Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/711,402

LUBRICANT LEAKAGE CONTROL MECHANISM AND GEAR MECHANISM

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Nov 18, 2024
Examiner
ROGERS, ADAM D
Art Unit
3617
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Nabtesco Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1117 granted / 1360 resolved
+30.1% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1400
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1360 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nagi et al. (JP 2010-31409 A; see provided machine translation). Regarding claim 1, Nagi et al. discloses a lubricant leakage control mechanism comprising: a block body (33b, 33c) disposed adjacent to teeth (33a) of a gear (33) in a thickness direction (shown below) of the gear and, the block body having a circumferential surface around its entire circumference; a cover (8) provided around an entire circumference of the gear so as to face the teeth in a radial direction (up-and-down in Figure 4; shown below) of the gear, the cover covering the teeth (see Figure 4); and a sealing member (93) for preventing leakage of lubricant from between the block body and the cover, wherein the block body is disposed on at least one of two opposing surfaces of the gear in the thickness direction (33b is directly connected to 33 as shown in Figure 4), wherein the sealing member is disposed between the block body and the cover with overlapping the teeth of the gear in the thickness direction, and is held between the block body and the cover in the thickness direction (see the figure below). PNG media_image1.png 790 434 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 4 of Nagi et al. (JP 2010-31409 A) Regarding claim 15, Nagi et al. discloses a lubricant leakage control mechanism comprising: a block body (33b, 33c) disposed adjacent to teeth (33a) formed on an outer circumferential surface of a gear (33) in a thickness direction (shown below) of the gear, the block body having an outer circumferential surface around an entire circumference of the gear (see Figure 4); a cover (8) covering the teeth from a radially outer side; and a sealing member (the seal member that the leader line from 83a points to in Figure 4) for preventing leakage of lubricant from between the block body and the cover, wherein the cover has a cover overhang (83) projecting from the cover toward a radially inner side, and wherein the block body has a block body overhang (the structure to the right of the seal that the leader line from 83b points to in Figure 4) projecting from the outer circumferential surface of the block body toward the radially outer side, the block body overhang being provided on at least one of two opposing surfaces of the gear in the thickness direction (33b is directly connected to 33 as shown in Figure 4), and wherein the sealing member is held between the cover overhang and the block body overhang in the thickness direction (see Figure 4). PNG media_image1.png 790 434 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 4 of Nagi et al. (JP 2010-31409 A) Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Russ et al. (US 2004/0244521 A1). Regarding claim 1, Russ et al. discloses a lubricant leakage control mechanism comprising: a block body (79) disposed adjacent to teeth (65) of a gear (53) in a thickness direction of the gear and, the block body having a circumferential surface (the outer radial surface of 79 in Figure 4) around its entire circumference; a cover (66-68) provided around an entire circumference of the gear so as to face the teeth in a radial direction of the gear, the cover covering the teeth (see Figure 4); and a sealing member (85) for preventing leakage of lubricant from between the block body and the cover, wherein the block body is disposed on at least one of two opposing surfaces of the gear in the thickness direction (79 is in direct contact with a side surface of 53 as shown in Figure 4), wherein the sealing member is disposed between the block body and the cover with overlapping the teeth of the gear in the thickness direction, and is held between the block body and the cover in the thickness direction (see the figure below). PNG media_image2.png 429 947 media_image2.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 4 of Russ et al. (US 2004/0244521 A1) Regarding claim 8, Russ et al. discloses that the sealing member is in surface contact with the block body and the cover (see Figure 4). 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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Russ et al. (US 2004/0244521 A1) in view of Blais (US 2017/0299062 A1). Regarding claim 2, Russ et al. discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that the sealing member includes a porous material that is compressible and deformable. Blais teaches a sealing member (29A is a felt seal) that includes a porous material (felt) that is compressible and deformable (felt is both compressible and deformable). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sealing member of Russ et al. to include a porous material that is compressible and deformable, as taught by Blais, for the purpose of blocking debris or solids from passing into the mechanism and provides a seal that is compressible and deformable thus enabling the sealing effect to be maintained in the event of movement between the elements the sealing member is connected to. Regarding claim 3, Russ et al. discloses that the cover has a cover overhang (67; 67 extends to the side of the gear in the same manner as Applicant’s cover overhang (23) extends to the side of a gear (4) thus 67 is viewed as meeting the claim limitation) projecting from the cover toward the gear teeth, and wherein the sealing member is disposed between the cover overhang and the block body (85 can be viewed as being located between 67 and 79 when the viewpoint is along the dashed line shown below). PNG media_image3.png 508 452 media_image3.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 4 of Russ et al. (US 2004/0244521 A1) Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-7, 9, and 10-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed January 7, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argued on Pages 8-9 of the Remarks that “ PNG media_image4.png 334 715 media_image4.png Greyscale As can be plainly seen from Nagi, "the sealing member [93]" is not disposed between the block body [33] and the cover [8] with overlapping the teeth of the gear in the thickness direction, and is held between the block body [33] and the cover [8] in the thickness direction." At best, the sealing member 93 is between those parts in the radial direction only, but not in the thickness direction. The claimed "thickness direction" in the above Figure from Nagi must be the vertical direction, as the claim differentiates the "thickness direction" from the "radial direction" and expressly defines the "thickness direction" as being the direction in which the block body is "adjacent to teeth of a gear" and the direction for the "two opposing surfaces of the gear." Plainly in Nagi, that is the vertical direction. Indeed, even without those limitations in the claim a POSITA would recognize the vertical direction in the Figure as the "thickness direction" because that is the common way to describe that structure's thickness. This is further emphasized by the language stating that "a cover [is] provided around an entire circumference of the gear so as to face the teeth in a radial direction of the gear, the cover covering the teeth," which confirms the radial direction is different from the thickness direction. In the Nagi Figure above, that direction is the horizonal direction. Therefore, Nagi's sealing member 93 is between those parts in the radial direction only. That cannot anticipate claim 1, which requires "wherein the sealing member is disposed between the block body and the cover with overlapping the teeth of the gear in the thickness direction, and is held between the block body and the cover in the thickness direction."” The Applicant provided a similar argument to the rejection of claim 15 on Page 9 of the Remarks. The thickness direction and the radial direction of Nagi et al. is shown below. As shown below, the sealing member 93 is located between a portion (33c) of the block body and a portion (81) of the cover in the thickness direction. The sealing member 93 overlaps the teeth of the gear in the thickness direction as well. PNG media_image1.png 790 434 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 4 of Nagi et al. (JP 2010-31409 A) The Applicant argued on Page 10 of the Remarks that “It is clear that sealing ring 85 (corresponding to the "sealing member") is not disposed between the metal ring 79 (corresponding to a block body) and the housing 66 (corresponding to the "cover") "in the thickness direction, and is not held between the block body [79] and the cover [66] in the thickness direction. Indeed, the structural arrangement of those components is the same as in Nagi, i.e., the sealing member is radially positioned between those parts, rather than being between them in the thickness direction. The same rationale for Nagi failing to anticipate claim 1 thus applies equally to Russ.” The thickness direction and the radial direction of Russ et al. is shown below. As shown below, the sealing member 85 is located between a portion of the block body 79 and a portion 67 of the cover in the thickness direction. The sealing member 85 overlaps the teeth of the gear in the thickness direction as well. PNG media_image2.png 429 947 media_image2.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 4 of Russ et al. (US 2004/0244521 A1) 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 ADAM D ROGERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 6AM-2:00PM EST. 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. /ADAM D ROGERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 18, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 07, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601326
Torque Driven Dynamic Generator with Inertia Sustaining Drive
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600400
STEERING WHEEL GRIP ASSEMBLY FOR AUTOMOBILES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600399
STEERING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591264
DETACHABLE MULTI FUNCTIONAL CONTROL KNOB ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576963
PEDAL CARTRIDGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.6%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1360 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month