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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/08/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 3922916 (herein Bertram) in view of Shimogawa et al (US Patent No. 9,879,643).
A machine translation of Bertram was provided with the previous office action and is relied upon herein).
Bertram teaches:
limitations from claim 1, a drive assembly for a piston-type fuel pump (see FIG. 2), said drive assembly comprising: a drive housing (43, 45, 49) defining a drive chamber (within carrier 43); a cam shaft (39) supported within said drive chamber for rotation about a shaft axis (FIG. 2; paragraph 22); a circular cam (37) rigidly connected to the cam shaft, said cam having a circular outer periphery defining a circular cam surface, said cam surface having a cam surface axis eccentric from said shaft axis (FIG. 2; paragraph 22); a cam follower (11) surrounding the cam roller and including a first driven surface (left-most side of slot 33) and a second driven surface (right-most side of slot 33), said first and second driven surfaces arranged on diametrically opposite sides of said cam roller (see FIG. 2), said cam follower having a first end (the side near extension 15) axially outward of said first driven surface and a second end (17) axially outward of said second driven surface, said cam follower (11) having an outside surface guided on a complementary surface of said drive housing for movement along a drive axis perpendicular to said shaft axis (see slide guide 13; FIG. 2), rotation of said cam shaft causing said cam follower to reciprocate along said drive axis between a first cam follower position and a second cam follower position (paragraph 20, 26); an energy accumulator (41, 49, 55) arranged at the second end of the cam follower (see tappet 41), said energy accumulator comprising at least one bias element (55) between the second end of the cam follower (at tappet 41) and the drive housing (see plug 49), movement of the cam follower from the first cam follower position to the second cam follower position compressing said at least one bias element (paragraph 26, at line 306) and movement of the cam follower from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position allowing the at least one bias element to extend, thereby returning energy from the bias element to the cam follower to assist movement of the cam follower from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position (paragraph 26, at line 311; “the accumulator pressure spring then supports the compression force supplied by the engine…”);
PNG
media_image1.png
382
647
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bertram differs from claim 1 in that the cam (37) does not teach a cam roller on its surface;
Shimogawa teaches:
limitations from claim 1, a fuel pump (FIG. 8-10) including a cam shaft (13), a cam (38), and follower (44); and wherein a roller (45) in sliding relationship to an outer cam surface (FIG. 9; C. 6 Lines 59-67);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known cam-follower assembly for another, such as the roller-follower of Shimogawa for the follower of Bertram, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the transfer of rotary to reciprocating motion). In this case, providing a sliding coupling can reduce friction between the abutting components.
Bertram teaches a cam follower bore (13) complimentary to the follower (11), but does not teach a lubricant supply path;
Shimogawa teaches:
a fuel pump (FIG. 8-10) including a drive shaft (13), cam (38), and follower (45); and: a drive housing (25) defining a drive chamber (36) and an oil inlet (~48) communicating with the drive chamber (FIG. 8-10; C. 7 Lines 36-60); said cam shaft defining an oil flow passage (47) along a shaft axis; said cam including a radially extending oil passage (59-60) connecting the oil flow passage with the cam surface (C. 9 Lines 1-7) and an interface of the cam surface and cam roller lubricated with oil flowing through the oil flow passage and radially extending oil passage to the cam surface (see for example passage 48 and passage 49, and the arrows in FIG. 9; C. 9 Lines 8-13);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to provide a lubricating path in the pump of Bertram, such as the shaft-based lubricant path of Shimogawa, in order to ensure lubrication to the relatively movable parts of the pump to reduce friction and the accompanying deleterious effects related thereto.
Bertram further teaches:
Bertram further teaches:
limitations from claim 2, wherein the at least one bias element (55) comprises at least one coil spring (FIG. 2; paragraph 25);
Regarding claim 3:
Bertram teaches the follower (11) within a complimentary cam follower bore (13) aligned with the drive axis (axis along piston 15), but does not show a or describe a peripheral shape of the housing or follower, and so does not explicitly teach a cylindrical follower;
However, Ritchie teaches that the housing bore (36) is cylindrical in shape (see FIG. 10-11) that fits the round follower (11);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to form the follower of Bertram in a desired shape from amongst known shapes, including cylindrical as taught by Shimogawa, as a matter of design choice in order to fit within housings of various shapes and sizes depending on pump design. The examiner further notes that the applicant’s disclosure does not describe the shape of the follower and housing as being critical in nature.
Regarding claim 4:
Bertram teaches a rotatable drive shaft (39) within the follower (opening 33 of follower 45; see FIG. 2), but does not show how the components are mounted such as with bushings;
However, Shimogawa teaches the cam follower (45) and the cam shaft (54; see FIG. 9-10), said cam shaft supported for rotation by first and second bushings (35, 37) on opposite sides of the cam follower (see FIG. 9-10; C. 4 Lines 52-57);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to mount the drive shaft of Bertram in a known manner, for example via the use of opposed bushings as taught by Shimogawa, in order to stably support the shaft while allowing for low resistance rotation via the bushings.
Shimogawa further teaches:
a fuel pump (FIG. 8-10) including a drive shaft (13), cam (38), and follower (45); and:
limitations from claim 8, wherein said oil flow passage includes radial portions (59-60) directing oil to a first and second bushings (37; FIG. 9), a drive housing (25) defining at least one oil flow passage to circulate lubricating oil delivered to one of the first or second bushings to a portion of a cam bore (see for example passage 48 and passage 49);
limitations from claim 9, wherein said drive housing (25) includes an oil inlet (~48) communicating with said oil flow passage (FIG. 8-10; C. 7 Lines 36-60), said drive housing defines a drive chamber (36) surrounding the cam shaft and cam follower and said drive housing includes an oil return passage (43; C. 9 Lines 21-34);
Claim(s) 10, 12-13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 3922916 (herein Bertram) in view of Shimogawa et al (US Patent No. 9,879,643) in further view of Ohara et al (US Patent No. 4,360,324).
Bertram teaches the limitations of claim 1 as above, and:
limitations from claim 10, an electric motor (see paragraph 22) coupled to rotate said cam shaft (39); and a piston type fuel pump connected to said drive housing, said fuel pump comprising a pumping plunger (9) arranged to reciprocate on said drive axis between a plunger first position advanced into a pumping chamber and a plunger second position retracted from the pumping chamber (paragraphs 22, 26), wherein said pumping plunger is moved from the plunger second position to the plunger first position as the cam follower moves from the cam follower second position to the cam follower first position (paragraphs 22, 26);
Bertram teaches a piston (9, 15), but does not explicitly teach how the piston and follower (11) are coupled (it appears from FIG. 2 that the components are integral);
Shimogawa teaches:
wherein the pumping plunger (22) includes a driven end (right-hand side in FIG. 9) received in a recess (66) defined by the first end of the cam follower, the pumping plunger is biased toward the cam follower and the plunger second position by a plunger bias element (65) compressed between the fuel pump (72-73) and the driven end of the pumping plunger; said pumping plunger is moved from the plunger second position to the plunger first position as the cam follower moves from the cam follower second position to the cam follower first position (C. 6 Lines 34-42), a bias of the plunger bias element opposing movement of the pumping plunger from the plunger second position to the plunger first position (C. 7 Lines 20-33);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known plunger-cam coupling assembly for another, such as the biased plunger of Shimogawa for the unbiased plunger of Bertram, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the driving of a plunger via a cam). Shimogawa further teaches that the use of a spring system allows for maintaining a coupling relationship between the piston and the follower (C. 7 Lines 31-33);
Bertram teaches an electric motor (see paragraph 22), but does not teach that the motor is a variable speed motor;
Ohara teaches a pump (for example FIG. 8) including a reciprocating member (138) biased via an accumulator (140) while being driven by a motor shaft (124) of a variable speed motor (90; C. 5 Lines 66-68 and C. 6 Lines 42-47 for example);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to use a variable speed motor to drive the pump of Bertram, as taught by Ohara, in order to more robustly control the driving speed and therefore the output of the pump.
Bertram further teaches:
limitations from claim 12, wherein a first force along the drive axis is required to move the pumping plunger from the plunger second position to the plunger first position to compress fuel in the pumping chamber and the energy returned to the cam follower generates a second force between 1/3 and 2/3 the first force (see paragraphs 8 and 23: “whereby the loading torque of the spring energy accumulator exerted on the engine is half as large as the load torque exerted during the compression stroke due to a corresponding design of the accumulator springs 27”);
limitations from claim 13, wherein a quantity of fuel pressurized by the pump is regulated by varying the rotational speed of the variable speed electric motor (it is commonly known that speed is directly related to the output of a pump, as more strokes occur, therefore Bertram in combination with Ohara would obviously vary fuel quantity with varied speed);
Shimogawa further teaches:
limitations from claim 15, comprising a piston interface plate (68) in said recess, said piston interface plate including a central projection (left hand central portion as seen in FIG. 9) that contacts the driven end of the pumping plunger to transfer force from the cam follower to the pumping plunger as the cam follower moves from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position (C. 6 Lines 34-42 and C. 7 Lines 31-33);
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 3922916 (herein Bertram) in view of Ritchie (US Patent No. 3,314,365) in view of Shimogawa et al (US Patent No. 9,879,643).
A machine translation of Bertram has been provided with the current office action and is relied upon herein).
Bertram teaches:
limitations from claims 1 and 14, a drive assembly/method for a piston-type fuel pump (see FIG. 2), said drive assembly comprising: a drive housing (43, 45, 49) defining a drive chamber (within carrier 43); a cam shaft (39) supported within said drive chamber for rotation about a shaft axis (FIG. 2; paragraph 22); a circular cam (37) rigidly connected to the cam shaft, said cam having a circular outer periphery defining a circular cam surface, said cam surface having a cam surface axis eccentric from said shaft axis (FIG. 2; paragraph 22); a cam follower (11) surrounding the cam roller and including a first driven surface (left-most side of slot 33) and a second driven surface (right-most side of slot 33), said first and second driven surfaces arranged on diametrically opposite sides of said cam roller (see FIG. 2), said cam follower having a first end (the side near extension 15) axially outward of said first driven surface and a second end (17) axially outward of said second driven surface, said cam follower (11) having an outside surface guided on a complementary surface of said drive housing for movement along a drive axis perpendicular to said shaft axis (see slide guide 13; FIG. 2), rotation of said cam shaft causing said cam follower to reciprocate along said drive axis between a first cam follower position and a second cam follower position (paragraph 20, 26); an energy accumulator (41, 49, 55) arranged at the second end of the cam follower (see tappet 41), said energy accumulator comprising at least one bias element (55) between the second end of the cam follower (at tappet 41) and the drive housing (see plug 49), movement of the cam follower from the first cam follower position to the second cam follower position compressing said at least one bias element (paragraph 26, at line 306) and movement of the cam follower from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position allowing the at least one bias element to extend, thereby returning energy from the bias element to the cam follower to assist movement of the cam follower from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position (paragraph 26, at line 311; “the accumulator pressure spring then supports the compression force supplied by the engine…”);
PNG
media_image1.png
382
647
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bertram differs from claim 1 in that the cam (37) does not teach a cam roller on its surface;
Ritchie teaches a fuel pump (FIG. 1) including a reciprocating member (see diaphragm 22) driven via a cam (64) and follower (40; FIG. 2); and wherein the cam is eccentrically mounted on a driveshaft (54), and coupled to the follower with a relatively moveable cam roller (68) therebetween (FIG. 1-2; C. 4 Lines 30-32);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to provide a cam roller on the cam of Bertram, as taught by Ritchie, in order to allow sliding between the moveable parts thereby reducing wear (see C. 4 Lines 30-32 of Ritchie).
Bertram teaches a cam follower bore (13) complimentary to the follower (11), but does not teach a lubricant supply path;
Shimogawa teaches:
a fuel pump (FIG. 8-10) including a drive shaft (13), cam (38), and follower (45); and: a drive housing (25) defining a drive chamber (36) and an oil inlet (~48) communicating with the drive chamber (FIG. 8-10; C. 7 Lines 36-60); said cam shaft defining an oil flow passage (47) along a shaft axis; said cam including a radially extending oil passage (59-60) connecting the oil flow passage with the cam surface (C. 9 Lines 1-7) and an interface of the cam surface and cam roller lubricated with oil flowing through the oil flow passage and radially extending oil passage to the cam surface (see for example passage 48 and passage 49, and the arrows in FIG. 9; C. 9 Lines 8-13);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to provide a lubricating path in the pump of Bertram, such as the shaft-based lubricant path of Shimogawa, in order to ensure lubrication to the relatively movable parts of the pump to reduce friction and the accompanying deleterious effects related thereto (including the roller as per the combination with Ritchie).
Regarding claim 4:
Bertram teaches a rotatable drive shaft (39) within the follower (opening 33 of follower 11; see FIG. 2), but does not show how the components are mounted such as with bushings;
However, Ritchie teaches the cam follower (40) defining an opening (46; see FIG. 2) and the cam shaft (54) extends through said opening (see FIG. 1), said cam shaft supported for rotation by first and second bushings (56, 58) on opposite sides of the cam follower (see FIG. 1; C. 4 Lines 18-21);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to mount the drive shaft of Bertram in a known manner, for example via the use of opposed bushings as taught by Ritchie, in order to stably support the shaft while allowing for low resistance rotation via the bushings.
Bertram further teaches:
limitations from claim 5, wherein the first driven surface and the second driven surface are planar surfaces on opposite ends of the opening (33), said drive axis extending through the first and second driven surfaces (see FIG. 2 annotated below);
PNG
media_image2.png
405
647
media_image2.png
Greyscale
limitations from claim 6, wherein the first and second driven surfaces are planar surfaces on opposite ends of the opening (33) spaced apart from each other along the drive axis a distance equal to an outside diameter of the cam roller (see annotated FIG. 2 above, the lines indicating driven surfaces are at respective outer surfaces of cam 37; said cam would include an outer roller in the combination with Ritchie);
limitations from claim 7, wherein said cam follower (11) includes sides connecting the first and second ends of the cam follower, said sides defining a lateral width of the opening, said lateral width being greater than the outside diameter of the cam roller by at least the distance between the shaft axis and the cam surface axis (see annotated FIG. 2 below; the examiner notes that is this space does not exist, the cam would not be able to fully turn within the space 33);
PNG
media_image3.png
368
647
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 1221827 (herein Hales) in view of Shimogawa et al (US Patent No. 9,879,643).
Hales teaches:
limitations from claims 1 and 14, a drive assembly/method for a piston-type fuel pump (FIG. 4), said drive assembly comprising: a drive housing (12, 19) defining a drive chamber (18); a cam shaft (42) supported within said drive chamber for rotation about a shaft axis (Page 2 Lines 129-130); a circular cam (43) rigidly connected to the cam shaft, said cam having a circular outer periphery defining a circular cam surface, said circular cam surface having a cam surface axis eccentric from said shaft axis (FIG. 4-5; Page 3 Lines 1-3); a cam roller (FIG 4) surrounding the circular cam surface and having a sliding relationship to said circular cam surface (Page 3 Lines 2-3); a cam follower (40) surrounding the cam roller and including a first driven surface and a second driven surface (left and right sides of the space 41), said first and second driven surfaces arranged on diametrically opposite sides of said cam roller, said cam follower having a first end axially outward of said first driven surface and a second end axially outward of said second driven surface (FIG. 4-5), rotation of said cam shaft causing said cam follower to reciprocate along said drive axis between a first cam follower position and a second cam follower position (Page 2 Lines and Page 3 Lines 1-6); an energy accumulator (45) arranged at the second end of the cam follower, said energy accumulator comprising at least one bias element between the second end of the cam follower and the drive housing (element 45 is a spring; Page 3 Lines 7-10), movement of the cam follower from the first cam follower position to the second cam follower position compressing said at least one bias element and movement of the cam follower from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position allowing the at least one bias element to extend, thereby returning energy from the bias element to the cam follower to assist movement of the cam follower from the second cam follower position to the first cam follower position (Page 2 Lines 50-61 and Page 3 Lines 7-13);
PNG
media_image4.png
348
721
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Hales teaches a cam follower bore (18) complimentary to the follower (40), but does not teach a lubricant supply path as claimed (Hales teaches only that a lubrication can involve water when used as a pumped liquid, but is silent as to non-water lubrication);
Shimogawa teaches:
a fuel pump (FIG. 8-10) including a drive shaft (13), cam (38), and follower (44); and: a drive housing (25) defining a drive chamber (36) and an oil inlet (~48) communicating with the drive chamber (FIG. 8-10; C. 7 Lines 36-60); said cam shaft defining an oil flow passage (47) along a shaft axis; said cam including a radially extending oil passage (59-60) connecting the oil flow passage with the cam surface (C. 9 Lines 1-7) and an interface of the cam surface and cam roller lubricated with oil flowing through the oil flow passage and radially extending oil passage to the cam surface (see for example passage 48 and passage 49, and the arrows in FIG. 9; C. 9 Lines 8-13);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to provide a lubricating path in the pump of Hales, such as the shaft-based lubricant path of Shimogawa, in order to ensure lubrication to the relatively movable parts of the pump to reduce friction and the accompanying deleterious effects related thereto (particularly when pumping a non-water-based fluid).
Hales does not expressly teach said cam follower having an outside surface guided on a complementary surface of said drive housing for movement along a drive axis perpendicular to said shaft axis;
However, Shimogawa teaches that the follower (44) includes an outside surface (66) guided on a complimentary surface of drive housing (25) along an axis (of piston 22; C. 7 Lines 1-19);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to allow the follower of Hales to be guided axially within the housing, as taught by Shimogawa, in order to reduce movement of the follower away from the axis to create a more stable reciprocating motion.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB 1221827 (herein Hales) in view of Shimogawa et al (US Patent No. 9,879,643) in further view of Ohara et al (US Patent No. 4,360,324).
Hales teaches the limitations of claim 1 as above, and:
limitations from claim 10, an electric motor (Page 2 Lines 99-103) coupled to rotate said cam shaft (42); and a piston type fuel pump connected to said drive housing, said fuel pump comprising a pumping plunger (10) arranged to reciprocate on said drive axis between a plunger first position advanced into a pumping chamber and a plunger second position retracted from the pumping chamber (Page 2 Lines 1-18), wherein said pumping plunger is moved from the plunger second position to the plunger first position as the cam follower moves from the cam follower second position to the cam follower first position (Page 2 Lines 50-61 and Page 3 Lines 7-13);
Hales teaches a piston (10), but does not explicitly teach how the piston and follower (40) are coupled (it appears from FIG. 4 that the components are integral);
Shimogawa teaches:
wherein the pumping plunger (22) includes a driven end (right-hand side in FIG. 9) received in a recess (66) defined by the first end of the cam follower, the pumping plunger is biased toward the cam follower and the plunger second position by a plunger bias element (65) compressed between the fuel pump (72-73) and the driven end of the pumping plunger; said pumping plunger is moved from the plunger second position to the plunger first position as the cam follower moves from the cam follower second position to the cam follower first position (C. 6 Lines 34-42), a bias of the plunger bias element opposing movement of the pumping plunger from the plunger second position to the plunger first position (C. 7 Lines 20-33);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to substitute one known plunger-cam coupling assembly for another, such as the biased plunger of Shimogawa for the unbiased plunger of Hales, as a matter of design choice in order to reach an expected result (i.e. the driving of a plunger via a cam). Shimogawa further teaches that the use of a spring system allows for maintaining a coupling relationship between the piston and the follower (C. 7 Lines 31-33);
Hales teaches an electric motor (Page 2 Lines 99-103), but does not teach that the motor is a variable speed motor;
Ohara teaches a pump (for example FIG. 8) including a reciprocating member (138) biased via an accumulator (140) while being driven by a motor shaft (124) of a variable speed motor (90; C. 5 Lines 66-68 and C. 6 Lines 42-47 for example);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of pumps at the time the invention was filed to use a variable speed motor to drive the pump of Hales, as taught by Ohara, in order to more robustly control the driving speed and therefore the output of the pump.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection of claim 1 in view of Bertram and Shimogawa, the applicant argues:
“One skilled in the art would understand that a water pump for an expresso machine cannot be modified to include lubricating oil, which would contaminate water used to prepare coffee for human consumption.”. In response, the examiner maintains that the combination of Bertram and Shimogawa relies upon the lubricating structure of Shimogawa to provide additional friction-reducing effects within the pump, and that it is not necessary for the combination to be limited to a particular type of oil. One of ordinary skill, looking to add lubrication to the pump of Bertram, would not choose an oil that is unsafe for use with this particular pump but rather an oil compatible with both the pump components and the pump’s use (for example known food-grade oils). Further, the examiner notes that both Bertram and Shimogawa teach separate drive and compression chambers; Shimogawa specifically teaches returning the oil to an oil pan via exit ports 43 away from the compression chamber (and pumped fluid), rather than allowing mixing of the pumped fluid (fuel) and the oil.
“Further, there is no source or supply of such lubricating oil in an expresso machine as disclosed by Bertram, and the espresso machine would have to be heavily modified to include a supply of lubricating oil, increasing the cost and complexity of the espresso machine in a manner that would not be attempted by one skilled in the art.”. The examiner notes that, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, the benefit of lubricating relatively moveable surfaces is known in the art of pumps; for example, the reduction of friction, heat, and associated wear; Shimogawa provides a template for achieving these results.
“As shown in Shimogawa, Figures 8-10, the roller 45 rotates about the shaft 81 and does not surround a surface of the cam 38. Shimogawa does not disclose or suggest the relationship between the cam roller and cam surface required by claim 1.”. The examiner does not necessarily disagree that differences in the structure of Shimogawa and the claimed follower assembly exist; However, Shimogawa is not relied upon to teach all of the follower details claimed but instead modifies the primary prior art reference to Bertram. Bertram is relied upon to teach the structural details (cam roller and cam surface) at issue. Further, In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S BOBISH whose telephone number is (571)270-5289. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER S BOBISH/Examiner, Art Unit 3746