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 of the following informalities:
The lead line for reference character 102 in Fig. 2 is not directed to the “inner surface” of the endless track as described in the specification.
The lead line for reference character 104 in Fig. 2 is not directed to the “outer surface” of the endless track as described in the specification.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "100" and "730" have both been used to designate the same structure in Fig. 15B as evident from the sharing of the same lead line.
Each distinct part, including modified parts, should be labeled with a distinct reference character to be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.84(p). Note at least the following informalities:
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in embodiment of Fig. 8B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the parts labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 7B.
The parts labeled with reference characters 100, 136a and 136b in the embodiment shown in embodiment of Fig. 9B are distinct (i.e., modified) from the parts labeled with these same reference characters in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 7B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 10B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 7B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 11B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 10B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 12B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 11B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 13B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 12B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 14B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 13B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 15B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 14B.
The part labeled with reference character 100 in the embodiment shown in Fig. 16B is distinct (i.e., modified) from the part labeled with this same reference character in at least the embodiment shown in Fig. 15B.
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 § 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 –
(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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 12-14 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Helsper (DE 4014790 C1).
Regarding claim 1, Helsper discloses a reinforcement member 3 configured to be at least partially embedded in a continuous body of an endless track 8 (Fig. 1), comprising: a tubular (note that inasmuch as the body comprised of 9, 12 and 13 includes openings 19 that are long, round, and hollow like a tube, the body is considered to be tubular) and elongated body (comprised of 9, 12 and 13) having: an upper face (unlabeled upper surface of 9 in Figs. 1-3), a lower face (unlabeled lower surfacer of 12 and 13 in Figs. 1-3) opposite from the upper face, each of the upper and lower faces having a depth (dimension either in the thickness direction shown in Fig. 2 or dimension in the longitudinal direction of the track) and a length (dimension shown in widthwise direction best shown in Fig. 2) greater than the depth (Fig. 2), a central portion at 6 configured to be laterally centered in the continuous body (Figs. 1 and 2) and a lateral arm (leg 12 and “left” side portion of 9 as shown in Fig. 2; leg 13 and “right” side portion of 9 as shown in Fig. 2) extending from each side thereof (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Helsper further discloses the reinforcement member is made of a metallic material (“steel” per Title and Abstract).
Regarding claim 3, Helsper further discloses the metallic material is one of aluminum and high strength steel alloy (evident from Title and Abstract).
Regarding claim 4, Helsper further discloses the reinforcement member formed of a unitary metal (“one-piece casting” per Abstract) so that opposite long edges 20, 21 of the metal are brought in proximity to one another to form a junction at 20, 21 along the length on the lower face of the reinforcement member (Figs. 1-3). Note the specific method (i.e., stamping by a unitary metal sheet) by which the reinforcement is formed is not afforded full patentable weight in a product claim (See MPEP 2113).
Regarding claim 7, Helsper further discloses least one of the upper face and the lower face includes an elongated bulge 6 (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Helsper further discloses a pair of elongated grooves (unlabeled circular groove at each end 10, 11 best shown in Figs. 1 and 3) formed on both sides 10, 11 of a junction on the lower face of the reinforcement member (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 13, Helsper further discloses a pair of apertures (unlabeled aperture that extends through the upper face of the reinforcement member at clamp seat 6 as shown in Figs. 1-3 and the unlabeled aperture that extends through the lower face between free ends 20 and 21 as shown in Figs. 1-3) extending through the upper and lower faces of the reinforcement member (Figs. 1-3), the apertures being located proximal to distal ends of the reinforcement member (i.e., both apertures of the claimed pair are located near the distal ends at 20, 21 of the reinforcement member as shown in Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 14, Helsper further discloses the tubular and elongated body defines a pair of oppositely curved and elongated surfaces (at 15 on each end of the body in the width direction as shown in Fig. 2) joining the upper and lower faces of the reinforcement member (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 40, Helsper further discloses an endless track 8 for a tracked vehicle (“Vehicle” per Title), the track being disposed around at least a driving wheel assembly (not shown, but implicit from at least the use of the “chain guide sprocket 2” and a plurality of idler wheel assemblies (not shown, but implicit structure of the tracked vehicle as evident from at least the Title and Figs. 1-3), the endless track comprising: an inner surface (unlabeled upper surface of 8 shown in Fig. 1) engageable (i.e., capable of being engaged) by the driving wheel assembly and by the idler wheel assemblies (evident from Fig. 1), an outer surface (unlabeled lower surface of 8 shown in Fig. 1) engageable (i.e., capable of being engaged) to a ground surface (Fig. 1), one or more lugs 2 projecting from the inner surface and configured to (i.e., capable of) transmit driving power from the driving wheel assembly to the endless track (evident from at least Fig. 1 that the “chain guide sprocket 2” is capable of transmitting driving power from the drive wheel assembly to the endless track), and one or more reinforcement members 3, each reinforcement member being embedded in a carcass of the endless track (evident from Fig. 1), the length of the reinforcement member being oriented along a track width of the endless track (Fig. 1), each reinforcement member being aligned with a corresponding one 2 of the one or more lugs (Fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 8-10, 15, 18, 19, 21 and 23 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 13 March 2026, with respect to the rejections of newly amended independent claim 1 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Junginger and Oyama have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims as noted in the previous office action under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Junginger and Oyama have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejection of newly amended independent claim 1 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Helsper have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant argues that the cross-member or reinforcement member 3 of Helsper is not tubular. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted above, inasmuch as the body of the reinforcement member 3 comprised of 9, 12 and 13 includes openings 19 that are long, round, and hollow like a tube, the body can reasonably be considered to be tubular.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIP T KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7953. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Samuel (Joe) J 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.
/Kip T Kotter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615