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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 8-10 ad 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anno (2020/0031164).
Per claims 8 and 16, Anno shows a bearing device (i.e. a wheel bearing hub) having an outer member 10 with a double row outer raceway 13 on an inner periphery, an inner member 11 having a double row inner raceway (11a, 11b) facing the outer raceway 13. Double row rolling elements K are disposed between the outer 13 and inner (11a, 11b) raceways. The inner member 11 includes a wheel mounting flange 27 including a plurality of screw holes 28 into which wheel bolts are screwed, said bolts securing a wheel and brake rotor. Ribs 36 are provided on inner-side circumferential edges of the screw holes 28. The flange 27 further includes a screw hole 43 into which a bolt is screwed to fix only the brake rotor.
Regarding claim 16, Anno does not show a plurality of holes to which only the brake rotor is fixed on the flange. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include more than one (i.e. a plurality) brake rotor only holes in the hub flange of Anno, as a multiplication of parts, for the purpose of preventing the brake rotor from shifting position on the flange prior to the wheel being fully installed on the hub flange, thus preventing binding or damage to either the wheel or the brake rotor.
Regarding claims 8-10 and 12-14, Anno does not specify the dimensions of the wheel stud holes, ribs, or the flange. While not disclosed as being to scale, the diameter of bolt holes 28 of Anno are equal to a commonly known wheel bolt stud used in the art (namely, 12mm). Therefore, it appears that the drawings of Anno are to scale. Thus, the ratio of the width of the rib 36 with respect to the nominal diameter of the wheel bolt screw hole 28, the ratio of the thickness of the rib 36 (i.e. the total thickness of the flange at area of the rib) with respect to the nominal diameter of the screw hole 28, and the ratio of the thickness of the mounting flange 27 without the rib with respect to the thickness of the rib 36 all fall within the claimed ranges. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to form the features of the flange of Anno with dimensions suitable to secure a wheel and brake rotor thereto without the flange warping or failing during use, dependent on weight and durability constraints, and the type of vehicle on which the wheel bearing hub is mounted.
Regarding claims 16-17, Anno does not specify the dimensions of the brake rotor screw holes, ribs, or the flange. While not disclosed as being to scale, the diameter of bolt holes 28 of Anno are equal to a commonly known wheel bolt stud used in the art (namely, 12mm). Therefore, it appears that the drawings of Anno are to scale. Thus, the ratio of the width of the rib 42 with respect to the nominal diameter of the brake rotor screw hole 43, the ratio of the thickness of the rib 42 (i.e. the total thickness of the flange at area of the rib) with respect to the nominal diameter of the screw hole 43, and the ratio of the thickness of the mounting flange 27 without the rib with respect to the thickness of the rib 42 all fall within the claimed ranges. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found in obvious to form the features of the flange of Anno with dimensions suitable to secure a wheel and brake rotor thereto without the flange warping or failing during use, dependent on weight and durability constraints, and the type of vehicle on which the wheel bearing hub is mounted.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anno as applied to claims 8-10 and 12-16 above, and further in view of Tajima et al (6,309,110).
Anno does not disclose that a deflection of a region on an outer side surface of the wheel mounting flange 27 on a radially outer side of the pitch circle of the wheel mounting screw hole 28 is 50 µm or less.
Tajima et al teaches the use of a wheel bearing hub 1 having a wheel and brake rotor mounting flange 2 wherein the runout (or deflection) of the axially outer surface of the brake rotor 20 is less than 50 µm once the rotor is mounted on the flange. 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 a reasonable expectation of success to hold a deflection of outer side surface of the wheel mounting flange of Anno to be less than 50 µm, for the purpose of keeping the brake rotor substantially perpendicular to the rotational axis of the wheel bearing hub, thus allowing the largest surface area of the brake rotor to contact the brake pads of a brake caliper, thus maximizing braking force of the vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 24 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that the claimed ratios “have technical significance” and “cannot be dismissed as mere design modifications”. The Applicant also argues that the “claimed ratios are not arbitrary design parameters”. However, the Applicant has failed to provide any evidence (test data, etc.), in the form of a declaration or affidavit filed under 37 CFR 1.131 or 1.132, to support these arguments of alleged criticality of the claimed ratios.
The Applicant argues that Anno “provides no disclosure of specific dimensional relationships among the rib width, flange thickness, and screw hole nominal diameter” and that the “assertion that such ratios fall within the claimed ranges is unsupported by any actual measurement or scale-verified analysis of the figures of Anno”. However, measurement of the various features of Anno (rib width, flange thickness, screw hole diameter) was performed (see annotated Figure 3 below), which shows that the diameter of the screw hole 28 is 12mm, which is a commonly known and used wheel stud diameter in the art. Therefore, the drawing figures of Anno appear to be roughly to scale and meet the claimed ratios. Furthermore, the rejection sets forth rationale from one of ordinary skill in the art regarding how these ratios and dimensions are dependent upon the size of the vehicle on which the wheel bearing hub is used.
PNG
media_image1.png
1855
1430
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
Prosecution Insights