DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Taiwan on May 8, 2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the TW113204635 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
The document submitted June 20, 2024 consists of the front page only and is not a certified copy of the foreign application as filed. See MPEP 215.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “an reinforcing unit” should read – a reinforcing unit--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites that an abutting portion “which corresponds in shape to the installation hole” which is indefinite. It is unclear to what degree the shape of the abutting portion corresponds to the installation hole. The abutting portion has multiple parts including the tapered part and the surrounding portion and if these parts should partially or fully correspond to the installation hole. The specification provides no standard for measuring the degree of correspondence required. MPEP 2173.05(b).
Claims 2-12 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies, of rejected dependent claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-8, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenbaum (US 1,928,982) in view of Schermer (US 9,051,962 B2).
With regards to claim 1, Rosenbaum discloses a fastening device (as shown in Figs. 1 and 5) having a hole-defining wall defining an installation hole (see annotated Fig. 1 below) therein, said fastening device being disposed in one of the installation holes, and comprising: a fastening unit (inner nut 3 as shown in Fig. 1) extending along a longitudinal axis, and having an abutting portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which corresponds in shape to the installation hole (see annotated Fig. 1 below) to be engaged with the corresponding hole-defining wall (see annotated Fig. 1 below), a tightening portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which is coaxially connected with said abutting portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below), an abutting wall (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which extends radially (conical bearing surface f3 as shown in Fig. 3) from one of said abutting portion and said tightening portion, and a first threaded hole (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which is formed in said abutting portion and which extends along the longitudinal axis, said first threaded hole having first threads (see annotated Fig. 1 below); and an reinforcing unit (outer nut 2 as shown in Fig. 1) coaxially coupled with said fastening unit (inner nut 3 as shown in Fig. 1), and rotatable relative to said fastening unit about the longitudinal axis, said reinforcing unit having a friction wall (counter surface f4 in Fig. 3) which extends radially to face said abutting wall, and a second threaded hole (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which extends along the longitudinal axis to be aligned with said first threaded hole, wherein said reinforcing unit is rotated and tightened along the longitudinal axis to said fastening unit through abutment of said friction wall against said abutting wall.
However, Rosenbaum does not explicitly disclose the fastening device to be used with a wheel rim and wheel hub, or the abutting portion shaped to the installation hole.
Schermer teaches a wheel fastener (wheel fastener 3 as shown in Fig. 10) in which the hub flange (hub flange 21) carries studs (stud 22) , the wheel rim (wheel rim 1) has through holes aligned with those studs, and the fastener body seats in the hole with a pushing section (pushing section 315) pressed against the rim.
Schermer discloses that conventional wheel fasteners are easily unfastened once loosened. Rosenbaum solves that problem, providing a fastening device with a dual-nut lock. It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to install Rosenbaum’s dual-nut lock in Schermer’s wheel installation hole to resist vibration-induced loosening, with a reasonable expectation of success since both act on a common threaded stud.
With regards to claim 2, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the fastening device of claim 1 as set forth above. Rosenbaum further discloses wherein said abutting portion includes a surrounding section (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which has an outer diameter larger than an outer diameter of said tightening portion, and a taper section (see annotated Fig. 1 below) which extends from said surrounding section along the longitudinal axis and which is tapered away from said surrounding section to have a frusto-conical cross-section.
PNG
media_image1.png
600
952
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 3, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the fastening device of claim 1 as set forth above. Rosenbaum further discloses wherein said fastening unit (inner nut 3 as shown in Figs. 1 and 5) further has an extending portion (see annotated Fig. 1 above) which is coaxially connected with said tightening portion and which extends along the longitudinal axis away from said abutting portion, said reinforcing unit (outer nut 2) further having a sleeve portion (see annotated Fig. 1 above) which surrounds the longitudinal axis to sleeve around said extending portion and which extends along the longitudinal axis to terminate at said friction wall.
With regards to claim 4, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the fastening device of claim 3 as set forth above. However, Rosenbaum does not discloses wherein said extending portion has an outer engaging section, said sleeve portion having an inner engaging section which is engaged with said outer engaging section to retain said extending portion to said sleeve portion.
Schermer teaches wherein said extending portion has an outer engaging section (first positioning portion 314, an outer circumferential surface 313 of flange section 312 as shown in Fig. 2), said sleeve portion having an inner engaging section (second positioning portion 323, on inner peripheral surface 322 of peripheral wall 321 as shown in Fig. 2) which is engaged with said outer engaging section to retain said extending portion to said sleeve portion (the second positioning portion 323 is configured to rotatably couple the rotatable element to the first positioning position 314 of the flange section 312).
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the outer nut and inner nut of Rosenbaum with the mating engaging sections as taught by Schermer. Rosenbaum’s fastening device and Schermer’s fastening device have the same two-piece structure of a threaded body with a second element mounted coaxially on it. Schermer improved that structure with mating engaging sections that hold the two members together. Applying the same structure to Rosenbaum would predictably retain the outer nut to the inner net, so the lock installs as one piece instead of loose parts.
With regards to claim 5, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the device of claim 4 as set forth above. Schermer further teaches wherein said outer engaging section has a protuberance, said inner engaging section having an annular groove for accommodating said protuberance therein (an annular rib that radially extends outwardly on the outer circumferential surface 313, whilst the second positioning portion 323 of the peripheral wall 321 is an annular groove forming a radial recess that extends outwardly in the inner peripheral surface 322 and that accommodates the annular rib of the first positioning portion 314, col. 4, lns 19-26).
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the outer nut and inner nut of Rosenbaum with the mating engaging sections as taught by Schermer. The motivation is the same as set forth in claim 4. Rosenbaum’s fastening device and Schermer’s fastening device have the same two-piece structure of a threaded body with a second element mounted coaxially on it. Schermer improved that structure with mating engaging sections that hold the two members together. Applying the same structure to Rosenbaum would predictably retain the outer nut to the inner nut, so the lock installs as one piece instead of loose parts.
With regards to claim 6, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the device of claim 5 as set forth above. Schermer further discloses at Fig. 2 wherein said protuberance (first positioning portion 314 is an annular rib that radially extends outwardly on the outer circumferential surface 313 as shown in Fig. 2, col 4, lns 20-22) extends along the longitudinal axis to terminate at two ends proximal to and distal from said abutting wall, respectively, said outer engaging section (at 314 in Fig. 2) further having a first end flange (see annotated Fig. 2 below) which is connected with and is inclined relative to said end of said protuberance distal from said abutting wall (see annotated Fig. 2 below), said annular groove (the second positioning portion 323 of the peripheral wall 321 is an annular groove forming a radial recess that extends outwardly in the inner peripheral surface 322 and that accommodates the annular rib of the first positioning portion 314, col 4, lns 22-26) extending along the longitudinal axis to terminate at two ends proximal to and distal from said friction wall (see annotated Fig. 2 below), respectively, said inner engaging section further having a first slope surface (see annotated Fig. 2 below) which is connected with and is inclined relative to said end of said annular groove distal from said friction wall and which is retainingly engaged with said first end flange.
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incline the distal end of the protuberance and the matching end of the groove as shown in annotated Schermer Fig. 2 as to allow the protuberance to easily slide and snap onto the groove. The incline surface and matching groove for connection of two parts is a known technique with predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(C).
With regards to claim 7, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the fastening device of claim 5 as set forth above. Schermer further discloses wherein said protuberance (first positioning portion 314 is an annular rib that radially extends outwardly on the outer circumferential surface 313 as shown in Fig. 2, col 4, lns 20-22) extends along the longitudinal axis to terminate at two ends proximal to and distal from said abutting wall, respectively, said outer engaging section further having a second end flange (see annotated Fig. 2 below) which is connected with and is inclined relative to said end of said protuberance proximal to said abutting wall, said annular groove (the second positioning portion 323 of the peripheral wall 321 is an annular groove forming a radial recess that extends outwardly in the inner peripheral surface 322 and that accommodates the annular rib of the first positioning portion 314, col 4, lns 22-26) extending along the longitudinal axis to terminate at two ends proximal to and distal from said friction wall, respectively, said inner engaging section further having a second slope surface (see annotated Fig. 2 below) which is connected with and is inclined relative to said end of said annular groove proximal to said friction wall and which is retainingly engaged with said second end flange.
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incline the proximal end of the protuberance and the matching end of the groove as shown in the annotated Schermer Fig. 2 as to allow the protuberance to easily slide and snap onto the groove. The snap connection is a known technique with predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(C).
With regards to claim 8, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the device of claim 1 as set forth above. Rosenbaum discloses wherein said fastening unit (inner nut 3) is in form of a nut, and said first threaded hole (see annotated Fig. 1 above) extends through said abutting portion and said tightening portion (see annotated Fig. 1 above).
With regards to claim 10, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the fastening device of claim 1 as set forth above, wherein said fastening unit is in form of a bolt (bolt 1 as shown in Fig. 1), said first threaded hole extends through said abutting portion (see annotated Fig. 1), and said tightening portion is a threaded shaft which is threadedly engaged with said first threaded hole and said second threaded hole (tightening portion is the threaded shaft engaged with both the first threaded hole of the inner nut 3 and the second threaded of the outer nut 2).
Schermer further teaches a fastener unit in the form of a bolt (fastener 3 in Fig. 10), said first threaded hole extends through said abutting portion (near element 315), and said tightening portion is a threaded shaft (22) which is threadedly engaged with said first threaded hole and said second threaded hole (near element 316).
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a bolt form of the fastening device because Schermer teaches both configurations as alternative fastening devices based on the wheel hub used. Selecting the bolt form for a hub having threaded holes rather than projecting studs is the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results of securing the wheel rim to the hub and involves no change to the tightening interaction between the fastening unit and the reinforcing unit taught by Rosenbaum.
With regards to claim 12, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer disclose the device of claim 1 as set forth above. Claim 12 recites the reversal arrangement of the sleeve portion on the fastening unit and the extending portion on the reinforcing unit.
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reverse these parts. The tightening interaction is unchanged. The friction wall still abuts the abutting wall, and the two threaded holes remain aligned along the longitudinal axis regardless of which unit carries the surrounding wall and which carries the received portion. Mere reversal of essential working parts of a device is not patentable where the reversal produces no change in function. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A).
PNG
media_image2.png
1164
1071
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenbaum (US 1,928,982) in view of Schermer (US 9,051,962 B2) and further in view of Sato (US 4,729,703).
With regards to claim 9, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer discloses the fastening device of claim 8 as set forth above, but Rosenbaum’s tightening portion (extension 9) is tapered rather than cylindrical.
Sato teaches the tightening portion has a cylindrical wall extending along the longitudinal axis (axial projection 7 with cylindrical surface 7a along common axis 4 as shown in Fig. 6) to terminate at an end which is connected with said abutting portion (axial projection 7 is integrally formed with the tightening nut body 3 carrying axial bore 3a), and an opposite end which is connected with said abutting wall (thin walled radial connecting web 8 as shown in Fig. 5, the two nut bodies 2. 3 are connected by a thin-walled radial connecting web 8 extending from end of the cylindrical surface 7a to the maximum-diameter end of the conical internal surface 5a of the recess 5).
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Rosenbaum’s tightening portion with a cylindrical wall connected at one end to the abutting portion and at the opposite end to the abutting wall, as taught by Sato, because the cylindrical wall allows the reinforcing unit to tighten axially against the fastening unit. Sato’s cylindrical wall seats in the conical recess to produce clamping contact, so the substitution does not impair Rosenbaum’s locking function.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenbaum (US 1,928,982) in view of Schermer (US 9,051,962 B2) and further in view of Heighberger (US 3,494,399).
With regards to claim 11, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer discloses the fastening device of claim 3 as set forth above.
However, Rosenbaum in view of Schermer do not disclose wherein said reinforcing unit further has an elastic ring which is sleeved on said sleeve portion to seal a clearance between said sleeve portion and said extending portion.
Heighberger teaches a fastening device with reinforcing unit (second nut member 4 as shown in Fig. 1) further has an elastic ring (ring 9 made of plastic memory, col 2, lns 23-30) which is sleeved on said sleeve portion (surface 7) to seal a clearance between said sleeve portion (surface 7) and said extending portion (surface 8).
It would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the elastic ring sleeved on the sleeve portion and the extending portion as taught by Heighberger on the fastening device of Rosenbaum in view of Schermer because the elastic ring would seal any clearance between the sleeve portion and the extending portion and prevent liquid and debris from entering.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20230220870-A1 to Ye, US-1943672-A to Hewitt, US-5314279-A to Ewing, , and US-20090067948-A1 to Chung disclose a double nut locking assembly.
US-5324149-A to Bainbridge et al. disclose a lug nut for a wheel rim and wheel hub assembly.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONG BAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7350. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5:30 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, Kristina R Fulton can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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.
/L.B.N./
Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights