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 under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 2307401, filed on July 11, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on July 10, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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 2-3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite.
Claims 2 and 3 recite that the locking-circle diameter is “between two predetermined values,” but neither the claims or the specification discloses those values or provide a method of determining them. Applicant is suggested to replace the indefinite language with --the locking-circle diameter is larger than the screw-shank diameter and smaller than the projecting annular-edge diameter--. Claim 3 is rejected for the same reason by virtue of its dependency from claim 2.
Claims 6 and 8 recite that the unlocking-circle diameter is “larger than a predetermined value,” but the predetermined value is not disclosed. The metes and bounds of these claims cannot be determined with reasonable certainty. Applicant is suggested to replace the indefinite language with – the unlocking-circle diameter is larger than the projecting annular-edge diameter--.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wright (EP 2942555 A1).
With regards to claim 1, a washer is “a flat think ring or a perforated plate used in joints or assemblies to ensure tightness, prevent leakage, or relieve friction” (Merriam-Webster dictionary). The claim does not include structure specific to a locking washer and therefore, any type of structure that meets the definition of a washer can be used. Wright discloses an annular main component with a ring (grab ring 28 in Figs. 1-2) comprising, on its inner periphery, at least two tabs arranged radially toward an inside (the plurality of teeth 29 carried on the inner periphery of the grab ring 28 and directed radially inward toward the axis as show in Figs. 1-2, para [0024]), each of the tabs being connected, by a first end, to the ring and comprising an opposite second end, that is a free end (each tooth 29 is joined to the body of the grab ring 28 at its root and terminates in a free tip, Figs. 1-2), the tabs being flexible and curved such that their free ends deviate (the teeth 29 deflect to admit the inserted member and return toward the axis to resist its withdrawal, and are further deflected outward by the demount collar 30, i.e. the tabs/teeth are flexible, para [0026]), on a same side, from a plane formed by the ring and substantially define arcs of a same circle, that is a locking circle (the tips of the teeth 29 together engage the cylindrical surface of the inserted member, and therefore lie on a common circle, Fig. 1), the annular auxiliary component to interact with the main component and arranged coaxially with the main component on the side opposite the side toward which the free ends of the tabs deviate (demount collar 30, an annular member coaxial with the grab ring 28 and entered from the side of the ring opposite the direction in which the teeth 29 are inclined), the auxiliary component comprising a ring equipped with an inner rim, which projects toward the main component (the collar 30 carries an angled contact surface 32 which projects axially toward the grab ring 28 and presses on the teeth 29 when the collar is advanced, para [0026]).
With regards to claim 2, Wright discloses wherein the locking circle (formed by the tip ends of teeth 29) has a diameter between two predetermined values (first value when diameter of the locking circle formed by the teeth 29 in locking state when the teeth 29 grab onto the inserted member and second value when the diameter of the locking circle is in demounting state with the demount collar 30 pressing axially against the teeth 29) .
With regards to claim 4, Wright discloses wherein the tabs are bent (the teeth 29 are angled radially and axially inward relative to the body of the grab ring 28 as shown in Fig. 2).
With regards to claim 5, Wright discloses wherein the rim has a conical shape (the inner rim of the auxiliary component at element 32 in Fig. 2 of Wright is an angled contact surface extending annularly about the axis of the collar which is a conical surface that presses upon the teeth as the collar advances).
With regards to claim 6, Wright discloses wherein in an unlocking position the main component is pressed against the auxiliary component such that peripheral edges of the free ends of the flexible tabs of the main component form an unlocking circle and have a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the locking circle and larger than a predetermined value (when the demount collar 30 is forced axially against the grab ring 28, the angled contact surface presses on the teeth so that they are directed outward and no longer engage the inserted member—the tips are displaced to a second, larger circle with a diameter greater than that of the locking circle).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright (EP-2942555-A1).
With regards to claim 3, Wright discloses the article of claim 1 as set forth above and further discloses that the peripheral edges of the free ends of the tabs (free ends of teeth 29) closely follow an arc of the locking circle (as shown with teeth 29 in Fig. 1).
However, Wright does not explicitly disclose the peripheral edges of the tabs are rounded.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the peripheral edges of the teeth of Wright as rounded edges following the arc of the circle they define. The member gripped is cylindrical, and shaping the edge that presses on it to conform to that cylindrical surface increases the area of contact and distributes the gripping load. Making the contact surface to the shape of the surface it contacts is a design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright (EP 2942555 A1) in view of Le (US-7204668-A).
With regards to claim 7, Wright discloses the fastening system of claim 1 as set forth above.
However, Wright does not disclose that the gripped member is a screw/bolt comprising a shank comprising, at one longitudinal end, a head, and at another longitudinal end, a projecting annular edge and wherein a diameter of the locking circle formed by the tabs of the main component is larger than a diameter of the shank of the screw and smaller than a diameter of the annular edge of the screw.
Le teaches a gripped member being a screw/bolt 10 (as shown in Figs. 1-4) comprising a shank (shaft 12) comprising, at one longitudinal end, a head (tapered head 15), and at another longitudinal end, a projecting annular edge (nose portion 16). Note that Le’s ring 20 is not part of the combination. In Le’s discussion of related art in the Background of the Invention (col 1, ln 10 - col 2, ln 33), Le describes a washer with inwardly extending tabs installed on a screw/bolt shank and stopped in its downward movement by a stop on the screw/bolt. The art therefore already used this kind of stop with the tabbed members, not only with split rings.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have mounted the article of Wright on a screw/bolt of the type taught by Le in order to attach a threaded fastener to a panel so that the fastener is not lost when it is loosened. This is applying a known technique to a known device that yields a predictable result. MPEP 2143(C-D).
The combination of Wright in view of Le discloses: (a) the diameter of the locking circle (of Wright) is larger than the diameter of the shank (of Le) in order for the teeth (of Wright) to grip the shank (of Le) and (b) the diameter of the locking circle (of Wright) is smaller than the diameter of the annular edge (of Le). Le’s lip or annular edge with the larger diameter keeps the locking circle on the screw/bolt.
With regards to claim 8, the combination of Wright in view of Le discloses the fastening system of claim 7 as set forth above and further discloses wherein in an unlocking position the main component (grab ring 28 in Figs. 1-2 of Wright) is pressed against the auxiliary component (demount collar 30 of Wright) such that peripheral edges of the free ends of the flexible tabs (teeth 29 of Wright) of the main component form an unlocking circle and have a diameter that is greater than a diameter of the locking circle and larger than a predetermined value, and wherein the diameter of the unlocking circle is larger than the diameter of the annular edge of the screw (screw/bolt 10 of Le). It would also have been obvious to make the unlocking circle larger than the annular edge of Le’s screw. Wright presses the teeth outward so the gripped part can come free. Sizing the parts so the release works would have been within the level of ordinary skill.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-1788735-A to Olson, US-2712262-A to Knohl, US-2794476-A to Hanneman, US-3523299-A to Tinnermann, US-5620290-A to Homfeldt et al., and US-2003/0147723-A1 to Schwab disclose lock washers with at least two tabs for engaging a bolt/screw.
US-3234-824-A to Lyvers, KR-20050000848-A to You and FR-2807816-A1 to Le Quere disclose a retaining ring with tabs and an annular auxiliary component to remove the retaining ring.
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