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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, the phrases “a [the] length D1” and “a [the] length T1” can cause confusion as the variables are first defined specifically as a diameter and thickness by name, while “length” could be in reference to another dimension. In order to prevent confusion it is suggested that lines 9-10 read - -wherein when a diameter of the rollers is D1 and a wall thickness of the shell type outer ring is T1- - and then the phrases - -the length- - can be dropped from the later recitations as well as dependent claims 2, 3 and 7.
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 4, 8, 9, 12 and 15 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.
Claims 4, 8 and 9 recite the limitation "the protrusions". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 13-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP5081571 (JP571, all line citations below are in reference to the translation provided by Applicant).
Regarding claim 1, JP571 discloses a rolling bearing comprising: a shell type outer ring (12) having a raceway surface on an inside diameter side thereof (surface contacting 13); a plurality of rollers (13) arranged on the raceway surface; and a retainer (14) arranged on the inside diameter side of the shell type outer ring and retaining the plurality of needle-rollers; the shell type outer ring including a movement restricting portion (12a or 12b) that restricts a movement of the retainer in an axial direction, wherein when a diameter of the rollers is a length D1; and a wall thickness of the shell type outer ring is a length T1, the length D1 is not more than 2 mm, the length T1, is not less than 0.3 mm, and a relationship of 0.5 < length D1/length T1 < 1.5 holds (the reference discloses the diameter, Da, as being less than 1.5mm, paragraphs 0012-0013, the reference also discloses a t/Da ratio, t being the thickness, that when 1.5 is substituted for Da and the relationship solved for t provides a range 0.45-1.05mm which is not less than 0.3mm, finally using the larger side roller of 1.5mm and the upper limit of t which is 1.05 results in a ratio of 1.5/1.05 which is equal to 1.43 which is within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 2, JP571 discloses that the length D1 is not less than 0.2 mm (ultimately the combination of claims 1 and 2 defines a range for the diameter of 0.2-1.5, JP571 discloses 1.5 or less anticipating the claimed range).
Regarding claims 3 and 7, JP571 discloses that the length T1 is not more than 2.0 mm (the calculated range for t, 0.45-1.05mm, this falls within the recited range of 0.3-2mm set forth by the combination of claims 1 and 3).
Regarding claims 5, 10 and 11, JP571 discloses that the retainer is a split retainer (see figure 3 showing that 14 includes two free ends making it a split retainer under the broadest reasonable interpretation, see citation of pertinent art below) made of a resin (see paragraphs 0015 and 0022) and divided in a circumferential direction (the split forms a division in the retainer along the circumferential direction).
Regarding claims 6, 13, 14 and 16, JP517 discloses that the rollers are needle rollers (13 are needle rollers, see at least paragraphs 0001 and 0019).
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) 4, 8, 9, 12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP5081571 (JP571), as applied to claim 1-3 above, and further in view of GB1424466 (GB466).
Regarding claims 4, 8 and 9, JP571 does not disclose a washer having an annular shape following an outer ring inside diameter surface of the shell type outer ring, the washer being arranged between the retainer and the protrusions in the axial direction.
GB466 teaches a shell type bearing wherein the outer ring includes a plurality of protrusions at an axial end (see figure 12, at 68) and a washer (70) having an annular shape (disclosed as an annular retainer) following an outer ring inside diameter surface of the shell type outer ring (fits inside the outer ring and follows an inner surface of the ring), the washer (70) being arranged between the retainer (60) and the protrusions (68) in the axial direction for the purpose of providing an arrangement that limits axial movement the retainer and rollers (see page 2, line 18-page 3, line 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify JP517 and use an outer ring with a plurality of protrusions and a washer between the cage and the protrusions, as taught by G466, for the purpose of providing an alternate arrangement that limits axial movement of cage and the roller. Substituting between a radially extending flange or protrusion on one end of the outer ring (JP517) for a known assembly with a plurality of protrusions and a washer that performs the same function (GB466) is within the level or ordinary skill in the art and provides the same predicable result of retaining the roller/retainer assembly within the outer ring.
Regarding claim 12, JP571 discloses that the retainer is a split retainer (see figure 3 showing that 14 includes two free ends making it a split retainer under the broadest reasonable interpretation, see citation of pertinent art below) made of a resin (see paragraphs 0015 and 0022) and divided in a circumferential direction (the split forms a division in the retainer along the circumferential direction).
Regarding claim 15, JP517 discloses that the rollers are needle rollers (13 are needle rollers, see at least paragraphs 0001 and 0019).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
USP 8,393,800 and USP 7,866,891 shows a double split bearing retainer.
JP2007-10012 shows a retainer with a split end with matching shapes that connect in figure 6.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES PILKINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-5052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7-3.
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.
/JAMES PILKINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617