Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 10-13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (CN-204150022-U).
Regarding Claim 1, Wang (CN-204150022-U) discloses a noise suppression system for a vehicle (Para. 0019; Fig. 1-2) comprising:
a halfshaft configured for a driveline of the vehicle, the halfshaft having a surface (Shaft 2 with surface 210; Para. 0019; Fig. 2-3. 2 having structure of halfshaft of a driveline via its connection to wheel hub);
a wheel hub and bearing assembly configured to be coupled with the halfshaft (1 couples to 2; Fig. 3), the wheel hub and bearing assembly including a wall contacting the surface at an interface (1 with wall contacting above 210 as an interface; Para. 0023; Fig. 3), wherein at least one of the wall and the halfshaft defines a groove (Shaft 2 with groove 5; Para. 0023; Fig. 3); and
a ring configured to be compressed in the groove between the halfshaft and the wheel hub and bearing assembly (72 of ring 7 in groove 5 between shaft 2 and hub 1; Para. Para. 0023; Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 2, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1, wherein the ring comprises a compliant, resilient material (Structure of 7 of elastic metal or high strength composite; Para. 0024; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 3, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1, wherein a gap is defined between the halfshaft and the wheel hub and bearing assembly, the gap disposed around, and radially outward from, the ring (See gap A between 2 and 1 with A disposed around and radially outward from ring 7 in Examiner Annotated Wang Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
639
710
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Wang Fig. 3
Regarding Claim 8, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1, wherein the surface of the halfshaft is disposed normal to a centerline of the halfshaft (Surface 210 of shaft 2 normal to centerline though 21 and 2 of Fig. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 10, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1, wherein the ring has a cross sectional shape that tapers in an axial direction (72 of ring 7 tapers axially; Fig. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 11, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 1. Claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Regarding Claim 12, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 2. Claim 12 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 2; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Regarding Claim 13, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 3. Claim 13 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 3; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Regarding Claim 18, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 8. Claim 18 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 8; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
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) 4, 6, 14, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN-204150022-U) in view of Ouchi (US-7125171-B2).
Regarding Claim 4, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1, comprising a fastener configured to secure the wheel hub and bearing assembly to the halfshaft (Fastener 3 secures 1 to 2; Para. 0019; Fig. 2). Wang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the fastener (3) is torqued to a selected torque value that optimizes noise suppression.
However, Ouchi (US-7125171-B2) teaches wherein the fastener is torqued to a selected torque value that optimizes noise suppression (Ouchi: Average surface pressure low suppresses unpleasant noise, requires tightening force (torque) of fastener 24 to be low, and regulating noised based on tightening force; Col. 10, Lines 50-67; Col. 11; Col. 12, Lines 1-20; Fig. 2). Ouchi and Wang are in similar fields comprising fasteners securing a wheel hub and bearing assembly to a halfshaft. Modifying Wang with teachings of Ouchi would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the fastener is torqued to a selected torque value that optimizes noise suppression for the purpose of reducing rubbing energy of adjacent contacting surfaces due to twisting deformation (Ouchi: Col. 11, Lines 15-60).
Regarding Claim 6, Wang as modified by Ouchi disclose the noise suppression system of claim 4, wherein the fastener is torqued to a selected torque value (Selected torque of Ouchi for example between 3.5KN-40KN; Col. 11, Lines 1-5; Col. 12, Lines 15-20). Wang as modified by Ouchi fail to explicitly disclose wherein the selected torque value is approximately twenty percent to thirty percent of a conventional torque valve. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of preventing loosening of components while suppressing desired noise (Ouchi: Col. 11, Lines 1-5; Col. 12, Lines 15-20), since it has been held that discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the Art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 14, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 4; Claim 14 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 4; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Regarding Claim 16, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 6. Claim 16 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 6; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Regarding Claim 20, Wang (CN-204150022-U) discloses a noise suppression system for a vehicle (Para. 0019; Fig. 1-2) comprising:
a driveline of the vehicle that includes a halfshaft, the halfshaft having a surface defining an annular shape around the halfshaft (Shaft 2 with surface 210; Para. 0019; Fig. 2-3. 2 having structure of halfshaft of a driveline via its connection to wheel hub. Surface 210 annular; Para. 0023);
a wheel hub and bearing assembly coupled with the halfshaft (1 couples to 2; Fig. 3), the wheel hub and bearing assembly having a wall contacting the surface at an interface (1 with wall contacting above 210 as an interface; Para. 0023; Fig. 3), wherein at least one of the wall and the surface defines a groove (Shaft 2 with groove 5; Para. 0023; Fig. 3);
a fastener configured to retain the wheel hub and bearing assembly to the halfshaft (Fastener 3 retains 1 to 2; Para. 0019; Fig. 2; and
a compliant ring compressed, in the groove between the halfshaft and the wheel hub and bearing assembly (Structure of ring 7 of elastic metal or high strength composite as compliant in groove 5 between 2 and 1; Para. 0024; Fig. 3).
Wang fails to explicitly disclose the wheel hub and bearing assembly (1; Fig. 3) including a hub body having a wall contacting the surface at an interface (1 with wall contacting above 210 as an interface; Para. 0023; Fig. 3) and a compliant ring compressed (7; Fig. 3), by a torquing of the fastener. However, Ouchi (US-7125171-B2) teaches the wheel hub and bearing assembly including a hub body having a wall contacting the surface at an interface and a torquing of the fastener (Ouchi: Hub body 4 with wall 30 contacting surface at interface 32; Torquing of fastener 24 brings 30 and 32 together; Col. 10, Lines 50-67; Col. 11; Col. 12, Lines 1-20; Fig. 2). Ouchi and Wang are in similar fields comprising fasteners securing a wheel hub and bearing assembly to a halfshaft. Modifying Wang with teachings of Ouchi would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the wheel hub and bearing assembly including a hub body having a wall contacting the surface at an interface and a compliant ring compressed, by a torquing of the fastener for the purpose of desired noise suppression by optimizing rubbing energy of the hub body against the interface due to twisting deformation (Ouchi: Col. 11, Lines 15-60).
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN-204150022-U) in view of Ouchi (US-7125171-B2) and Mizukoshi et al. (US-6286909-B1).
Regarding Claim 5, Wang as modified by Ouchi disclose the noise suppression system of claim 4, wherein the selected torque value is selected so that the wall contacts the surface (Selected torque of Ouchi (Col. 11, Lines 15-60) with wall contacting surface 210 of Wang; Fig. 3). Wang as modified by Ouchi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the selected torque value is selected so that the wall contacts the surface and compresses the ring fully into the groove.
However, Mizukoshi et al. (US-6286909-B1) teaches so that the wall contacts the surface and compresses the ring fully into the groove (Mizukoshi: Wall 27 abuts/contacts surface of 11 and compresses ring 41 into groove 42; Col. 16, Lines 45-67; Fig. 7). Mizukoshi et al., Ouchi, and Wang are in similar fields comprising a wheel hub and bearing assembly attached to a halfshaft. Modifying Wang as modified by Ouchi with teachings of Mizukoshi et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventions wherein the selected torque value is selected so that the wall contacts the surface and compresses the ring fully into the groove for the purpose of preventing the halfshaft from being displaced and causing noise (Mizukoshi: Col. 16, Lines 63-67; Col. 17, Lines 1-17).
Regarding Claim 15, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 5. Claim 15 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 5; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Claim(s) 7, 9, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN-204150022-U) in view of Mizukoshi et al. (US-6286909-B1).
Regarding Claim 7, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1, comprising a splined shaft on the halfshaft (Spline 4 on shaft 2; Para. 0019; Fig. 2). Wang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the ring (7) is configured to seal the interface (Between 210 and 1; Fig. 3) and the splined shaft (4).
However, Mizukoshi et al. (US-6286909-B1) teaches wherein the ring is configured to seal the interface and the splined shaft (Mizukoshi: Ring 41 seals interface around 42 and splined shaft 30 due to wall 27 abuts surface of 11 and compresses ring 41 into groove 42; Col. 16, Lines 45-67; Fig. 7). Mizukoshi et al. and Wang are in similar fields comprising a wheel hub and bearing assembly attached to a halfshaft. Modifying Wang with teachings of Mizukoshi et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventions wherein the ring is configured to seal the interface and the splined shaft for the purpose of preventing the splined shaft from being displaced and causing noise (Mizukoshi: Col. 16, Lines 63-67; Col. 17, Lines 1-17).
Regarding Claim 9, Wang discloses the noise suppression system of claim 1. Wang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the wheel hub and bearing assembly (1; Fig. 2) comprises a hub assembly with a hub body and a bearing assembly disposed around the hub body, wherein the wall (Above 210; Fig. 3) is disposed at an inboard end of the hub body where the inboard end is located inboard relative to the vehicle.
However, Mizukoshi et al. (US-6286909-B1) teaches a hub assembly with a hub body and a bearing assembly disposed around the hub body, wherein the wall is disposed at an inboard end of the hub body where the inboard end is located inboard relative to the vehicle (Mizukoshi: Hub body 6a and bearing assembly between 1 and 50 disposed around hub body 6a, wherein wall 27 disposed at inboard end of hub body 6a; Col. 8, Lines 50-67; Col. 9, Lines 1-10; Fig. 3,7). Mizukoshi et al. and Wang are in similar fields comprising a wheel hub and bearing assembly attached to a halfshaft. Modifying Wang with teachings of Mizukoshi et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventions wherein a hub assembly with a hub body and a bearing assembly disposed around the hub body for the purpose of rotatably supporting the hub assembly (Mizukoshi: Col. 9, Lines 1-10), wherein the wall is disposed at an inboard end of the hub body where the inboard end is located inboard relative to the vehicle for the purpose of preventing the halfshaft from being displaced and causing noise (Mizukoshi: Col. 16, Lines 63-67; Col. 17, Lines 1-17).
Regarding Claim 17, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 7. Claim 17 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 7; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Regarding Claim 19, please note the rejection as set forth above with respect to claim 9. Claim 19 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 9; detailed discussion is omitted for brevity.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US-8770672-B2, US-6786645-B2, US-10618350-B2, US-20220203762-A1, US-8893364-B2, US-8616779-B2, WO-2023082791-A1, CN-208498141-U, CN-208858741-U.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER B OLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3041. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am -4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571)270-7938. 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.
/JENNIFER B OLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837