DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Claims 3, 13, 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/27/2026.
3. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 in the reply filed on 7/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-2, 4-12, 14-16 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the orifice comprises a first flow inlet having a first edge profile and a second flow inlet having a second edge profile such that fluid flowing through the orifice from the first flow inlet toward the second flow inlet exhibits a different pressure drop than fluid flowing through the orifice from the second flow inlet to the first flow inlet” (Lines 6-9). Claim 10 recites “wherein the orifice comprises a curved edge flow inlet and a square edge flow inlet such that fluid flowing through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet exhibits a different pressure drop than fluid flowing through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet” (Lines 4-8). Fluid velocity increases and pressure decreases when flowing from the larger first flow inlet (310) to smaller second flow inlet (320) and the reverse occurs when fluid flows in the opposite direction. The static pressure does not drop in response to flow in both flow directions as claimed, making the scope of the claims unclear. The Examiner suggests changing the word “drop” to --change--.
Claim 11 recites “wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet”. Claim 12 recites “wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet”. Each of the claims omits the requisite operating conditions to cause the claimed fluid flows. It is unclear what happens when the piston is stationary or moves in the opposite direction that the applicant likely intends.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claim(s) 1, 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wössner et al (US 3,993,294).
As per claim 1, Wössner et al discloses a hydraulic damper (Title) comprising:
a damper body (1) comprising a chamber (3); and
a shaft (2) telescopically engaged with the damper body; and
a piston (4) slidably disposed with the damper body and coupled to a first end (4, 2, Fig. 1) of the shaft, the piston comprising an orifice (5) for fluidly connecting the chamber to an interior (6) of the shaft,
wherein the orifice comprises a first flow inlet (5, Fig. 1 Detail) having a first edge profile (5) and a second flow inlet (5, Fig. 1 Detail) having a second edge profile (5) such that fluid flowing through the orifice from the first flow inlet toward the second flow inlet exhibits a different pressure drop than fluid flowing through the orifice from the second flow inlet to the first flow inlet (The inlet and outlet fluid speeds and pressures of axially-asymmetric passages are inherently different, 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
382
537
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 4, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, wherein the second edge profile is a square edge profile (5).
As per claim 5, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the first flow inlet toward the second flow inlet during a compression event (5).
As per claim 6, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the second flow inlet to the first flow inlet during a rebound event (5).
As per claim 7, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, further comprising a bumper (22) disposed at a second end of the shaft.
As per claim 8, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, further comprising: an internal piston (8) slidably disposed within the shaft.
As per claim 9, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, further comprising: a negative spring (12, 13) disposed between the shaft and the damper body.
9. Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sheng et al (CN 114922932).
As per claim 10, Sheng et al discloses a hydraulic damper ([0002]) comprising:
a damper body (Fig. 7) comprising a chamber (Fig. 7); and
a flow control device (8) disposed within the damper body, the flow control device comprising an orifice (Fig. 7, 8) for enabling fluid flow therethrough,
wherein the orifice comprises a curved edge flow inlet (21) and a square edge flow inlet (22) such that fluid flowing through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet exhibits a different pressure drop than fluid flowing through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet (The inlet and outlet fluid speeds and pressures of axially-asymmetric passages are inherently different, 21, 22, Fig. 2).
As per claim 11, Sheng et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 10, wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet (Fig. 7; [0034], [0053]).
As per claim 12, Sheng et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 10, wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet (Fig. 7; [0035], [0053]).
As per claim 15, Sheng et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 10, wherein said flow control device is coupled to an internal piston (9).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. Claim(s) 14 and16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheng et al (CN 114922932) in view of Marking (US 2011/0083929).
As per claim 14, Sheng et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 10, but does not disclose further comprising a bumper.
Marking discloses a fluid damper further comprising a bumper (150a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shock absorber of Sheng et al by adding an elastic bumper to the outer piston rod end as taught by Marking in order to prevent damage from bottoming out (Marking: [0015]).
As per claim 16, Sheng et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 10, but does not disclose further comprising: a negative spring disposed between the flow control device and the damper body.
Marking discloses a fluid damper further comprising: a negative spring (150b) disposed between the flow control device and the damper body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shock absorber of Sheng et al by adding an elastic bumper to the piston interior as taught by Marking in order to prevent damage from topping out (Marking: [0015]).
12. Claim(s) 2, 10-12, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wössner et al (US 3,993,294) in view of Sheng et al (CN 114922932).
As per claim 2, Wössner et al discloses the hydraulic damper of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the first edge profile is a curved edge profile.
Sheng et al discloses a one-way damping fluid element wherein the first edge profile is a curved edge profile (21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the throttling passage of Wössner et al by forming the conical opening with a curved profile as taught by Sheng et al in order to improve flow characteristics (Sheng et al: [0034]).
As per claim 10, Wössner et al discloses a hydraulic damper (Title) comprising:
a damper body (1) comprising a chamber (3); and
a flow control device (4) disposed within the damper body, the flow control device comprising an orifice (5) for enabling fluid flow therethrough,
wherein the orifice comprises a flow inlet (5) and a square edge flow inlet (5) such that fluid flowing through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet exhibits a different pressure drop than fluid flowing through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet (The inlet and outlet fluid speeds and pressures of axially-asymmetric passages are inherently different, 5). Wössner et al does not disclose wherein the orifice comprises a curved edge flow inlet.
Sheng et al discloses a one-way damping fluid element wherein the orifice comprises a curved edge flow inlet (21) and a square edge flow inlet (22) such that fluid flowing through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet exhibits a different pressure drop than fluid flowing through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet (The inlet and outlet fluid speeds and pressures of axially-asymmetric passages are inherently different, 21, 22, Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the throttling passage of Wössner et al by forming the conical opening with a curved profile as taught by Sheng et al in order to improve flow characteristics (Sheng et al: [0034]).
As per claim 11, Wössner et al and Sheng et al disclose the hydraulic damper of claim 10. Wössner et al further discloses wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the curved edge flow inlet toward the square edge flow inlet (5).
As per claim 12, Wössner et al and Sheng et al disclose the hydraulic damper of claim 10. Wössner et al further discloses wherein fluid flows through the orifice from the square edge flow inlet to the curved edge flow inlet (5).
As per claim 14, Wössner et al and Sheng et al disclose the hydraulic damper of claim 10. Wössner et al discloses further comprising a bumper (22).
As per claim 15, Wössner et al and Sheng et al disclose the hydraulic damper of claim 10. Wössner et al further discloses wherein said flow control device is coupled to an internal piston (8).
As per claim 16, Wössner et al and Sheng et al disclose the hydraulic damper of claim 10. Wössner et al discloses further comprising: a negative spring (12, 13) disposed between the flow control device and the damper body.
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shock absorbers
Robertson (US 2004/0004316).
Dohrmann et al (US 6,027,105).
Ayyildiz et al (US 5,443,146).
Wössner (US 5,064,030).
Dohrmann (US 4,988,081).
Haberl et al (DE 3506001).
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN M BOWES whose telephone number is (571)270-0460. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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.
STEPHEN M. BOWES IV
Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/STEPHEN M BOWES/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/BRADLEY T KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights