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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “rotation stoppers” as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 § 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.
Claim 12 is 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 12 recites “…when the circulation path is viewed from an outer diameter side, a dimension of the circulation path in a direction orthogonal to an axial direction is larger than a dimension of the circulation path in the axial direction…”
It is unclear what direction and dimension the applicant is trying to claim. What dimension it is diameter? or length of the circulation path? and in what direction, there is more than one orthogonal plane direction
Claim 12 will be examined as best understood.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kubata [WO 2016/088546].
Regarding claim 1: Kubata shows a ball screw device comprising: a nut (2) including a nut main body having a screw groove (2a) on an inner circumference thereof and a circulation path forming member (4) fixed to an outer circumferential surface of the nut main body; a screw shaft (1) having a screw groove on an outer circumference thereof; a rolling path ( see fig 3) formed by the screw groove of the nut main body and the screw groove of the screw shaft (1); a circulation path (22) formed by the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body and the circulation path forming member; a pair of connection paths that allow one end of the circulation path and one end of the rolling path to be communicated with each other and allow another end of the circulation path and another end of the rolling path to be communicated with each other, respectively; and a plurality of balls (3) disposed in the rolling path, the circulation path, and the pair of connection paths, wherein the circulation path is formed in an arch shape (see fig 3) along a cylindrical portion of the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body (see fig 3).
Regarding claim 2: Kubota shows wherein the circulation path (22) includes a circulation groove formed in the cylindrical portion of the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body, and the circulation path (22) forming member covering the circulation groove (see fig 2).
Regarding claim 3: Kubota shows wherein the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body has, in a circumferential partial region thereof, a recessed portion (6) recessed toward an inner diameter side relative to another circumferential region, and the circulation path forming member is accommodated in a depth direction region of the recessed portion (see fig 1).
Regarding claim 10: Kubata shows wherein an inner circumferential surface of the nut main body (2) has, in a region on one side in an axial direction relative to the rolling path, a cylindrical portion (see markup figure 3) in which the screw groove is not formed.
Regarding claim 11: Kubata shows wherein a pair of through holes (7a, 7b) is formed in the nut main body (2) , the pair of through holes functions as the pair of connection paths, and the through holes are parallel to each other (see fig 2).
Regarding claim 12: Kubata shows wherein when the circulation path is viewed from an outer diameter side, a dimension of the circulation path in a direction orthogonal to an axial direction is larger than a dimension of the circulation path in the axial direction.
Regarding claim 13: Kubata shows wherein a pair of through holes (7a, 7b) is formed in the nut main body (2), the pair of through holes (7a, 7b) functions as the pair of connection paths, and the circulation path forming member does not fit to the pair of through holes.
Regarding claim 14: Kubata shows wherein the circulation path forming member is a press-molded product of a metal plate (see translation “…by forming the pair of end portions 32 and 33 (indicated by hatching) of the circulation component 30 separately from the main body portion 31, the circulation component 30 can be easily molded…”).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubata [WO 2016/088546] in view of Okubo [ JP 2008/169983].
Regarding claim 4: Kubata shows wherein the circulation path (22) forming member has a groove that forms the circulation path; Kubata does not explicitly show the groove has, in a bottom portion thereof, an opening extending along a direction in which the groove extends; and an edge of the opening is an outermost diameter portion of the circulation path forming member. However Okubo shows show the groove has, in a bottom portion thereof, an opening (18, see fig 3) extending along a direction in which the groove extends; and an edge of the opening is an outermost diameter portion (see fig 4) of the circulation path forming member
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to add opening to Kubata circulating assembly to provide easy access for inspection of the rolling ball and have easy access for lubrication and/or cleaning.
Claim 5, 6, 8, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubata [WO 2016/088546] in view of Yamazaki [US Pub # 2018/0100566].
Regarding claim 5: Kubata does not explicitly show wherein the circulation path forming member is fixed to the nut main body by swaging. Yamazaki wherein the circulation path forming member is fixed to the nut main body by swaging ([0092]).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have fixed the circulating path by swaging to have reliable and strong connections. Also helps reduces the risk of potential leaks and conservation of material.
Regarding claim 6: Kubata does not explicitly wherein the circulation path forming member is fixed to the nut main body by adhesion. However attaching by adhesive material such glue or any other attaching technique is well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have fixed the circulating path by adhesive to help reduce the risk of potential leaks and conservation of material.
Regarding claim 8: Kubata does not show wherein the nut main body and an inner ring of a rolling bearing are integrally formed as one component. However, Yamazaki shows wherein the nut main body (34) and an inner ring of a rolling bearing (33) ais mounted on the nut body. Yamazaki does not explicitly show that the inner ring is integrally formed as one component. However making the ring mounted or integral part on the nu body is matter of design choice (see case law cited in MPEP 2144 section B Making integral).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have mounted the ring on the nut body to provide support to the nut body and it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have to make the ring integral with the nut body to minimize the manufacturing processing steps and lower the manufacturing cost.
Regarding claim 9: Kubata does not show wherein the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body has an attachment surface to which an inner ring of a rolling bearing is attached; and the circulation path extends to an axial region of the attachment surface. However Yamazaki shows wherein the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body (34) has an attachment surface to which an inner ring (33) of a rolling bearing is attached; and the circulation path extends to an axial region of the attachment surface (the surface where 33 is attached to).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have to make the ring integral with the nut body to minimize the manufacturing processing steps and lower the manufacturing cost.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [WO 2016/088546] in view of Yamazaki [US Pat # 299,5948].
Regarding claim 7: Kubata shows a guide surface that guides the balls (3) from the rolling path to one of the connection paths . Kubata does not explicitly show coil-shaped ball pickup members screwed into the screw groove of the nut main body,
And rotation stoppers that restrict relative rotation between the coil-shape ball pickup members (24) and the nut (2)
wherein the coil-shaped (see fig 9) ball pickup members each have, at an end portion thereof, However Galanska shows show a coil-shaped ball pickup member (24) screwed into the screw groove of the nut main body, wherein the ball pickup member has, at an end portion thereof,
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have implemented a coil element in the ball circulating assembly of Kubata to reduce backlash and improve accuracy and repeatability of the ball screw movement.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [WO 2016/088546] in view of Shinmoto [CN 111140627]
Regarding claim 15: Kubata does not explicitly show wherein the circulation path forming member is a sintered body. However, Shinmoto teaches the circulation path forming member is a sintered body (see translation “…for example, from sintered metal, resin material 18 is fitted in the hole 19. the piston 16 is inserted into cylinder 15. the piston 16 has a cylindrical outer peripheral surface and is fitted in the cylinder 15…”).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary kill in the art at the time of the effective filling date to have made the circulation path member from sintered body to increase strength and durability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 09/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant argument that Kubota failed to show and the pair of connection paths, wherein the circulation path is formed in an arch shape (see fig 7) along a cylindrical portion of the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body (see fig 7).
Figure 3 clearly shows curved connection paths in arch shape along a cylindrical portion of the outer circumferential surface of the nut main body. In addition, figure 7 also clearly shows arch-shaped pair of connection paths.
The added new claims are addressed in details in the office action above.
[AltContent: textbox (Cylindrical portion)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
647
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
643
484
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
744
540
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZAKARIA ELAHMADI whose telephone number is (571)270-5324. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-6 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 571-270-7778. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZAKARIA ELAHMADI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3618