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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 9-20 in the reply filed on 4/13/26 is acknowledged.
The limitations of claim 1-8, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, is required for an allowable claim. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(a), the restriction requirement between inventions Track link structure and Track Link assembly, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 03/06/26, is hereby withdrawn and claims 1-8 hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. The combination track assembly requires the sub assembly track link of claim 1, so claim 1 is recited. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or non-statutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
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 sum of the heights H11 + H12 ≤ Hmax1 as set forth in claim 2; and the sum of the heights H21 + H22 ≤ Hmax2 as set forth in claim 11; must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
In figure 1, the height H11 and in figure 4, the height H21 are at one part of the link, whilst height H12 and H22 show the height at a different part. Therefore, it appears that in figure 1, H11 + H12 > Hmax1, and in figure 4: H21 + H22 > Hmax2. Namely, it appears that the sum of the aforementioned heights would be greater than maximum height of the master link rather than less than or equal to.
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 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.
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the relative heights of the connecting portions.
Claim 2 states: “the height of the first connecting portion (140) perpendicular to the major axis (L1) of the track link structure (100) is H11, the height of the second connecting portion (160) perpendicular to the major axis (L1) of the track ink structure (100) is H12, the maximum height of the track link structure (100) is Hmax1, and the following condition is satisfied: H11 + H12 ≤ Hmax1.” Comparing this feature to figures 1 and 2, however, the height H11 denotes the maximum height of the first connection portion on the outer surface of the link at one side of the first inclined plane portion, whilst height H12 denotes the maximum height of the second connection portion on the outer surface of the link at the other side of the second inclined plane portion. Therefore, using figure 1, it would appear that H11 + H12 > Hmax1.
Claim 11 states, “a height (H22) of the second binding portion (560) perpendicular to the major axis (L2) of the master link structure (300) is smaller than the maximum height (Hmax2) of the master link structure (300), wherein the following condition is satisfied: H21 + H22 ≤ Hmax2.” Again, comparing this to figure 4, it would appear that H21 + H22 > Hmax2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-20 are allowed.
Claims 2 and 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. (US 3096661, Reinsma), (US 20190351960, Trone), (US10407115, Johansen) and (US20080174175, Livesay), all teach a split master-link with at least one protruding structure. They also teach holes for pins and recesses for bushings, and a plurality of bolt holes to secure shoes and fasten the link together.
(US 20220033018, Chiang) and Trone teach a link with a reenforced pin eyelet.
(US 20200023914, Galet) teaches threaded track pins to allow the possibility of an endless track with functionally all Master-links.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOWARD BINNS whose telephone number is (571)272-9456. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 - 5:00.
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.
/HOWARD PATRICK BINNS/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/JASON R BELLINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights