DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first Office Action on the merits for application no. 18/727,343 filed on July 9th, 2024. Claims 1-10 are pending.
Priority
Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s claim to priority of application CN 2023 1139 7807.9 filed on October 26th, 2023. A certified copy was received on February 18th, 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 9th, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement was considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Regarding Claim 1 (line 30), please change the recitation of “the self-centering device comprises a first disc-spring” to - - the self-centering device comprises [[a]] the first disc-spring - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1 (line 7).
Regarding Claim 1 (line 39), please change the recitation of “against an edge of the friction-disc” to - - against [[an]] the edge of the friction-disc - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1 (line 25).
Regarding Claim 1 (line 45), please change the recitation of “the entire device” to - - the friction damper - - as this feature is previously referred to in claim 1 (line 1).
Regarding Claim 2 (lines 3-4), please change the recitation of “the central parts of the two clamp arms” to - - [[the]] central parts of the two clamp arms - - to establish antecedent basis.
Regarding Claim 5 (line 4), please change the recitation of “through the first bolt” to - - through [[the]] a first bolt - - to establish antecedent basis.
Regarding Claim 5 (line 5), please change the recitation of “a winch” to - - [[a]] the winch - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 1 (line 13).
Regarding Claim 5 (line 8), please change the recitation of “the first bolt component comprises a first bolt” to - - the first bolt component comprises [[a]] the first bolt - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 5 (line 4).
Regarding Claim 6 (line 10), please change the recitation of “the second bolt component comprises a second bolt” to - - the second bolt component comprises [[a]] the second bolt - - as antecedent basis has already been established in claim 6 (line 5).
Regarding Claim 8 (lines 5-6), please change the recitation of “around the longitudinal axis of the first bolt component and the second bolt component” to - - around [[the] respective longitudinal [[axis]] axes of the first bolt component and the second bolt component - - to establish antecedent basis.
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 1-10 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.
Regarding Claim 1 (lines 19-20), in the recitation of “one end of the steel strand is connected to the winch, while the other end of the steel strand passes through a first hole on the outer sleeve, then through the bushing and entering the first end cap” it is unclear how the other end of the steel strand (Figs. 2 and 8; 5) passes through a first hole of the outer sleeve (1), then through the bushing (unreferenced by numeral) and entering the first end cap (9). The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “one end of the steel strand is connected to the winch, then passes through a first hole on the outer sleeve, then through the bushing and entering the first end cap” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination.
Regarding Claim 1 (lines 35-36), the metes and bounds of “any directions” in the recitation of “when the inner sleeve and outer sleeve are subjected to a relative motion in any directions” is unclear as the friction damper appears to only move relative in a linear direction. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “when the inner sleeve and outer sleeve are subjected to [[a]] relative motion
Regarding Claim 3 (lines 2-3), in the recitation of “wherein the second disc-springs comprise two identical disc-springs” the difference between the “second disc-springs” recited in claim 3 and the “two identical disc-springs” recited in claim 3 is unclear. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “wherein the second disc-springs [[comprise]] are two identical disc-springs” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination. See MPEP 2173.05(o) – Double Inclusion.
Regarding Claim 3 (lines 2-3 and 7-9), in the recitations of “the second disc-springs comprise two identical disc-springs positioned on one side of the clamp arms” and “then successively through one of the second disc springs, one side of the clamp arms, the other one of the second disc springs, the other side of the clamp arms” it is generally unclear what Applicant intended to recite. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. Applicant could recite “the second disc-springs [[comprise]] are two identical disc-springs positioned on respective clamp arms” and “then successively through one of the second disc springs, one [[side]] of the respective clamp arms, the other one of the second disc springs, the other [[side]] one of the respective clamp arms” to clarify the recitation and Examiner will interpret the recitation as such during examination.
Regarding Claim 8 (lines 3-5), in the recitation of “which can apply pressure to the parts and prevent the relative sliding when the components rotate, and the entire components can freely rotate” it is unclear which parts and components Applicant is referring to. Please review the original disclosure and amend as needed. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claims 2-10 are rejected based upon their dependency to a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Reasons for allowance, if applicable, will be the subject of a separate communication to the Applicant or patent owner, pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.104 and MPEP § 1302.14.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, Applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The prior art of Wu (CN 112 081 851), Du (CN 111 764 529) and Wu (CN 112 081 852) listed in the attached "Notice of References Cited" disclose similar friction dampers comprising friction discs related to various aspects of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James J. Taylor II whose telephone number is (571)272-4074. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at 571-270-5565. 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 J. TAYLOR II
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3655
/JAMES J TAYLOR II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655
Prosecution Insights