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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the lead line for claim 10 points to the body instead of the vehicle in figure 1. 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 Objections
Claims 5 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the entirety of peripheral body portion” should be changed to --the entirety of the peripheral body portion-- for grammatical purposes. Appropriate correction is required.
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 12-20 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.
Re: claim 12. The phrase “a knuckle” in line 6 from the bottom is indefinite. It is unclear whether the knuckle is intended to be the same or different from the earlier recited knuckle in line 3 of the claim.
Re: claim 17. The phrase “a wheel bearing” is indefinite. It is unclear whether the wheel bearing is intended to be the same or different from the earlier recited wheel bearing in claim 12.
The remaining claims are indefinite due to their dependency from claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 –
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 10-13, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO-03018376 (WO’376).
Re: claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 15, and 16. WO’376 shows in figure 14 a brake dust shield 336 for a wheel assembly of a vehicle, the brake dust shield comprising: a central body portion, as labeled, radially centered along a wheel axis in a first plane, as labeled, substantially perpendicular to the wheel axis; a peripheral body portion, as labeled, positioned radially outward from the central body portion disposed at least in part in a second plane, as labeled, spaced apart from the first plane along the wheel axis as shown, wherein the central body portion is operably coupled to the wheel assembly via a knuckle 302 of the wheel assembly, and wherein the peripheral body portion comprises a positive axial offset surface that is axially offset from the first plane in a direction extending away from a brake rotor 306.
See Next Page.
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Flange)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Connecting body portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st knuckle body portion)][AltContent: textbox (1st mounting plane)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Peripheral body portion (2nd plane))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Wheel axis)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Central body portion (1st plane))][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
627
395
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re: claims 6 and 17. WO’376 shows in figure 14 wherein the brake dust shield 336 and a wheel bearing 304 of the wheel assembly are operably coupled to the knuckle 302 at a first mounting plane, as labeled, of the wheel assembly, wherein the first mounting plane is disposed between the brake rotor 306 and a first knuckle body portion, as labeled.
Re: claims 8 and 19. WO’376 shows in figure 14 wherein the brake dust shield further comprises a connecting body portion, as labeled, wherein the central body portion and the peripheral body portion are operably coupled to each other via the connecting body portion as shown, and wherein the connecting body portion is angled between 20 degrees and 90 degrees relative to the first plane of the central body portion as shown.
Re: claims 10 and 20. WO’376 shows in figure 14 wherein the peripheral body portion, as labeled, is operably coupled to a flange, as labeled, extending away from a brake rotor and wherein the flange surrounds at least half of an outer edge of the peripheral body portion as shown in figure 13.
Re: claim 11. WO’376 shows in figures 13 and 14 wherein the brake dust shield surrounds at least 70% of the wheel bearing, as labeled, as particularly surrounding more than half as shown.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 3, 7, 14, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO’376 in view of US Patent 9239087 to Frantz et al.
Re: claims 3 and 4. WO’376 is silent with regard to the limitation wherein the central body is disposed within a brake rotor hat of the brake rotor and does not overlap with a friction ring of the brake rotor.
[AltContent: textbox (Acute angle)]Frantz et al. teach in figure 3 the use of a central body 8 and extending toward the central axis being disposed within the entrance of a brake rotor hat, as labeled, of a brake rotor and does not overlap with a friction ring, as labeled, of the brake rotor 4.
[AltContent: textbox (2nd plane)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Friction ring)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
487
371
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Brake rotor hat)]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the arrangement of the central body with respect to brake rotor and the friction ring of WO’376 to have been as recited, in view of the teachings of Frantz et al., in order to provide a means of better shielding components of inner brake rotor area from debris, water, etc. to avoid overlapping with the friction ring to help prevent the blocking of airflow.
Re: claims 7 and 18. WO’376 shows in figure 14 the limitation wherein the positive axial offset surface, as labeled, and including the flange in this interpretation is disposed radially outward with respect to a remainder portion of the peripheral body portion which includes the connecting body portion in this interpretation and extends from the connecting body portion of the peripheral body portion away from the brake rotor 306, but is silent with regard to the limitation wherein the positive axial offset surface is disposed in a portion of the peripheral body portion that extends away at an acute angle from the second plane.
Frantz et al. teach in annotated figure 3 the use of a positive axial offset surface or the inclined surface shown connected to the end of the lead line of 6 extending away from a second plane of a dust shield at an acute angle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the positive axial offset surface of WO’376 to have extended away from a second plane of the dust shield at an acute angle, in view of the teachings of Frantz et al., in order to provide a means of promoting better airflow and to deflect debris instead of trapping it.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO’376 in view of CN-217814675 (CN’675).
WO’376 shows in figure 14 wherein the positive axial offset surface is axially offset from the first plane in a direction away from the brake rotor by at least a given number of millimeters, but is silent with regard to the range of millimeters being at least 5 mm.
CN’675 teaches in claim 1 the use of a mounting block 4 on one plane of a dust shield shown in figure 1 is 4-7mm higher than a mounting or another plane of the dust shield (the 6-7mm satisfies the at least 5 mm recitation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the range of millimeters between the first plane and the positive axial offset surface of WO’376 to have been at least 5mm, in view of the teachings of CN’675, in order to provide a means improving airflow and preventing contact with surrounding components under load with spatial gaps. Also see In re Aller. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent applications, patent, and foreign patents: US20200116221, US 20180094684, US20020174543, US4540069, FR2803643, and JPS61140228 teach the use of similar brake dust shields.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY M BURCH whose telephone number is (571)272-7114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30AM-3PM, generally.
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.
mmb
March 21, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616