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 .
Remarks
Office Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed 5/29/2024.
Claims 4-5, 7-10, and 12-13 are amended.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/29/2024 and 1/12/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: In line 7 “fixed portion” should read –fixing portion--.
Claim 5: In line 3-4 “fixed portion” should read –fixing portion--.
Claim 13: In line 11 “fixed portion” should read –fixing portion--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato et al. (WO 2020/226042; IDS; English Machine Translation Attached).
In claim 1, Sato discloses (Fig. 1-8) a sealing device (10) disposed between a housing (103) with an opening and a shaft (102) within the opening, and that seals a gap between an inner peripheral surface of the housing (103) and an outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), the sealing device (10) comprising: an annular reinforcing ring (20) fixed to the housing (103); an annular elastic member (30) comprising: a fixing portion (32, 33) fixed to the reinforcing ring (20); and a lip (35) that protrudes from the fixing portion (32, 33) and is in slidable contact with an outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102); and at least one annular spring (38) that presses the lip (35) against the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), wherein: the lip (35) is between the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102) and the at least one spring (38), the elastic member (30) is made of an electrically conductive elastic material (rubber; Pg. 6), the lip (35) includes a contact surface (36s) in contact with the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), and the contact surface (36s) is straight in a natural state when viewed in a cross section defined by a plane that includes a central axis of the elastic member (30).
In claim 4, Sato discloses wherein: the contact surface (36s) has at least one groove (83) that extends along a circumferential direction of the shaft (102), and the at least one groove (83) holds a conductive lubricant (G).
In claim 5, Sato discloses wherein: the elastic member (30) further includes a protruding portion (85) that protrudes from the fixing portion (32, 33) in a direction that differs from the lip (36s), and the protruding portion (85) is in contact with the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102) at a position different to the lip (36s) in the axial direction of the shaft (102).
In claim 6, Sato discloses wherein: the elastic member (30) is provided with a recessed portion (83) for defining a space surrounded by the following: the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), the lip (36s), and the protruding portion (85), and the recessed portion (83) holds a conductive lubricant (G; Pg. 3).
In claim 10, Sato discloses wherein the reinforcing ring (20) is electrically conductive (Pg. 1, metal).
In claim 11, Sato discloses where WD is a width of the reinforcing ring (20) in the radial direction of the shaft (102), and AD is a distance between the inner peripheral surface of the housing (103) and the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), WD/AD is 0.5 or more and 0.9 or less.
In claim 12, Sato discloses wherein the at least one spring (38) is electrically conductive (Pg. 6, metal).
In claim 13, Sato discloses (Fig. 1-8) an electric motor (Pg. 1) comprising: a housing a housing (103) with an opening and a shaft (102) within the opening, and a sealing device (10) that is disposed between the housing (103) and the shaft (102), and that seals a gap between an inner peripheral surface of the housing (103) and an outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), the sealing device (10) comprising: an annular reinforcing ring (20) fixed to the housing (103); an annular elastic member (30) comprising: a fixing portion (32, 33) fixed to the reinforcing ring (20); and a lip (35) that protrudes from the fixing portion (32, 33) and is in slidable contact with an outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102); and at least one annular spring (38) that presses the lip (35) against the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), wherein: the lip (35) is between the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102) and the at least one spring (38), the elastic member (30) is made of an electrically conductive elastic material (rubber; Pg. 6), the lip (35) includes a contact surface (36s) in contact with the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (102), and the contact surface (36s) is straight in a natural state when viewed in a cross section defined by a plane that includes a central axis of the elastic member (30).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (WO 2020/226042; IDS) in view of Yoshino et al. (JP 2001032947; IDS; English Machine Translation Attached).
In claim 2, Sato teaches the device of claim 1, with the exception of wherein the at least one spring includes more than one spring that is arranged along an axial direction of the shaft.
However, Yoshino teaches a sealing device (Fig. 1-3) having more than one spring (18) that is arranged along an axial direction of the shaft (12).
Therefore in view of Yoshino, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to help evenly arrange the lip of the device constantly across the shaft (Yoshino; [0018]).
Claim(s) 3 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (WO 2020/226042; IDS) in view of Ozaki et al. (EP3078885; IDS)
In claim 3 Sato teaches the device of claim 1, with the exception of wherein the at least one spring includes a spring that is flat in a radial direction of the shaft.
However, Ozaki teaches (Fig. 1-4) a sealing device (S) wherein the at least one spring (5) includes a spring that is flat in a radial direction of the shaft (6).
Therefore in view of Ozaki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to help reduce the size of the spring by reducing its size in the radial direction and minimize interference with the rest of the seal (Ozaki; [0032-0035]).
In claim 8, Sato teaches the device of claim 1, with the exception of wherein, where t is a thickness of a part of the lip between the at least one spring and the outer peripheral surface of the shaft, and Wi is a width of the contact surface in an axial direction of the shaft, a relationship of t<W1 is met.
However Ozaki teaches a sealing device (S) where t is a thickness of a part of the lip (4) between the at least one spring (5) and the outer peripheral surface of the shaft (6), and W1 is a width of the contact surface (surface of 2 contacts the shaft along distance H; Fig. 3) in an axial direction of the shaft (6), a relationship of t<W1 is met.
Therefore in view of Ozaki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to help inhibit working oil from escaping the seal (Ozaki; [0018]).
In claim 9, Sato teaches the device of claim 1, with the exception of wherein, where t is a thickness of a part of the lip between the at least one spring and the outer peripheral surface of the shaft, and W2 is a width of the at least one spring in an axial direction of the shaft, a relationship of t< W2 is met.
However, Ozaki teaches (Fig. 1-4) a sealing device (S) wherein the at least one spring (5) can be adjusted in axial length so as long as it does not exceed the length (H) from the respective distal ends of the lip portions (3, 4; [0035]).
Therefore in view of Ozaki, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to help reduce the size of the spring by reducing its size in the radial direction and minimize interference with the rest of the seal while effectively pressing the lip contact portions (Ozaki; [0032-0035]).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (WO 2020/226042; IDS) in view of Yokoyama et al. (JP2003035371; IDS; English Machine Translation Attached)
In claim 7, Sato teaches the device of claim 1, with the exception of wherein, where W1 is a width of the contact surface in an axial direction of the shaft, and W2 is a width of the at least one spring in the axial direction of the shaft, a relationship of W1> W2 is met.
However, Yokoyama teaches a sealing device (1) wherein where W1 is a width (W) of the contact surface (12) in an axial direction of the shaft (22), and W2 is a width of the at least one spring (11) in the axial direction of the shaft (22), a relationship of W1> W2 is met.
Therefore in view of Yokoyama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to ensure that the sealing device grease is securely sealed and does not leak (Yokoyama; Pg. 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhou et al. (US 20204/0097536) teaches a rotor grounding system for an electric machine includes a rotor including a shaft assembly configured to rotate about an axis.
Griesbach et al. (US 12088157) teaches a shaft grounding device for the electrical grounding of a shaft with respect to a housing includes an electrically conductive rectangular ring arranged in a rectangular groove formed in the shaft.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAD H JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-5pm.
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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
RASHAD H. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/RASHAD H JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834