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 . Claims 1-17 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “shaft”, “top portion” and “bottom portion” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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 1-6 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Berres et al. (US 20250012119 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
385
410
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
464
637
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Berres discloses a sealing cover (housing 3, fig. 1) for an actuator motor in a vehicle (see the title: “ACTUATOR FOR MOTOR VEHICLE APPLICATIONS”), the sealing cover comprising:
a base part (base, annotated fig. 2) to enclose a top portion and a bottom portion of the actuator motor (see fig. 1 and annotated fig. 2);
a first web (first web, annotated fig. 2) extending from the base part in a direction perpendicular to the base part, wherein the first web is to partially enclose a first side portion of the actuator motor (see figs. 1 and 2);
a second web (second web, annotated fig. 2) extending from the base part in a direction perpendicular to the base part and being parallel to the first web, wherein the second web is to partially enclose a second side portion of the actuator motor, the second side portion being opposite to the first side portion, wherein the first side portion and the second side portion are perpendicular to the top portion and the bottom portion (see figs. 1 and 2), wherein the first web and the second web are to enable tight gripping of the sealing cover over the actuator motor (via clip connections 8 and 9, fig. 1); and
a bellows (bellows, annotated fig. 2) extending from the base part to enclose at least a portion of a shaft (shaft, annotated fig. 2) of the actuator motor (see annotated fig. 2), wherein the bellows is to absorb vibration of the actuator motor and to enable holding of the sealing cover (implied).
Regarding claim 2, Berres discloses the sealing cover as claimed in claim 1 comprising at least one stepped section (stepped section, annotated fig. 2) to correspond to a stepped section of the actuator motor.
Regarding claim 3, Berres discloses the sealing cover as claimed in claim 1, wherein the base part, the first web, and the second web forms a U-shaped section (see annotated fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Berres discloses the sealing cover as claimed in claim 1, comprising a ball ring (ball ring, annotated fig. 2) to provide geometrical stability of the sealing cover and to enhance sealing engagement of the sealing cover with the actuator motor, wherein the ball ring is disposable over a neck (neck, annotated fig. 2) of the actuator motor, and wherein the shaft of the actuator motor protrudes out of the actuator motor through the neck (see annotated fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Berres discloses the sealing cover as claimed in claim 4, wherein the ball ring is substantially ring-shaped (implied because the shaft goes through it; see also fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Berres discloses the sealing cover as claimed in claim 4, wherein the ball ring has a substantially circular cross-section (implied, a ring has a circular cross-section).
Regarding claim 9, Berres , discloses an actuator motor assembly for vehicles (fig. 1), comprising:
an actuator motor for actuation of at least one component of a vehicle (para [0028]: “Generally, vehicles use actuator motors for various purposes. For example, actuator motors are used as a driving source to propel the vehicle, as a part of a starter assembly to start the vehicle, as a part of windshield wiper assembly to actuate windshield wiper, powering opening and closing of windows, in flush door handles to power opening and closing of doors, in fuel fillers, in charge port housings, and so on.”), wherein the actuator motor comprises:
a top portion (top portion, annotated fig. 2);
a bottom portion opposite to the top portion (bottom portion, annotated fig. 2);
a first side portion (first side, annotated fig. 2);
a second side portion (second side, annotated fig. 2), wherein the second side portion is opposite to the first side portion, wherein the first side portion and the second side portion are perpendicular to the top portion and the bottom portion; and
a shaft (shaft, annotated fig. 2) to transfer motion from the actuator motor to the at least one component of the vehicle (implied), wherein at least a portion of the shaft protrudes out from the actuator motor (see annotated fig. 2);
(and as disclosed regarding claim 1):
a sealing cover removably disposed over the actuator motor to protect the actuator motor from ingress, wherein the sealing cover comprises:
a base part to enclose the top portion and the bottom portion of the actuator motor;
a first web extending from the base part in a direction perpendicular to the base part, wherein the first web is to partially enclose the first side portion of the actuator motor;
a second web extending from the base part in a direction perpendicular to the base part and being parallel to the first web, wherein the second web is to partially enclose the second side portion of the actuator motor, wherein the first web and the second web are to enable tight gripping of the sealing cover over the actuator motor; and
a bellows to absorb vibration of the actuator motor and to enable holding of the sealing cover and to enclose at least a portion of the shaft of the actuator motor.
Regarding claim 10, Berres discloses the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claim 9, wherein the sealing cover comprises at least one stepped section to correspond to a stepped section of the actuator motor (discussed and showed regarding claim 2).
Regarding claim 11, Berres discloses the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claim 9, wherein the base part, the first web, and the second web forms a U-shaped section (discussed and showed regarding claim 3).
Regarding claim 12, Berres discloses the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claim 9, wherein the shape of the sealing cover corresponds substantially to the shape of the actuator motor (see fig. 2, the housing shape matches that of the actuator).
Regarding claim 13, Berres discloses the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claim 9, wherein the sealing cover comprises a ball ring to provide geometrical stability of the sealing cover and to enhance sealing engagement of the sealing cover with the actuator motor, and wherein the ball ring is disposable over a neck of the actuator motor, wherein the shaft of the actuator motor protrudes out of the actuator motor through the neck (discussed and showed regarding claim 4).
Regarding claim 14, Berres discloses the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claim 13, wherein the ball ring is substantially ring-shaped (discussed and showed regarding claim 5).
Regarding claim 15, Berres discloses the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claim 13, wherein the ball ring has a substantially circular cross-section (discussed and showed regarding claim 6).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berres et al. (US 20250012119 A1) in view of Knepper et al. (US 20210222775 A1).
Regarding claim 7 and 16, Berres discloses the sealing cover and the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claims 1 and 9, respectively, but does not disclose: wherein the sealing cover is made of at least one of: ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) and silicone rubber.
Selecting a sealing cover material is within the skills of a person having ordinary skills in the art. As an evidence, Knepper teaches a component assembly that includes an actuator for a motor vehicle (see the abstract) wherein for a sealing cover EPDM or silicone rubber is used (see para [0064]: “[0064] The material of the elastomer can be different from the material of the third sealing element, for example. The elastomer can have or comprise, respectively, merely for example natural rubber, rubber, ethylene-propylene-diene-monomer rubber (EPDM) or silicone, or largely (to the extent of more than 50%) comprise or be composed of one of these materials. It is understood that other materials can also be selected for the elastomer, depending on the application conditions.”)
For sealing the actuator from ingress, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose a sealing cover material that is made of at least one of: ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) and silicone rubber.
Claim(s) 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berres et al. (US 20250012119 A1) in view of Schaupp, J. (US 20050023369 A1).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Berres discloses the sealing cover and the actuator motor assembly as claimed in claims 1 and 9, respectively, but does not disclose: wherein material of the sealing cover has shore A hardness of about 41, tensile strength of about 9 MPa, elongation at break of about 690%, a tear strength of about 15 KN/m, and stability up to 20° C.
The above mentioned parameters are result effective variables and determination their operating ranges are within the skills of a person having ordinary skills in the art. Selecting ranges for these result effective variables have been mentioned by Schaupp for an O-ring (see para [0041: “O-rings 112, 124 illustratively are constructed from filled resins having Shore A hardness in the range of about 45 to 75 durometer, specific gravity of about 1.8, tensile strength of about 200 p.s.i. (about 138 Nt/cm.sup.2), an elongation of about 280%, a tear strength of 35 lb./in. (about 61 Nt/cm), and a volume resistivity of about 0.05 .OMEGA.-cm. O-rings 112, 124 are of types available from, for example, Zatkoff Seals & Packings, 23230 Industrial Park Drive, Farmington Hills, Mich. 48335-2850.”). Of course, operating temperature is a basic design parameter.
For proper sealing of the actuator, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that: the material of the sealing cover has shore A hardness of about 41, tensile strength of about 9 MPa, elongation at break of about 690%, a tear strength of about 15 KN/m, and stability up to 20° C.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MASOUD VAZIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-2340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm EST..
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, the examiner’s supervisor, SEYE IWARERE can be reached on (571) 270-5112. 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.
/MASOUD VAZIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834