DETAILED ACTION
This is a first Non-Final Office Action on the merits in response to the application filed 07/02/24. A preliminary amendment was entered 09/03/24. The request for foreign priority to a corresponding DE application filed 01/10/22 has been received and is proper. Claims 13-24 are currently pending yet all are rejected as detailed below. 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.
Lemieux
Claim(s) 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lemieux (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2003/0051957). Lemieux is directed to a shock absorber with a floating piston. See Abstract.
Claim 13: Lemieux discloses an absorber device [Figs. 1, 2] for absorbing a force acting thereon, comprising: an absorber housing (102) which encloses an interior space (108, 109); a hydraulic medium [see para. 0008] arranged in the interior space; and an absorber piston rod (110) which has an absorber piston (120) arranged thereon, wherein the absorber piston rod is arranged so as to protrude into the interior space along an axial direction relative to the absorber housing, wherein the absorber piston is arranged in the interior space and divides the interior space into a first chamber (108) and a second chamber (109), wherein the absorber device comprises a spring device (160, 164) for resiliently supporting the absorber piston relative to a quasi-static component (connected to 114), wherein upon movement of the absorber piston rod the absorber piston is moved and a pressure is applied to the hydraulic medium of the second chamber by the absorber piston, and wherein the pressure is compensated via a hydraulic medium-conducting pressure compensation device (150, 152) that connects the second chamber to the first chamber, wherein the spring device comprises a first spring (160) and a second spring (164), wherein the absorber piston is mounted on the absorber piston rod so as to be axially movable, and wherein the first spring and the second spring of the spring device are arranged on opposite sides of the absorber piston and in each case resiliently connect the absorber piston rod to the absorber piston such that the spring device counteracts a movement of the absorber piston in the axial direction, relative to the absorber piston rod. See Figs. 1, 2.
Claim 14: Lemieux discloses that the first spring and/or the second spring is a helical spring, wherein the absorber piston rod is resiliently mounted on the absorber piston via the first spring, on a first absorber piston side facing the first chamber, and via the second spring, on a second absorber piston side opposite the first absorber piston side and facing the second chamber. See Fig. 1.
Claim 15: Lemieux discloses that the first spring and the second spring are arranged opposingly to one another on the absorber piston. See Fig. 1.
Claim 16: Lemieux discloses that the absorber piston rod is mounted in an axially movable manner on two absorber piston rod bearing regions (at 120, at 107) that are arranged so as to be spaced apart from one another in the axial direction, such that the absorber piston rod can absorb transverse forces acting on the absorber piston rod in a transverse direction. See Fig. 1.
Claim 17: Lemieux discloses that the absorber device has degressive spring characteristics. See Fig. 2 (due to shims 150, 152).
Claim 18: Lemieux discloses that the absorber piston comprises a sealing device (106, 107), wherein the sealing device seals the absorber piston in a fluid-tight manner against the absorber housing and/or against the absorber piston rod. See Fig. 1.
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.
Lemieux in view of JP Ref
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemieux in view of JP 6116988 (hereinafter “JP Ref”). JP Ref is directed to a vibration damping device. See Abstract.
Claim 19: Lemieux is relied upon as in claim 13 above but uses a conduit through the piston for pressure compensation rather than a separate “pipe” connecting the chambers. JP Ref discloses a piston-cylinder arrangement wherein the two chambers are connected via a pipe. See Fig. 2 (helical pipe 13); Fig. 7 (pipe 31). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to provide a pipe because this permits easier adjustability of the bypass flow path without having to remove and modify the piston itself, since it is located outside the shock absorber housing. In addition, a helical pipe may provide additional length to the fluid path, which may provide desired damping properties.
Lemieux
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemieux.
Claim 20: Lemieux is relied upon as in claim 13 above but does not explicitly state that the fluid used for hydraulic damping is a “mineral oil.” It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use a mineral oil because it is the most commonly used hydraulic oil in automotive shocks/suspensions and industrial hydraulic dampers, and it is relatively inexpensive as compared to synthetic hydraulic oils and silicone fluids.
Lemieux in view of Kieserling
Claim(s) 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemieux in view of Kieserling et al. (DE 10 2010 054 908) (cited by Applicant). Kieserling is directed to a vehicle damping device. See Abstract. Note: this is an “X” reference in the cited ISA Written Opinion.
Claim 21: Lemieux is relied upon as in claim 13 but does not disclose the inclusion of the absorber device “arranged in the damper piston rod” of a larger damper device. Kieserling discloses damper device [Fig. 5] for damping a force acting thereon, comprising: a damper housing (2) which encloses an interior space (5, 6); a hydraulic medium arranged in the interior space; a damper piston rod (4, 3) which has a damper piston (bottom of 3 piston with valves 20) fixed thereon, wherein the damper piston is arranged in the interior space and divides the interior space into a first chamber (5) and a second chamber (6), wherein the damper piston rod is movable in an axial direction, relative to the damper housing, such that in an event of action of a force on the damper piston rod a movement of the damper piston rod along the axial direction, relative to the damper housing, is made possible, wherein upon movement of the damper piston rod the damper piston is moved and a pressure is applied to the hydraulic medium of the second chamber by the damper piston, and the pressure is compensated via a hydraulic medium-conducting damper pressure compensation device that connects the second chamber to the first chamber, wherein the damper piston rod is hollow at least in portions (at 3), and wherein the absorber device (21, 23, 24) according to claim 13 is arranged in the damper piston rod. Kieserling discloses the absorber device with an absorber piston (21) with a spring device composed of two springs (23, 24) such that the spring device counteracts a movement of the absorber piston in the axial direction. See Fig. 5. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to provide the absorber device in the piston rod of a damper device, partly because it is fully disclosed in Kieserling itself [see Fig. 5], but also to provide desired damping effects and a certain “feel” in a vehicle during certain vibratory movements.
Claim 22: Kieserling discloses that the absorber device is fixed on the damper housing via the absorber piston rod. See Fig. 5.
Claim 23: Kieserling discloses that the pressure compensation device (33) is arranged between the absorber housing and the damper piston rod. See Fig. 5.
Lemieux in view of Kieserling and JP Ref
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemieux in view of Kieserling and JP Ref.
Claim 24: Lemieux and Kieserling are relied upon as in claim 21 above but do not disclose that the pressure compensation device is helical outside the absorber housing. JP Ref discloses a piston-cylinder arrangement wherein the two chambers are connected via a helical/spiral device outside the absorber housing. See Fig. 2 (helical pipe 13). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to provide a helical/spiral bypass flow path because this may provide additional length to the fluid path, which may provide desired damping properties.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL R SAHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-3838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm PST.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
VISHAL SAHNI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3657
/VISHAL R SAHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 June 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights