fig. 8.
Claim 12: Kawachi discloses that the assembly arrangement further comprises a contact ring which engages a cylindrical passage opening of the assembly arrangement via a cylindrical appendage. See Fig. 8.
Claim 13: Kawachi discloses that a cylinder region is molded onto the damping portion in the axial direction of the substantially cylindrical shape of the damping portion. See Fig. 8.
Claim 14: Kawachi discloses that an abutting region can be placed on the damping portion and/or the cylinder region. See Fig. 8.
Claim 15: Kawachi discloses that at least one circumferential arc-shaped contact surface is provided radially on the outer circumference of the cylinder region. See Fig. 8.
Claim 16: Kawachi discloses that three circumferential arc-shaped contact surfaces are provided radially on the outer circumference of the cylinder region. See Fig. 8.
Claim 17: Kawachi discloses that the periodic function which corresponds to the damping portion at least approximately follows a contour profile having a height amplitude H, with the formula recited in the application. See 112 rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/03/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant traverses the 102 rejection of the 3 prior art references, but often does so only with conclusory statements. First, Applicant states that Noruschat is “structurally different from the assembly arrangement of amended claim 1” and “fails to disclose, teach, or suggest at least the claimed circumferential load-bearing periodic structure affirmatively recited in Applicant's independent claim 1.” See Remarks, pages 8-9. This conclusory statement is not persuasive – how does Noruschat fail to meet the limitation? For some reason Applicant discusses restoring element 5, but that component is internal to the damping region. The multiple 112 issues further complicate proper examination of this claim.
Second, Applicant asserts that “the RU Ref merely discloses a locally undulated surface in a groove region, but does not disclose, teach, or suggest continuous periodic structures around the full circumference for defining a structure with a periodic amplitude profile, as disclosed and claimed by Applicant.” In response, the wave-shaped surface in the groove clearly extends around the full circumference, and does so in a periodic fashion with peaks. Applicant next contends that the RU ref does not define abutment regions. In response, Applicant appears to be taking an overly narrow interpretation of “abutment region.” Any region that is capable of abutting another component can be deemed an “abutment region.” Applicant may have intended for these regions to be flat surfaces that face in certain axial direction on an axial exterior of the assembly, but no such limiting language is recited. The multiple 112 issues further complicate proper examination of this claim.
Finally, Applicant also states that Kawachi fails to disclose a continuous period function over the entire circumference, but Figures 2, 4 and 6 clearly show that the portion 48, 50 extends all the way around the assembly. Applicant’s brief conclusory statement is adequate to properly convey why Applicant believes Kawachi is insufficient to read on the fairly broad language of claim 1. The multiple 112 issues further complicate proper examination of this claim.
Applicant should consider significant revisions to the claim language to properly describe the embodiments depicted in the Figures and with sufficient specificity to avoid reasonably broad applications of the cited prior art references.
For the foregoing reasons, all pending claims remain rejected as detailed above.
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 VISHAL R SAHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-3838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm PST.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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 SAHNI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3657
/VISHAL R SAHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 August 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights