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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "203a" and "203" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "203b" and "203" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "20" and "2" have both been used to designate the same element in Figures 11-12.
Reference characters "302" and "300" have both been used to designate the same element in Figures 13B, and 14A-C.
Reference characters cannot share the same leader line. Furthermore, reference characters denoting an overall element should include an arrowhead at the end of its leader line.
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. 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.
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1-3 and 11-12 appear to be photocopies of actual photographs, which are blurry and dark, thus making it difficult to decern the details of the invention.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: It is believed that the term “rod” in the phrase “rod shape” should be replaced with the term - -cylindrical- - throughout the specification, to more accurately define the invention.
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 1-20 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.
Claims 5, 11, 14, 16 and 20 are indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the “to be integrated”. This phrase appears incomplete, or may be the result of a literal translation of a foreign document (see section 7 below).
Claim 7 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the limitation that the nonwoven fabric is embedded in grooves of the body springs “in a rounded rod shape”. It appears that the phrase “rounded rod” should be replaced with the term - -cylindrical- - to more clearly define the invention.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
A non-limiting example of narrative and indefinite language is the phrase “in such a manner” in claims 7-8.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 13-14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brϋck et al (7,833,319).
Per claim 1, Brϋck et al discloses a nonwoven body 1 formed of a plurality of metal fibers 2, each having a cross section orthogonal to a longitudinal direction, with the cross section having a convex polygonal profile (see Figure 6).
Per claim 3, the metal fibers 2 may be an aluminum alloy.
Per claims 4 and 13, the nonwoven body 1 is only constituted of the plurality of metal fibers 2.
Per claims 5, 14, and 16, the metal fibers are mechanically tangled with each other.
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) 2, 9-11, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brϋck et al.
Regarding claim 2, Brϋck et al does not show the cross section of each metal fiber being rectangle. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success, to form the cross section of each metal fiber of any convex polygonal shape, as functional equivalents, dependent upon availability and cost.
Per claim 9, the metal fibers may be formed of aluminum alloy.
Per claims 10 and 19, the nonwoven body is constituted of only the metal fibers.
Per claim 11 and 20, the metal fibers are mechanically tangled with each other.
Claim(s) 6, 12, 15, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brϋck et al as applied to claims 1-5, 9-11, 13-14, 16, and 19-20 above, and further in view of Kemmerich (1,217,461).
Brϋck et al does not show or disclose the nonwoven fabric being used as part of a tire. Kemmerich teaches the use of a tire including a skeleton portion including a rim member 6, a plurality of body springs 1 and a plurality of interlink springs 2 interlaced with the body springs 1; and a tread member may be disposed on at least an outer periphery of the skeleton portion (lines 60-65). Therefore, from this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and with reasonable expectation of success, to utilize the nonwoven fabric of Brϋck et al as the tread member of Kemmerich, for the purpose of rendering the outer surface smoother (i.e. protecting the surface on which the tire moves from damage, and prevent debris from being lodged in the springs) and to protect the springs of the tire from oxidation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 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. The references show the structure of tires formed of interlaced springs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R BELLINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6680. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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) 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.
/JASON R BELLINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615