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 . 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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the torsional damper of Figures 6-8 (Species II) in the reply filed on May 4, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 7 and 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The abstract is objected to for including a phrase which can be implied (see “are provided” in line 2). See MPEP 608.01(b). The Examiner notes simply removing this phrase and ending the first sentence with “is applied” would place the abstract improper form and overcome the objection. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is directed to a torsional damper, as set forth in line 1. However, the claim goes on to positively recite structure that is not a part of the torsional damper (i.e. a rotor sleeve, a rotor hub, between which the torsional damper is disposed). It is therefore unclear from the claim whether Applicant is intending the claim the subcombination of the torsional damper, or the combination of the torsional damper, the rotor sleeve, and the rotor hub. For the purpose of this action, the Examiner has interpreted the claim as being directed to only the subcombination of the torsional damper, given the preamble of the claim and it’s dependents, as well as the presence of combination claims 16-18. As such, limitations to structure that are not a part of the torsional damper itself are given limited patentable weight. Claims 2-15 inherit this issue for depending upon claim 1. The Examiner notes proper functional language, such as “configured to” should be utilized to properly set forth the structure which is not of the torsional damper.
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.
(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.
Claims 1, 8-10, and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 7,225,908 (Back).
Regarding claim 1, Back discloses a torsional damper (see Figures 1-4), which is disposed between a rotor sleeve (14), which is configured to receive a rotational force of an engine (see column 6, lines 29-34), and a rotor hub (49), which is disposed rearward of the rotor sleeve, and configured to transmit the rotational force of the engine to the rotor hub (see column 9, lines 18-24), the torsional damper comprising:
a first damper (30),
wherein the first damper comprises:
a first damper spring (40) configured to absorb vibration of the rotational force of the engine (see column 9, lines 8-24);
a first cover plate (36) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor sleeve (14) and connected to the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1; and
a driven plate (34) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor hub (49) and connected to the rotor hub (see Figure 1), and
wherein the driven plate has a first fluid passageway (48a) configured to connect a front space and a rear space of the driven plate so that the front space and the rear space of the driven plate communicate with each other (see Figure 1 and column 10, lines 5-19).
Regarding claim 8, Back discloses a stopper device (at 42 in Figure 1) configured to prevent the first damper spring (40) from being contracted to a degree equal to or higher than a threshold degree (see column 9, lines 25-28).
Regarding claim 9, Back discloses the stopper device (at 42 in Figure 1) comprises:
a first stopper provided on the first cover plate (36); and
a first stopper accommodation portion (36a) provided on the driven plate (34) and configured to accommodate the first stopper (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Back discloses the driven plate (34) comprises:
a first surface facing the first cover plate (36) in an axial direction; and
a second surface opposite to the first surface, and
wherein the first stopper accommodation portion (36a) is defined by a groove formed in the first surface, and the second surface constitutes at least a part of a bottom of the groove (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 13, Back discloses the first cover plate (36) is disposed radially outward of the first damper spring (40) and connected to the rotor sleeve (14; see Figure 1 and NOTE below).
NOTE: As noted above in the 112(b) rejection, limitations to structure (i.e. the rotor sleeve, rotor hub) that are not a part of the torsional damper itself are given limited patentable weight. As such, these limitations amount to an intended use of torsional damper. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 14, Back discloses the rotor sleeve (14) comprises:
a radial extension portion (shown connected to rivet 31 in Figure 1) extending in the radial direction; and
an axial extension portion (at 14 in Figure 1) extending in the axial direction from an end of the radial extension portion, and
wherein the first damper spring (40) is supported in the axial direction by the radial extension portion of the rotor sleeve, supported radially outward by the axial extension portion of the rotor sleeve, and supported in the circumferential direction by a first circumferential support portion provided on the rotor sleeve (see NOTE above).
Regarding claim 15, Back discloses the torsional damper is connected to the rotor hub (49) through an engine clutch (10), and the torsional damper and the engine clutch are spline-connected (at 10b) so that a rotation of the torsional damper and a rotation of the engine clutch are restricted in a rotation direction, and the torsional damper and the engine clutch are allowed to relatively slide in the axial direction (see column 8, lines 4-27, and NOTE above).
Regarding claim 16, Back discloses a hybrid driving module (see Figures 1-4) comprising:
a rotor sleeve (14) configured to receive a rotational force of an engine (see column 6, lines 29-34);
a rotor hub (49) disposed rearward of the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1); and
a torsional damper configured to transmit the rotational force of the engine to the rotor hub (see column 9, lines 18-24) and including a first damper (30),
wherein the first damper comprises:
a first damper spring (40) configured to absorb vibration of the rotational force of the engine (see column 9, lines 8-24);
a first cover plate (36) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor sleeve and connected to the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1) and
a driven plate (34) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor hub and connected to the rotor hub (see Figure 1), and
wherein the driven plate has a first fluid passageway (48a) configured to connect a front space and a rear space of the driven plate so that the front space and the rear space of the driven plate communicate with each other (see Figure 1 and column 10, lines 5-19).
Regarding claim 17, Back discloses the torsional damper is a wet damper configured to be cooled by oil (see column 3, lines 3-20).
Regarding claim 18, Back discloses a space between the rotor sleeve (14) and the rotor hub (49) is filled with the oil, and the oil supplied to the space flows from the inside to the outside in the radial direction (see Figure 1 and column 3, lines 3-20).
Claims 1-5 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2021/0356032 (Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a torsional damper (80), which is disposed between a rotor sleeve (11b), which is configured to receive a rotational force of an engine, and a rotor hub (120), which is disposed rearward of the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1 and annotated Figure 1 above), and configured to transmit the rotational force of the engine to the rotor hub, the torsional damper comprising:
a first damper (see annotated Figure 1 below),
wherein the first damper comprises:
a first damper spring (see annotated Figure 1 below) configured to absorb vibration of the rotational force of the engine (see Figure 1);
a first cover plate (see annotated Figure 1 below) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor sleeve and connected to the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1); and
a driven plate (see annotated Figure 1 below) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor hub and connected to the rotor hub (see Figure 1), and
wherein the driven plate has a first fluid passageway (see annotated Figure 1 below) configured to connect a front space and a rear space of the driven plate so that the front space and the rear space of the driven plate communicate with each other (shown by the oil path which progressions through the first and second dampers and through passageway 115 in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses a second damper (see annotated Figure 1 below) connected in series to the first damper at a rear side of the first damper,
wherein the second damper is connected to the driven plate (see annotated Figure 1 below).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the second damper comprises a second damper spring (see annotated Figure 1 below) configured to absorb vibration of a rotational force of the engine (an inherent feature of torsional dampers), and the first fluid passageway is disposed radially inward of the second damper spring (see annotated Figure 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
712
859
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. Annotated Figure 1 of Kim
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the second damper has a second cover plate connected to the driven plate, and a second fluid passageway (see annotated Figure 1 above) is formed on the second cover plate (shown by the oil path which progressions through the first and second dampers and through passageway 115 in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the second fluid passageway (see annotated Figure 1 above) is connected to the first fluid passageway (shown by the oil path which progressions through the first and second dampers and through passageway 115 in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses the first cover plate (see annotated Figure 1 above) is disposed radially outward of the first damper spring and connected to the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses the rotor sleeve (11b) comprises:
a radial extension portion extending in the radial direction (see annotated Figure 1 above); and
an axial extension portion extending in the axial direction from an end of the radial extension portion (see annotated Figure 1 above), and
wherein the first damper spring (see annotated Figure 1 above) is supported in the axial direction by the radial extension portion of the rotor sleeve, supported radially outward by the axial extension portion of the rotor sleeve, and supported in the circumferential direction by a first circumferential support portion provided on the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses the torsional damper of claim 1,wherein the torsional damper (80) is connected to the rotor hub (120) through an engine clutch (40), and the torsional damper and the engine clutch are spline-connected (shown between 60 and 80 in Figure 1) so that a rotation of the torsional damper and a rotation of the engine clutch are restricted in a rotation direction, and the torsional damper and the engine clutch are allowed to relatively slide in the axial direction (see paragraphs [0039]-[0043]).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses a hybrid driving module (see Figure 1 and annotated Figure 1 above) comprising:
a rotor sleeve (11b) configured to receive a rotational force of an engine;
a rotor hub (120) disposed rearward of the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1); and
a torsional damper (80) configured to transmit the rotational force of the engine to the rotor hub and including a first damper (see annotated Figure 1 above),
wherein the first damper comprises:
a first damper spring (see annotated Figure 1 above) configured to absorb vibration of the rotational force of the engine (see Figure 1);
a first cover plate (see annotated Figure 1 above) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor sleeve and connected to the rotor sleeve (see Figure 1); and
a driven plate (see annotated Figure 1 above) disposed between the first damper spring and the rotor hub and connected to the rotor hub (see Figure 1), and
wherein the driven plate has a first fluid passageway (see annotated Figure 1 above) configured to connect a front space and a rear space of the driven plate so that the front space and the rear space of the driven plate communicate with each other (shown by the oil path which progressions through the first and second dampers and through passageway 115 in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses the torsional damper (80) is a wet damper configured to be cooled by oil (see, e.g., the Abstract).
Regarding claim 18, Kim discloses a space between the rotor sleeve (11b) and the rotor hub (120) is filled with the oil, and the oil supplied to the space flows from the inside to the outside in the radial direction (see Figure 1 and abstract).
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 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Back.
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches the torsional damper of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose a stopper device configured to prevent the first damper spring (see annotated Figure 1 above) from being contracted to a degree equal to or higher than a threshold degree.
Back teaches a stopper device (at 42 in Figure 1) configured to prevent the first damper spring (40) from being contracted to a degree equal to or higher than a threshold degree to provide limited freedom of angular movement (see column 9, lines 25-28). Therefore, 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 torsional damper of Kim, such that a stopper device is configured to prevent the first damper spring from being contracted to a degree equal to or higher than a threshold degree, as taught in Back, in order to provide limited freedom of angular movement.
Regarding claim 9, Back teaches the stopper device (at 42 in Figure 1) comprises:
a first stopper provided on the first cover plate (36); and
a first stopper accommodation portion (36a) provided on the driven plate (34) and configured to accommodate the first stopper (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Back teaches the driven plate (34) comprises:
a first surface facing the first cover plate (36) in an axial direction; and
a second surface opposite to the first surface, and
wherein the first stopper accommodation portion (36a) is defined by a groove formed in the first surface, and the second surface constitutes at least a part of a bottom of the groove (see Figure 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses the torsional damper of claim 5, wherein a first binding portion (see, e.g. the inner portion at 80 in Figure 1) is provided radially inside the driven plate (see annotated Figure 1 above), a second binding portion (see, e.g., the outer portion at 60 in Figure 1) bound to the first binding portion is provided radially inside the second cover plate (see Figure 1), but fails to disclose the first fluid passageway is provided on the first binding portion, and the second fluid passageway is provided on the second binding portion.
Instead, Kim discloses the first and second fluid passageways extending through the same locations as their respective first and second damper springs (see Figure 1). The prior art fails to fairly show or suggest a modification to Kim such that a first binding portion is provided radially inside the driven plate, a second binding portion bound to the first binding portion is provided radially inside the second cover plate, but fails to disclose the first fluid passageway is provided on the first binding portion, and the second fluid passageway is provided on the second binding portion. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to make such a modification to Kim, as it would require extensive changes to the packaging of the torsional damper of Kim which would undoubtedly teach away from the intended structure of Kim.
Regarding claim 11, Back discloses the torsional damper of claim 10, wherein the driven plate (34) comprises a driven body portion having an inclined section (extending from the radially inward end of 34 to its radially outward end at 36a in Figure 1) extending radially outward in a shape inclined with respect to the axial direction (at a 90° angle),
wherein the first cover plate (36) comprises a first cover body portion disposed radially inward of the first damper spring (40) and disposed radially outward of the inclined section (see Figure 1),
wherein the first stopper accommodation portion (36a) is provided on the inclined section (see Figure 1).
Back fails to disclose the first stopper (42) extends radially inward from the first cover body portion. Beck instead discloses the first stopper extending from a portion of the first cover plate that is disposed radially outward of the first damper spring (40; see Figure 1). The prior art fails to fair show or suggest a modification to Back such that disclose the first stopper extends radially inward from the first cover body portion. One of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to make such a modification to Back, as rearranging the first stopper to be at a location radially inward of the first damper spring would interfere with the diaphragm spring (37) interacting between the driven plate (34), first cover plate (36), and rotor sleeve (14; see Figure 1).
The combination of Kim and Back teaches the torsional damper of claim 10, but fails to teach the limitations of claim 11 for the same reasons noted above regarding Back.
Conclusion
The prior art set forth in the attached Notice of References Cited (PTO-892) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure in the field of torsional dampers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Josh Skroupa whose telephone number is (571)270-3220. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM – 3:30 PM ET.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached on (571)270-5281. 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.
/Josh Skroupa/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
July 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights