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). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the bobbin (recited within claim 1) must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities that requires appropriate correction:
In page 4, line 33-34, the phrase “upper position of the balls” should read -- upper position of the balls. --.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities that requires appropriate corrections:
Examiner suggest amending claim 1, line 3-4 limitation “a body comprising a cam, a spiral spring groove and a stroke determining groove on its outer surface” in the following manner to improver the overall clarity and comprehension of the claim: -- a body comprising a cam, a spiral spring groove, and a stroke determining groove, which are provided on an outer surface of the body --.
In claim 1, line 9, the limitation “on the inner surface” should read -- on an inner surface --.
In claim 2, line 3-4, the limitation “on the said synchronous ring that restricts the stroke distance” should read -- on the synchronous ring that restricts a stroke distance --.
In claim 3, line 4, the limitation “of the balls” should read -- of the ball --.
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 1-3 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the bobbin” in lines 5, 6, and 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 limitation “a ball that moves on the cam and locks the bobbin at the an opening diameter” (in lines 5-6) renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear what is being referred to by the limitations “open diameter”. Is this attempting to described the position/orientation of the ball when it protrudes radially outward from the synchronous ring? Clarification by the applicant is required.
Claim 1 limitation “a synchronous ring disposed on the body and enabling the balls to move synchronously” (in lines 7-8) renders the claim vague and indefinite. That is because, said limitation appear to contradict the superseding limitation in line 5-6, which disclose the friction ring comprising only a single ball that moves within the cam defined on the outer surface of the body. In other words, it is uncertain if the claimed friction ring includes only one ball, or if it includes plurality of balls. Furthermore, are all the balls disposed within a single cam on the outer surface of the body, or are they each disposed independently within a corresponding cam on the outer surface of the body? Clarification by the applicant is required.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “the balls” (in line 7), and the claim also recites the limitation “the ball” (in line 10) which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claims 2-3 depends from parent claim 1. Thus, claims 2-3 are also rejected as being indefinite for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 2 limitation “the open and closed diameters of the ball” (in line 3) renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear what is being referred to by the open diameter of the ball and the closed diameter of the ball. Is this limitation attempting to described the corresponding position/orientation of the ball when it protrudes radially outward from the synchronous ring and when it does not protrude radially outward from said synchronous ring? Clarification by the applicant is required.
Claim 3 limitation “a spiral spring screw, disposed in the spiral spring groove on the body that determines the position where the ball will be held” (in lines 1-3) renders the claim vague and indefinite, because said limitation appears to contradict the written description of the claimed invention. That is, lines 14-18 in page 4 of the specification recites “a spiral spring screw (60) positioned in the spiral spring groove (12) on the body (10) that determines the position where the wire spring (40) will be held and that enables the synchronous ring (20) to start clamping in the lower, middle, and upper positions of the balls and enables all functions that result thereof”, while lines 31-34 in page 4 of the specification recites “The position where the balls (30) will be held on the cam (11) is determined by the spiral spring screw (60), which is positioned in the spiral spring groove (12) on the body (10). Thus, the synchronous ring (20) is enabled to start clamping in the lower, middle and upper position of the balls”; therefore, it is unclear if the spiral spring screw in the claimed friction ring is configured to determine where the wire spring is being held (as disclosed by lines 14-18 in page 4 of the specification), or if said spiral spring screw is configured to determine where the balls are being held (as disclosed by lines 31-34 in page 4 of the specification and by claim 3). In other words, what exact functionality does the spiral spring screw performs within the friction ring, and how exactly does the spiral spring screw determines the position at which the spiral spring screw/balls are being held? Clarification by the applicant is required.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 3 recites the broad recitation “the balls” (in line 4), and the claim also recites the limitation “the ball” (in line 3) which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kataoka (Japanese Patent Application/Publication JP2012-166860A).
In regards to claim 1, Kataoka teach (Figures 1-14) a friction ring (winding collar 1) used for gripping paper, plastic, steel bobbins (winding core ‘C’, around which a strip-shaped sheet is wound) in the packaging industry, the friction ring (winding collar 1) comprising: a body (collar body 4) that includes a cam (inclined bottom grooves 5 with the supports 24), a spiral spring groove (section of the receiving groove 10 that accommodates the coil springs 11/14; which are defined between the first engaging means 12 and the second engaging means 13, and also between the third engaging means 15 and the fourth engaging means 16), and a stroke determining groove (sections of the receiving groove 10 that accommodates the stop plate 25; which is defined between the first engaging means 12 and the third engaging means 15), that are all provided on an outer surface of the body (outer peripheral surface of the collar body 4); a ball (rolling elements 6) that moves on the cam (inclined bottom grooves 5 with the supports 24), and that locks a bobbin (winding core ‘C’) at the an opening diameter of the ball (upper limit of the rolling elements 6; where said rolling elements 6 protrude from the cavities 7 on the outer peripheral surface of the retainer 8, and when they are pushed upwards by the shallow bottom surface parts of the inclined bottom grooves 5 and the supports 24) so as to ensure the rotation of the bobbin (winding core ‘C’); a synchronous ring (retainer 8) that is disposed on the body (collar body 4), and that enables the ball (rolling elements 6) to move synchronously; and a wire spring (coil springs 11/14) that is disposed on an inner surface of the synchronous ring (inner peripheral surface of the retainer 8), and that provides tension on the ball (rolling elements 6) so as to ensure that the bobbin (winding core ‘C’) runs on the synchronous ring (retainer 8) without friction (see also paragraphs 0016-0041 in the translated JP2012-166860A provided with this office action).
In regards to claim 2, Kataoka teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Kataoka further teach (Figures 1-14), the friction ring (winding collar 1) additionally comprising a stroke screw (pin 31, which forms the protrusion 27) that is disposed on the synchronous ring (retainer 8), and that restricts a stroke distance (via the stop plate 25) by acting as a limitation on the open diameter of the ball (upper limit of the rolling elements 6; where said rolling elements 6 protrude from the cavities 7 on the outer peripheral surface of the retainer 8, and when they are pushed upwards by the shallow bottom surface parts of the inclined bottom grooves 5 and the supports 24) and the closed diameter of the ball (lower limit of the rolling elements 6; where said rolling elements 6 are retracted from the cavities 7 on the outer peripheral surface of the retainer 8, and when they are positioned at the deep/central bottom surface parts of the inclined bottom grooves 5).
In regards to claim 3, Kataoka teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Kataoka further teach (Figures 1-14), the friction ring (winding collar 1) additionally comprising a spiral spring screw (pins 17/18/19/20) that is disposed in the spiral spring groove (section of the receiving groove 10 that accommodates the coil springs 11/14; which are defined between the first engaging means 12 and the second engaging means 13, and also between the third engaging means 15 and the fourth engaging means 16) on the body (collar body 4), and that determines the position where the ball (rolling elements 6) will be held; thereby enabling the synchronous ring (retainer 8) to start clamping in the lower, middle and upper position of the ball (rolling elements 6) and enabling all functions resulting thereof.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattrugeri et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0318633 A1 hereinafter referred to as “Gattrugeri”) in view of Pettinati (European Patent Application/Publication EP3705432 A1)
In regards to claims 1-2, Gattrugeri teach (Figures 1-10) a friction ring (friction ring 1a) used for gripping paper, plastic, steel bobbins (core/spool 40) in the packaging industry, the friction ring (friction ring 1a) comprising: a body (central body 10 of the inner ring 2) that includes a cam (slots 20) and a spiral spring groove (spring seat 31) that are provided on an outer surface of the body (central body 10 of the inner ring 2); a ball (balls 17) that moves on the cam (slots 20), and that locks a bobbin (core/spool 40) at the an opening diameter of the ball (when the balls 17 are in the extracted position; where said balls 17 radially protrudes from the openings 16 on the outer ring 15) so as to ensure the rotation of the bobbin (core/spool 40); a synchronous ring (outer ring 15) that is disposed on the body (central body 10 of the inner ring 2), and that enables the ball (balls 17) to move synchronously; and a wire spring (compression spring 30) that is disposed on an inner surface of the synchronous ring (outer ring 15), and that provides tension on the ball (balls 17) so as to ensure that the bobbin (core/spool 40) runs on the synchronous ring (outer ring 15) without friction (see also paragraphs 0038-0048). Yet, Gattrugeri fails to disclose, the body (central body 10 of the inner ring 2) of the friction ring (friction ring 1a) including a stroke determining groove, or the friction ring additionally comprising a stroke screw that is disposed on the synchronous ring (outer ring 15) and that restrict the stroke distance of the (balls 17).
However, Pettinati teach (Figures 5-8) a friction ring (annular locking device 110) comprising: a body (inner ring 111) that includes a cam (variable-depth sliding surfaces 119) and a stroke determining groove (circumferential recess 123) that are provided on an outer surface of the body (inner ring 111); a ball (engagement elements 113) that moves on the cam (variable-depth sliding surfaces 119); a synchronous ring (outer ring 112) that is disposed on the body (inner ring 111), and that enables the ball (engagement elements 113) to move synchronously; and a stroke screw (locking element 122) that is disposed on the synchronous ring (outer ring 112) and that is disposed within the stroke determining groove (circumferential recess 123); wherein the stroke screw (locking element 122) restricts a stroke distance by acting as a limitation on an open diameter of the ball (when the engagement elements 113 protrudes, through the slots 114, beyond the peripheral cylindrical surface 115 of the outer ring 112) and a closed diameter of the ball (when the engagement elements 113 does not protrudes beyond the peripheral cylindrical surface 115 of the outer ring 112) (see also paragraphs 0040-0067 in the EP3705432 A1 provided with this office action).
Accordingly, using on the suggestion in Pettinati reference, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Gattrugeri’s friction ring with a stroke determining groove the is defined on the outer surface of the body, and a stroke screw that is disposed on the synchronous ring; where said a stroke screw displace/interact within said stroke determining groove in order to restricts the stroke distance the ball within the cam. Providing the friction ring with such a stroke determining groove and stock screw would effectively that limit movement of the ball form its open diameter to its closed diameter, when the body and the synchronous ring rotates relative to one another. Thereby preventing the occurrence of an unplanned, inadvertent, or undesirable disengagement/unlocking of a bobbin and the friction ring when they are being rotated (in other words, limiting movement of the ball form its open diameter to its closed diameter by reducing the stroke distance the ball within the cam via a stroke screw and a stroke determining groove, would ensure a bobbin will remain locked and/or mechanically coupled to the friction ring during a winding/unwinding operation).
In regards to claim 3, Gattrugeri in view of Pettinati teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Gattrugeri further teach (Figures 1-10), the friction ring (friction ring 1a) additionally comprising a spiral spring screw (abutment pin 32) that is disposed in the spiral spring groove (spring seat 31) on the body (central body 10 of the inner ring 2), and that determines the position where the ball (balls 17) will be held; thereby enabling the synchronous ring (outer ring 15) to start clamping in the lower, middle and upper position of the ball (balls 17) and enabling all functions resulting thereof.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: See the attached PTO-892 for complete list of pertinent prior art references made of record by the examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEEN J DIAS whose telephone number is (571) 272-2195. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:00AM - 4:30PM, Alternate Fridays.
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, VICTORIA P AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/R.J.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654