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 .
The following final office action is in response to the reply filed November 17, 2025.
Drawings
The drawing correction filed November 17, 2025 has been approved.
However, the drawings are objected to because they fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(l) since the lines, numbers, and letters are not sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined as to give the drawings satisfactory reproduction characteristics. See the examples illustrated below.
PNG
media_image1.png
1264
892
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Specification
The applicant’s substitute specification filed November 17, 2025 has not been approved because it fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.125 since it is not “accompanied by a statement that the substitute specification includes no new matter”. See 37 CFR 1.125(b).
Accordingly, the disclosure is still objected to because of the following informalities: the description of figures 2 and 3 on page 9 is inadequate. Note that the applicant has presented figures 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b rather than figures 2 and 3. Accordingly each of the figures 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b requires its own description. Also, the applicant is requested to amend the specification to refer to figures 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b rather than to figures 2 and 3. For example, see “Fig. 2” on line 9 of page 10 and “fig. 2 and fig. 3” on line 19 of page 11.
Finally, the applicant should avoid referring to the same element of the invention with different language. For example, the applicant should avoid referring to element 2 as “a closure element assembly” on line 1 of page 10 and as “the spindle guide tube” on line 13 of page 12.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because “the drive movements are between” on lines 3-4 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is grammatically awkward and confusing. Note that the drive movements move the spindle-proximal drive connection relative to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection. The current recitation does not set forth the movements of the spindle-proximal drive connection relative to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection. Rather, the current recitation only requires a movement to occur between the spindle-proximal drive connection and the spindle nut-proximal drive connection.
Claim 1 is objected to because “an entire length” on line 9 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what element of the invention has the length to which the applicant is referring. It is assumed that the applicant is referring to the length of the spindle nut, accordingly, it is suggested the applicant add --thereof-- following “length” to avoid confusion.
Claim 1 is objected to because “a corresponding internal depression” on line 21 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear whether or not the applicant is referring to the corresponding internal depression set forth above or is attempting to set forth another a corresponding internal depression in addition to the one set forth above.
Claim 3 is objected to because “an axially movable and co-rotational manner” on lines 2-3 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what element of the invention the guide tube is guided in an axially movable and co-rotational manner. It is presumed that the guide tube is guided in an axially movable and co-rotational manner to the torsion tube, however, the claim does not require this.
Claim 4 is objected to because “the corresponding internal depressions” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because the applicant has only set forth one internal depression above and, yet, is referring to more than one internal depression on line 2.
Claim 6 is objected to because “the spindle nut is free from externally encircling depressions” on lines 1-2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what the applicant is attempting to set forth. Note that the spindle guide tube appears to have the depressions to which the applicant is referring. The spindle nut does not include the depressions and is therefore free of the depressions regardless whether or not the spindle guide tube has the depressions.
Claim 8 is objected to because “the internal protrusion” on lines 1-2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear to which one of the plurality of internal protrusions set forth above the applicant is referring.
Claim 8 is objected to because “an axial end” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear if the applicant is referring to one of the axial ends of the spindle nut set forth above or if the applicant is attempting to set forth another axial end of the spindle nut in addition to the ones set forth above.
Claim 9 is objected to because “the internal protrusion” on lines 1-2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear to which one of the plurality of internal protrusions set forth above the applicant is referring.
Claim 9 is objected to because “an axial end” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear if the applicant is referring to one of the axial ends of the spindle nut set forth above or if the applicant is attempting to set forth another axial end of the spindle nut in addition to the ones set forth above.
Claim 10 is objected to because “the internal protrusion” on line 5 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear to which one of the plurality of internal protrusions set forth above the applicant is referring.
Claim 13 is objected to because “is designed to” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear if the spindle drive is actually restorable or self-locking or is merely designed to be restorable or self-locking.
Claim 14 is objected to because “the motor vehicle” on line 1 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 14 is objected to because “a closure element” on line 1 of claim 1 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear if the closure element on line 1 of claim 1 is referring to the closure element on lines 1-2 of claim 14 or is attempting to set forth another closure element in addition to the one set forth above.
Claim 18 is objected to because “the corresponding internal depressions” on lines 1-2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because the applicant has only set forth one internal depression above and, yet, is referring to more than one internal depression on lines 1-2.
Claim 21 is objected to because “the drive movements are between” on lines 3-4 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is grammatically awkward and confusing. Note that the drive movements move the spindle-proximal drive connection relative to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection. The current recitation does not set forth the movements of the spindle-proximal drive connection relative to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection. Rather, the current recitation only requires a movement to occur between the spindle-proximal drive connection and the spindle nut-proximal drive connection.
Claim 21 is objected to because “an entire length” on line 9 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what element of the invention has the length to which the applicant is referring. It is assumed that the applicant is referring to the length of the spindle nut, accordingly, it is suggested the applicant add --thereof-- following “length” to avoid confusion.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 10 and 20 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.
Recitations such as “the axial end of the spindle guide tube is an annual intermediate piece” on lines 2-3 of claim 10 render the claims indefinite because it is unclear what the applicant is attempting to set forth. Is the applicant attempting to set forth that an annual intermediate piece is disposed adjacent to one of the axial ends of the spindle guide tube? Additionally, it is unclear to which one of the plurality of axial ends of the spindle guide tube the applicant is referring.
Recitations such as “wherein the axial end of the spindle guide . . . the internal protrusion” on lines 4-5 of claim 10 render the claims indefinite because the recitation does not agree with the original disclosure. See figure 3b which shows the annual intermediate piece 23 positioned between an axial end of the spindle nut 7 and an axial end 22 of the spindle guide tube 10. None of the axial ends of the spindle guide tube 10 are disposed between the spindle nut 7 and the internal protrusion 19 as required by the recitation.
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, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheuring et al. in view of DE 195 19 948.
With respect to claim 1, Scheuring et al. discloses a spindle drive 15 (fig. 1) for a closure element 14 (fig. 1) of a motor vehicle 10, comprising a spindle/spindle nut gear mechanism 40, 47 (fig. 2) which has a spindle 40 and a mating meshing spindle nut 47 for generating linear drive movements along a geometric spindle axis, wherein the drive movements are between a spindle-proximal drive connection 36 and a spindle nut-proximal drive connection 38 for the output of the drive movements (see lines 1-4 of paragraph 31 which disclose the optional use of a motor), wherein the spindle 40 is guided so as to be movable axially in a spindle guide tube 45 (fig. 4A) which is connected to the spindle nut 47 in an axially fixed manner and co-rotational manner as shown in figure 4A, and is coupled to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection 38 in an axially fixed manner,
wherein the spindle nut 47 over an entire length is inserted axially into a portion of the spindle guide tube 45 as shown in figure 4A that is shaped in such a manner that said portion engages with the spindle nut 47 in a form-fitting manner in both directions along the geometric spindle axis and in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis.
With respect to claim 3, the spindle guide tube 45 is guided in an axially movable and co-rotational manner in a torsion tube 44, and in that the torsion tube 44 is coupled to the spindle-proximal drive connection 38 in an axially fixed and co-rotational manner.
With respect to claim 6, the spindle nut 47 is free from externally encircling depressions as shown in figure 4A, and/or has a cylindrical surface contour in a circumferential portion or circumferential portions that is/are free from outward-projecting wings.
With respect to claim 7, each axial end of the spindle nut 47 engages at least one respective internal protrusion (labeled below) in the spindle guide tube 45 in a respective form-fitting manner in one of the two directions along the geometric spindle axis.
With respect to claim 11, the spindle 40 is made of metal since a metal cross sectional shading is used in figure 7, and/or in that the spindle nut and/or the spindle guide tube are/is made of a plastic material and/or of metal (claim 11).
With respect to claim 12, Scheuring et al. further discloses a drive unit having an electric motor (not shown, but set forth on lines 1-4 of paragraph 31 and lines 6-7 of paragraph 29) which drives the spindle 40 in a rotating manner, or wherein the spindle drive is without a motor.
With respect to claim 13, the spindle drive is designed to be restorable as set forth on lines 10-13 of paragraph 31 or self-locking.
Scheuring et al. is silent concerning the spindle nut comprising at least one radially outward-projecting wing, wherein the at least one radially outward-projecting wing engages with a corresponding internal depression in the spindle guide tube.
However, DE 195 19 948 discloses a spindle drive comprising a spindle nut 22 (figs. 2 and 3b) comprising at least one radially outward-projecting wing (labeled below), wherein the at least one radially outward-projecting wing engages with a corresponding internal depression (labeled below) in a spindle guide tube 16, 26, 30 (fig. 1) in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis,
wherein a center axis of the at least one radially outward-projecting wing is parallel with the geometric spindle axis as shown in figure 2,
wherein the spindle nut 22 is configured to be slid axially into the spindle guide tube 16, 26, 30 in a pre-manufactured stated including the at least one outward-projecting wing, with the at least one outward-projecting wing in the assembled state received in a corresponding internal depression of the spindle guide tube 16, 26, 30 as shown in figure 3b.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Scheuring et al. with a radially outwardly projecting wing, as taught by DE 195 19 948, with a reasonable expectation of success to radially connect the spindle guide tube and the spindle nut together without the expensive step of insert molding while increasing the amount of torque that can be transferred from the spindle nut to the spindle guide tube.
With respect to claim 8, Scheuring et al., as modified above, discloses the internal protrusion (see figure 3b of DE 195 19 948), by way of which the spindle nut 47 at an axial end facing the spindle nut-proximal drive connection 38 engages in a form-fitting manner in a first direction along the geometric spindle axis, is formed by reshaping the spindle guide tube 45 (labeled below as “reshaped portion of the guide tube for claim 8). Note that the limitation of reshaping has been treated as product by process limitations and, as such, are anticipated by the product as set forth above.
With respect to claim 9, Scheuring et al., as modified above, discloses the internal protrusion (see figure 3b of DE 195 19 948), by way of which the spindle nut 47 at an axial end facing the spindle-proximal drive connection 36 engages in a form-fitting manner in a second direction along the geometric spindle axis, is formed by reshaping, the axial end of the spindle guide tube 45 facing the spindle-proximal drive connection 36 (labeled below as “reshaped portion of the guide tube for claim 9). Note that the limitation of reshaping has been treated as product by process limitations and, as such, are anticipated by the product as set forth above.
With respect to claim 14, Scheuring et al., as modified above, discloses the motor vehicle 10, having a closure element 14 and a spindle drive 15 as claimed in claim 1.
With respect to claim 16, Scheuring et al., as modified above, discloses that the spindle nut 47 has at least two radially outward-projecting wings (labeled below in figure 3b of DE 195 19 948) which engage in each case in a corresponding internal depression in the spindle guide tube 45 in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis.
Claims 1, 3-5, 14 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritter (US 2007/0062119) in view of WO 2019/093195.
With respect to claim 1, Ritter discloses a spindle drive (not numbered, but shown in figure 3) for a closure element (not shown, but comprising the flap on line 8 of paragraph 53) of a motor vehicle (not shown, but set forth on line 6 of paragraph 53), comprising a spindle/spindle nut gear mechanism 8, 9 (fig. 3) which has a spindle 8 and a mating meshing spindle nut 9 for generating linear drive movements along a geometric spindle axis, wherein the drive movements are between a spindle-proximal drive connection 4 and a spindle nut-proximal drive connection 3 for the output of the drive movements, wherein the spindle 8 is guided so as to be movable axially in a spindle guide tube 11 which is connected to the spindle nut 9 in an axially fixed manner and co-rotational manner, and is coupled to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection 3 in an axially fixed manner,
wherein the spindle nut 9 over an entire length is inserted axially into a portion of the spindle guide tube 11, as shown in figure 1, that is shaped in such a manner that said portion engages with the spindle nut 9 in a form- fitting manner in both directions along the geometric spindle axis and in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis,
wherein the spindle nut comprises at least one radially outward-projecting wing 15 (fig. 3), wherein the at least one radially outward-projecting wing 15 engages with a corresponding slot (labeled below) in the spindle guide tube 11 in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis,
wherein a center axis of the at least one radially outward-projecting wing 15 is parallel with the geometric spindle axis,
wherein the spindle nut 9 is configured to be slid axially into the spindle guide tube 11 in a pre-manufactured stated including the at least one outward-projecting wing 15, with the at least one outward-projecting wing 15 in the assembled state received in a corresponding slot of the spindle guide tube 11.
Ritter is silent concerning at least one radially outward-projecting wing engaging with a corresponding internal depression in a spindle guide tube in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis.
However, WO 2019/093195 discloses a spindle drive 1 (fig. 1) comprising a spindle nut 60 (fig. 3) and a spindle guide tube 70, wherein the spindle nut 60 includes at least one radially outward-projecting wing 61 which engages with a corresponding internal depression 71a in the spindle guide tube 70 in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis, the at least one outward-projecting wing 61 in the assembled state received in a corresponding internal depression 71a of the spindle guide tube 70.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Ritter with internal depressions, as taught by WO 2019/093195, with a reasonable expectation of success to more securely mount the spindle nut within the spindle guide tube while increasing the strength of the spindle guide tube.
With respect to claim 3, Ritter discloses that the spindle guide tube 11 is guided in an axially movable and co-rotational manner in a torsion tube 10 (fig. 3), and in that the torsion tube 10 is coupled to the spindle-proximal drive connection 4 in an axially fixed and co-rotational manner.
With respect to claim 4, Ritter, as modified above, discloses that for each of the corresponding internal depressions 71a (fig. 3 of WO 2019/093195) in the spindle guide tube 11 is provided with one outward-projecting convexity 71 (fig. 3 of WO 2019/093195).
With respect to claim 5, Ritter, as modified above, discloses that the corresponding internal depression 71a and/or outward-projecting convexity 71 is formed by a corrugation. It should be noted that the limitation of “formed by a corrugation” has been treated as a product-by-process limitation and, as such, is anticipated by the product as set forth above.
With respect to claim 14, Ritter, as modified above, discloses the motor vehicle (not shown, but set forth on line 6 of paragraph 53), having a closure element (not shown, but comprising the flap on line 8 of paragraph 53) and a spindle drive as claimed in claim 1.
With respect to claim 17, Ritter, as modified above, discloses that the spindle guide tube 11 (fig. 3 of Ritter) has at least one radially outward-projecting convexity 71 (fig. 3 of WO 2019/093195) which engages in each case in a corresponding internal guide groove 81 (fig. 4 of WO 2019/093195) in a torsion tube 80 (fig. 4 of WO 2019/093195) in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis.
With respect to claim 18, Ritter, as modified above, discloses that each of the corresponding internal depressions 71a (fig. 3 of WO 2019/093195) and one outward-projecting convexity 71 (fig. 3 of WO 20196/093195) provided with each of the corresponding internal depressions 71a are in each case congruent in radial terms as shown in figure 3 of WO 2019/093195.
With respect to claim 19, Ritter, as modified above, discloses that the corrugation runs parallel to the geometric spindle axis as shown in figure 3 of WO 2019/093195.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritter in view of WO 2019/093195 as applied to claims 1, 3-5, 14 and 17-19 above. Ritter, as modified above, is silent concerning the specific method steps by which the spindle drive is produced.
However, the production of the spindle drive, as taught by Ritter, as modified above, would inherently lead to the method steps set forth in claim 15.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ritter (US 2007/0062119) in view of WO 2019/093195.
With respect to claim 21, Ritter discloses a spindle drive (not numbered, but shown in figure 3) for a closure element (not shown, but comprising the flap on line 8 of paragraph 53) of a motor vehicle (not shown, but set forth on line 6 of paragraph 53), comprising a spindle/spindle nut gear mechanism 8, 9 (fig. 3) which has a spindle 8 and a mating meshing spindle nut 9 for generating linear drive movements along a geometric spindle axis, wherein the drive movements are between a spindle-proximal drive connection 4 and a spindle nut-proximal drive connection 3 for the output of the drive movements, wherein the spindle 8 is guided so as to be movable axially in a spindle guide tube 11 which is connected to the spindle nut 9 in an axially fixed manner and co-rotational manner, and is coupled to the spindle nut-proximal drive connection 3 in an axially fixed manner,
wherein the spindle nut 9 over an entire length is inserted axially into a portion of the spindle guide tube 11, as shown in figure 1, that is shaped in such a manner that said portion engages with the spindle nut 9 in a form-fitting manner in both directions along the geometric spindle axis and in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis,
wherein the spindle nut 9 comprises at least one radially outward-projecting wing 15 (fig. 3), wherein the at least one radially outward-projecting wing 15 engages with a corresponding slot (labeled below) in the spindle guide tube 11 in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis,
wherein the at least one radially outward-projecting wing 15 is formed by a circumferential segment of the spindle nut 9, as shown in figure 3, with regard to the geometric spindle axis.
Ritter is silent concerning at least one radially outward-projecting wing engaging with a corresponding internal depression in a spindle guide tube in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis.
However, WO 2019/093195 discloses a spindle drive 1 (fig. 1) comprising a spindle nut 60 (fig. 3) and a spindle guide tube 70, wherein the spindle nut 60 includes at least one radially outward-projecting wing 61 which engages with a corresponding internal depression 71a in the spindle guide tube 70 in a form-fitting manner in the circumferential direction about the geometric spindle axis, wherein the at least one radially outward-projecting wing 61 is formed by a circumferential segment of the spindle nut 60 with regard to the geometric spindle axis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Ritter with internal depressions, as taught by WO 2019/093195, with a reasonable expectation of success to more securely mount the spindle nut within the spindle guide tube while increasing the strength of the spindle guide tube.
PNG
media_image2.png
1656
1116
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
1640
1096
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1650
1124
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
1654
1120
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 17, 2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 GREGORY J STRIMBU whose telephone number is (571)272-6836. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 Monday-Friday.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/GREGORY J STRIMBU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634