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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2 – 10, 12 and 14 – 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2 – 10 and 14 – 19, line 1, “A bearing” should read - - The bearing - -.
Claims 12, line 1, “A method” should read - - The method - -.
Claim 4, line 4, “has” should read - - having - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 – 4, 8, 13, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Metten et al. DE1020200106338 (incl. machine translation).
Claim 1, Metten discloses a bearing assembly (rolling bearing 1)(Fig. 1)([0021], l. 1) comprising: a first ring (inner ring 2)([0021], l. 2) defining a first rolling surface; a second ring (outer ring 3)([0021], l. 2) defining a second rolling surface opposed to the first rolling surface; a plurality of rolling elements 4 ([0021], l. 2) located between the first ring and the second ring in rolling engagement with the first rolling surface and the second rolling surface; a retainer (pressed-on sleeve 13)([0024], l. 2) positioned outside an associated one of the first ring and the second ring; and insulative sheet material (two insulating sleeves 7, 8)([0022], l. 1) interposing the retainer and the associated one of the first ring and the second ring, the insulative sheet material being retained in position by the retainer ([0024], ll. 1 – 2: “[t]he two insulating sleeves [7], [8] are encompassed radially on the outside and axially by a pressed-on sleeve 13 and fixed in their position”).
Claim 2, Metten discloses the retainer comprising a cylindrical portion (first cylindrical section 14)([0024], l. 3).
Claim 3, Metten discloses the retainer 13 being in the form of a cup ([0024], l. 3: “[t\he sleeve 13 has a C-shaped cross-section”) having a radial flange (second rim 16)([0024], l. 7) at one end of the cup.
Claim 4, Metten discloses each of the first ring 2 and the second ring 3 having a first end face, a second end face, and a cylindrical surface between the first end face and the second end face; and the retainer is formed as a cup ([0024], l. 3) having a first flange 16, a second flange (other rim 15)([0024], l. 7), and a cylindrical portion 14 respectively retaining the insulative sheet material in relation to the first end face, the second end face, and the cylindrical portion of the associated one of the first ring and the second ring.
Claims 8 and 17, Metten discloses the cup as a drawn cup ([0024], ll. 7 – 11: “[t]he sleeve 13 is made of metal, expediently of steel and preferably deep-drawn, wherein the rim 16 is formed during the deep-drawing process, while the other rim 15 is flanged after the sleeve 13 has been pressed onto the two insulating sleeves, thus being designed as a flanged rim”).
Claim 13, Metten discloses a bearing assembly 1 comprising: a first ring 2 defining a first rolling surface; a second ring 3 defining a second rolling surface opposed to the first rolling surface; each of the first ring and the second ring has a first end face, a second end face, and a cylindrical surface between the first end face and the second end face; a plurality of rolling elements 4 located between the first ring and the second ring in rolling engagement with the first rolling surface and the second rolling surface; a cup 13 positioned outside an associated one of the first ring and the second ring, the cup having a first flange 16, a second flange 15, and a cylindrical portion 14; and insulative sheet material 7,8 interposing the cup and the associated one of the first ring and the second ring, the insulative sheet material being retained in position by the cup ([0024], ll. 1 – 2) .
Claim 14, Metten discloses the insulative sheet material being respectively retained in relation to the first end face, the second end face, and the cylindrical portion of the associated one of the first ring and the second ring.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Viault et al. DE 102021211223 (incl. machine translation).
Claim 1, Viault discloses a bearing assembly 10 (Fig. 1)([0021], l. 1) comprising: a first ring (inner ring 12)([0021], l. 4) defining a first rolling surface; a second ring (outer ring 14)([0021], l. 4) defining a second rolling surface opposed to the first rolling surface; a plurality of rolling elements (balls 16)([0021], l. 4 – 5) located between the first ring and the second ring in rolling engagement with the first rolling surface and the second rolling surface; a retainer (adjusting ring 40)([0039], l. 2) positioned outside an associated one of the first ring and the second ring; and insulative sheet material (insulating device 20)([0024], l. 20) interposing the retainer and the associated one of the first ring and the second ring, the insulative sheet material being retained in position by the retainer ([0042], ll. 2 – 3: “[t]he adjusting ring 40 radially and axially covers the segments 22, 24 which form the insulating device 20”).
Claim 4, Viault discloses each of the first ring and the second ring having a first end face, a second end face, and a cylindrical surface between the first end face and the second end face; and the retainer 40 is formed as a cup having a first flange (first radially extending portion 44)([0041], l. 2), a second flange (second radially extending portion 45)([0041], l. 3), and a cylindrical portion (axial part 42)([0040], l. 2) respectively retaining the insulative sheet material in relation to the first end face, the second end face, and the cylindrical portion of the associated one of the first ring and the second ring.
Claim 5, Viault discloses the insulative sheet material comprising a unitary piece of insulative sheet material cut into a selected pattern ([0038], ll. 3 – 4: “[a]s an alternative not shown, the insulating device 20 may be a one-piece device comprising an axial tubular part and two radially extending sections at both axial ends of the axial part”).
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) 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metten et al. DE1020200106338 as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Friedrich et al. 20150217392.
Metten discloses all of the limitations of the invention of claim 18, except for the first flange and the cylindrical portion of the cup being hardened.
Metten discloses a prior art bearing assembly upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement.”.
Friedrich teaches a known technique that is applicable to retainer of Metten, namely, the technique of a retainer (support based body 4) being hardened ([0036]: “[i]n this way it is also possible that local hardening processes can be performed so that, for example, the material of the bearing-support base body 4 can be hardened at desired locations”).
Thus, it would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that applying the known technique taught by Friedrich to the cup of Metten, wherein the first flange and the cylindrical portion are hardened, would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved cup in Metten that would have an increased hardness and improved resistance to plastic deformation.
Claim 10, Metten as modified by Friedrich does not expressly disclose the second flange of the cup not being hardened.
However, Friedrich further teaches that it was known to provide a local hardening process only to areas of a component where hardening is required ([0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the cup of Metten as modified by Friedrich with the second flange of the cup not hardened, since such a modification would have been suitable for excluding areas of a component where hardening is not required, as taught and suggested by Friedrich.
Claim(s) 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metten et al. DE1020200106338 as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Friedrich et al. 20150217392.
Metten discloses all of the limitations of the invention of claim 18, except for the first flange and the cylindrical portion of the cup being hardened.
Metten discloses a prior art bearing assembly upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement.”.
Friedrich teaches a known technique that is applicable to retainer of Metten, namely, the technique of a retainer (support based body 4) being hardened ([0036]: “[i]n this way it is also possible that local hardening processes can be performed so that, for example, the material of the bearing-support base body 4 can be hardened at desired locations”).
Thus, it would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that applying the known technique taught by Friedrich to the cup of Metten, wherein the first flange and the cylindrical portion are hardened, would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved cup in Metten that would have an increased hardness and improved resistance to plastic deformation.
Claim 19, Metten as modified by Friedrich does not expressly disclose the second flange of the cup not being hardened.
However, Friedrich further teaches that it was known to provide a local hardening process only to areas of a component where hardening is required ([0036]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the cup of Metten as modified by Friedrich with the second flange of the cup not hardened, since such a modification would have been suitable for excluding areas of a component where hardening is not required, as taught and suggested by Friedrich.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 15 and 16 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.
Claims 11 and 12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record taken as a whole neither teaches nor makes obvious the claimed combination of a method of insulating a bearing as set forth in claim(s) 11, including inserting a unitary piece of insulative sheet material having a central hub from which a plurality of radial arms integrally extend into the cup such that the central hub is adjacent to the first flange and the radial arms are folded perpendicular to the central hub.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP A JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5216. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/PHILLIP A JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617