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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(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):
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 1-18 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 Claim 1, the recitation “the clear inner diameter of the rotor-side toothed disk device” is indefinite, being the first use of the recitation. It is suggested by the Examiner to change the recitation to “a clear inner diameter of the rotor-side toothed disk device”, for greater clarity.
Regarding Claim 4, the recitation “the biasing force of at least one biasing device” lacks antecedent basis, having not been previously introduced in a prior claim. It is suggested by the Examiner to change the recitation to “a biasing force of at least one biasing device”
Regarding Claim 5, the recitation “the clear inner diameter of the hub-side toothed disk device” is indefinite, being the first use of the recitation. It is suggested by the Examiner to change the recitation to “a clear inner diameter of the hub-side toothed disk device”, for greater clarity.
Regarding Claim 8, the recitation “the sprocket accommodation”, lacks antecedent basis, having not been previously introduced in a prior claim. It is suggested by the Examiner to change the recitation to “a sprocket accommodation” for greater clarity.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, 11, 14-15, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CN-203344640-U to Li (“Li”).
Regarding Claim 1, Li (FOR “S” on PTO-892, English Translation “ET”, Pages Fig 1-9) discloses a hub for at least partially muscle-powered vehicles (“hub structure for a bicycle between rear wheel and flywheel”, Para 2), comprising a hub axle (1 “mandrel”); a hub shell (10 “hub main body”); a rotor (20 “sleeve”); and a freewheel device (30 “drive components of a single-component type, Para 45, Fig4 , 3a-3c, 6-9) wherein the hub shell is supported for rotation with at least two axially spaced apart hub bearings (), namely, at least one rotor-side hub bearing (left 34 “rotating member” in Annotated Fig 4 “AF4”, Para 45, 46) disposed closer to the rotor and at least one outer hub bearing (AF4 ) further distant from the rotor; and wherein the rotor is supported for rotation (AF4) with at least two axially spaced apart rotor bearings (“2 other rotor bearings” right AF4), namely, one hub-side rotor bearing (34 right “rotating member”, in AF4 Para 45, 46) disposed closer to the hub shell and at least one outer rotor bearing (far right of AF4) further distant from the hub shell; and wherein the freewheel device comprises a hub-side toothed disk (32 “first ratchet ring”) device coupled with (AF4) the hub shell, and a rotor-side toothed disk device (33 “second ratchet ring”) interacting therewith and coupled with (AF4) the rotor, each comprising an end toothing (323 “first teeth” on 32, 333 “second teeth” on 33, Fig 3a, Para 45) to engage with one another (Para 45, AF4), and biased to an engagement position (“engaged” Para 45, AF4) by means of at least one biasing device (two 35 “elastic member/piece”, Para 45, best Fig 3a-3c), wherein the end toothing (323 of 32, Fig 3a, AF4) of the hub-side toothed disk device is axially oriented to (3a, AF4) the rotor; and wherein the rotor-side toothed disk device is accommodated radially within (AF4) the rotor, and by way of an outer radial toothing (331 of 33, Fig 3a, 3b) with an inner radial toothing (22 in 20, Para 45, Fig 2) in the rotor is coupled with the rotor in a rotationally fixed manner (Para 45, Fig 2, AFT) in the driving direction, and wherein the end toothing (333, Fig 3a, 3b) of the rotor-side toothed disk device is axially oriented (333, Fig 3b) to the hub shell; and wherein a clear inner diameter of the rotor-side toothed disk device is larger than (evident in AF4 wherein the hub side rotor bearing is installed inside the rotor side toothed disk, thus the diameter of the former is less than that of the latter) the outer diameter of the hub-side rotor bearing.
PNG
media_image1.png
643
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein at least the end toothing (333 “second teeth” on 33) of the rotor-side toothed disk device is received radially (Fig 2) within (into 22 in 20) the hub shell.
Regarding Claim 3, Li discloses the hub according to claim 2, wherein the rotor-side toothed disk device, the hub-side rotor bearing, and a rotor-side hub flange (AF4) on the hub shell, are located on a shared plane of cross section (AF4) transverse to the longitudinal extension of the hub axle.
Regarding Claim 4, Li discloses the hub according claim 1, wherein the hub-side toothed disk device is accommodated radially within (AF4) the hub shell and is coupled to the hub shell in a rotationally fixed manner (via 321 on 32 to 131 “tooth/teeth” in 13 “annual sleeve member” with “external screw thread” coupled to mating threading in 12 of 10, Para 43, 44, 45, 2, 3a, AF4) in the driving direction via an outer radial toothing (321 and external screw thread on 13) on the hub-side toothed disk device, with an inner radial toothing (mating thread in 12 of 10, Fig 2) in the hub shell, and wherein both the hub-side toothed disk device and the rotor-side toothed disk device can be transferred from (Para 45) an engagement position (“engaged” shown AF4, Para 45) to a freewheel position (Para 50, Fig 6, 7), each against a of at least one biasing device (35).
Regarding Claim 5, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein a clear inner diameter of the hub-side toothed disk device is larger than the outer diameter of the rotor-side hub bearing (evident in AF4 wherein the rotor side hub bearing is installed inside the hub-side toothed disk, thus the diameter of the former is larger than that of the latter).
Regarding Claim 6, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein at least one hub bearing and at least one rotor bearing are configured as a roller bearing (34 shown to have a plurality of spherical roller ball bearings, Fig 2, AF4), each provided with a plurality of rolling members (AF4); wherein a central plane of cross section (AF4) through the rotor-side toothed disk device (33) intersects the rolling members (34 left AFA) of the hub- side rotor bearing; and wherein a central plane of cross section (AF4) through the hub- side toothed disk device (32) intersects the rolling members (34 right AFA) of the rotor-side hub bearing.
Regarding Claim 9, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein the hub-side toothed disk device comprises an outer radial toothing (321 on 32), which is engaged in an inner radial toothing (via 131 on 13 “annual sleeve member” with “external screw thread” [Fig 2] coupled to mating threading [Fig 2] in 12 of 10 in the hub shell, Para 43-45), relative to which it is axially movable (from engaged position AF4, Para 45 to disengaged position Fig 6, 7 Para 50); and wherein the inner radial toothing, with which the outer radial toothing of the hub-side toothed disk device (33) interacts, is configured on a threaded ring (13 “annular sleeve member”, Para 43, 44, 45, 50) screwed into the hub shell.
Regarding Claim 11, Li discloses the hub according to claim 9, wherein the threaded ring has a support portion (“support position” AF4) on the axially inner surface facing away from the rotor, which support portion bears against a correspondingly configured accommodation (axial face in hub abutted by support position, AF4) in the hub shell.
Regarding Claim 14, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein at least one toothed disk device comprises an engagement body (axially extending portion having of L-shaped portion of 32, 33, axially extending portion having axial length “AL”, AFA), on which the end toothing is configured over a radial height (RH, AF4), and the radial toothing is configured over an axial length, wherein the axial length is larger (AF4) than the radial height.
Regarding Claim 15, Li discloses the hub according to the claim 14, wherein the axial extension of the engagement body is larger than at least an axial width of a rolling member (axial width being same as the diameter of rolling members 34, AF4).
Regarding Claim 17, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein the distance (“distance” AF4) of the two planes of cross section is smaller than (AF4) the axial width of both the toothed disk devices (“2AW”, AF4) in the engaged position of the threaded ring.
Regarding Claim 18, Li discloses the hub according to claim 1, wherein the hub-side toothed disk device and the rotor-side toothed disk device are configured substantially the same; wherein at least one biasing device (two 35, each adjacent to 32, 33 ) is assigned to each of the two toothed disk devices, which floatingly urge (Para 45) the toothed disk devices to one another; and wherein both the biasing devices are configured substantially the same (Fig 3a, 3c, AF4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to disclose, teach or make obvious the following limits of Claims 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 16.
Regarding Claim 7, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the hub according to claim 6, wherein the axial distance of the central plane of cross section through the rotor-side toothed disk device, from the plane of cross section through the rolling members of the hub-side rotor bearing, is smaller than the diameter or the radius of a rolling member.
Regarding Claim 8, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the hub according to claim 1, wherein the outer diameter of the rotor-side toothed disk device and/or the outer diameter of the end toothing of the rotor-side toothed disk device is larger than the outer diameter of the sprocket accommodation.
Regarding Claim 10, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the hub according to claim 9, wherein the threaded ring on the axially outer surface has a central depression, into which a conical portion configured on the end face of the rotor plunges contactless.
Regarding Claim 12, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the hub according to claim 9, wherein the threaded ring is wider in the axial direction on the radially outer surface than on the radially inner surface.
Regarding Claim 13, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the hub according to claim 1, wherein the external thread of the threaded ring extends axially outwardly beyond the hub-side toothed disk device and up to radially beyond the rotor-side toothed disk device, which it partially overlaps.
Regarding Claim 16, the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the hub according to claim 14, wherein the distance of the two planes of cross section is smaller than the axial length of the radial toothing of an engagement body of at least one toothed disk device.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Walthert (US-20190225014-A1,EP-3517315-A1, EP-3275694-A1) , Spahr (EP-1121255-B1, EP-2559567-A2, EP-2559569-A2) disclose bicycle free wheel devices having toothed discs, roller bearings, biasing members in hub shell and rotor.
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