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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/13/2024 was filed prior to the mailing date of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In page 3, line 5, the sentence ends with a question mark “?,” although the sentence is written as statement rather than a question, therefore “position?” should be written as “position.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krumm KG (DE 20319046), hereinafter Krumm.
Regarding claim 3, Krumm teaches a separable blind bearing puller (as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below), comprising: a collet (clamping sleeve 1 as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below) having flexible fingers (trigger hook 13 as shown in annotated Fig. 2 below); a drive bolt (spindle 2 as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below); and a ball bearing (ball 3 as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below), which when forced by said drive bolt expands said flexible fingers (ball 3 is arranged between the pressure surface of the spindle 2 and the contact surfaces of the expanding jaws 12, wherein trigger hooks 13 are located at the end of each jaw, which causes uniform expansion of the clamping jaws, thereby expanding the trigger hooks; ball 3 acts on the pressure surfaces 18 of the expanding jaws 12 via the pressure surface of the spindle 26 when spindle 2 is screwed, [0007], [0019], & [0024], Krumm).
PNG
media_image1.png
448
595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krumm, in view of Qi (CN 111941044).
Regarding claim 1, Krumm teaches A separable blinding bearing puller (as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below), comprising: a main body assembly (as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below) having a collet (clamping sleeve 1 as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below) and a drive bolt (spindle 2 as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 below); and an expansion device (ball 3 as shown in annotated Fig. 1 and 2 below).
Krumm does not teach the expansion device, which is separable from said main body assembly.
However, Qi does teach the expansion device (metal ball 62 as shown in annotated Fig. 7 below), which is separable from said main body assembly (details of assembling the mechanism is specified, with a separate step for inserting metal ball 62, [0053], [0055], & [0056], Qi).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Krumm such that the ball bearing is separable from the drive bolt, as taught by Qi, so that the drive bolt can generate only axial force and does not rotate, thus reducing the friction between components, which promotes longevity ([0068], Qi).
PNG
media_image2.png
458
550
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
385
745
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Krumm, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1, wherein: said expansion device is a ball bearing (ball 3 as shown in annotated Figs. 1 and 2 above).
Regarding claim 4, Krumm teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 3.
Krumm does not teach said ball bearing is separable from said drive bolt.
However, Qi does teach said ball (metal ball 62 as shown in annotated Fig. 7 above) is separable from said drive bolt (details of assembling the mechanism is specified, with a separate step for inserting metal ball 62, [0053], [0055], & [0056], Qi).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Krumm such that the ball bearing is separable from the drive bolt, as taught by Qi, so that the drive bolt can generate only axial force and does not rotate, thus reducing the friction between components, which promotes longevity ([0068], Qi).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISHAQ M ISHAQ whose telephone number is (571)270-0696. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30AM-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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/I.M.I./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights