With 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 .
The amendment filed 6/25/26 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6-11, 13, 15, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potratz (US Pub. No. 2023/0323952) in view of Allen (US Patent No. 8,177,238).
Regarding claim 1, the Potratz reference discloses a seal ring assembly (Fig. 13) for use with main shaft and crushing head of a gyratory crusher (Title), comprising:
a retaining ring assembly (46) configured to mount to the crushing head;
a seal ring (50) positioned to extend from the retaining ring assembly.
However, the Potratz reference fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies that are each movable between an engaged centering position in which each of the seal ring retention assemblies contacts the seal ring to hold the seal ring in a centered position during installation of the main shaft into the gyratory crusher and a retracted operating position in which the seal ring is movable within the retaining ring assembly.
The Allen reference, a centering system for a seal, discloses a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies (54) that are each movable between an engaged centering position in which each of the seal ring retention assemblies contacts the seal ring to hold the seal ring in a centered position during installation of the main shaft into the gyratory crusher and a retracted operating position in which the seal ring is movable within the retaining ring assembly (Allen, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies to the Potratz reference in view of the teachings of the Allen reference in order to allow for longer lasting centering of the sealing ring.
Regarding claim 2, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies are positioned in the retaining ring assembly (Allen, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 3, discloses, each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies is positively retained in the engaged centering position and biased into the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 6, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 3, discloses each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies are rotatable between the engaged centering position and the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 7, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 3, discloses each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies are longitudinally movable along a radius of the seal ring between the engaged centering position and the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 8, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 3, discloses radial movement of the seal ring moves the seal ring retention assemblies from the engaged centering position and the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 3-7).
Regarding claim 9, the Potratz reference discloses a seal ring assembly (Fig. 13) for use with main shaft and crushing head of a gyratory crusher (Title), comprising:
a retaining ring assembly (46) configured to mount to the crushing head, the retaining ring assembly including a seal ring channel (Fig. 13);
a seal ring (50) positioned within the seal ring channel and extending from the retaining ring assembly during operation of the gyratory crusher (Fig. 13).
However, the Potratz reference fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies each positioned in the retaining ring assembly and movable between an engaged centering position that holds the seal ring in a centered position during installation of the main shaft into the gyratory crusher and a retracted operating position in which the seal ring is movable within the seal ring channel, wherein each seal ring retention assembly contacts and holds the seal ring in the centered position.
The Allen reference, a centering system for a seal, discloses a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies (54) that are each positioned to contact the seal ring to hold the seal ring in a centered position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies to the Potratz reference in view of the teachings of the Allen reference in order to allow for longer lasting centering of the sealing ring.
Regarding claim 10, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 9, discloses the retaining ring assembly includes an upper retaining ring and a lower retaining ring (Figs. 12A-13 of Allen clearly shows element 46 being made of two parts), wherein the seal ring channel is located between the upper retaining ring and the lower retaining ring (Allen, Figs. 12A-13).
Regarding claim 11, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 9, discloses each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies is positively retained in the engaged centering position and biased into the retracted operating position (Allen, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 13, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 9, discloses each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies are rotatable between the engaged centering position and the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 15, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 9, discloses each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies are movable longitudinally along a radius of the seal ring between the engaged, centering position and the retracted, operating position (Allen, Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 17, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 9, discloses radial movement of the seal ring moves the seal ring retention assemblies from the engaged centering position and the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 18, the Potratz reference, as best understood, discloses a gyratory crusher (Title), comprising:
a main shaft (12);
a crushing head (Paras. [0002]-[0004]) mounted to the main shaft; and
a seal ring assembly (Fig. 13) mounted to the main shaft, comprising:
a retaining ring assembly (46) mounted to the crushing head, the retaining ring assembly
including a seal ring (50) positioned within a seal ring positioned within the seal ring channel (channel between two elements of 46) and extending from the retaining ring assembly during operation of the gyratory crusher (Fig. 13); and
However, the Potratz reference fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies each positioned in the retaining ring assembly and movable between an engaged centering position in which each of the seal ring assemblies contacts and holds the seal ring in a centered position during installation of the main shaft into the gyratory crusher and a retracted operating position out of contact with the seal ring such that the seal ring is movable within the seal ring channel, wherein each seal ring retention assembly contacts the seal ring to hold the seal ring in the centered position.
The Allen reference, a centering system for a seal, discloses a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies (54) that are each positioned to contact the seal ring to hold the seal ring in a centered position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a plurality of seal ring retention assemblies to the Potratz reference in view of the teachings of the Allen reference in order to allow for longer lasting centering of the sealing ring.
Regarding claim 19, the Potratz reference, as modified in claim 18, discloses each of the seal ring retention assemblies are selectively movable into the engaged centering position to hold the seal ring in the centered position and are moved by the seal ring to the retracted operating position (Allen, Figs. 3-7).
Claim(s) 5, 12, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potratz in view of Allen as applied to claims 1-4, 6-11, 13, 15, and 17-19 above, and further in view of Glawion et al. (US Patent No. 10,094,182).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, the modified Potratz reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claims 4 and 11.
However, the modified Potratz reference fails to explicitly disclose each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies includes a ball received in a detent to positively retain the seal ring retention assembly in the engaged centering position.
The Glawion reference, a positioning screw, discloses the addition of a ball (Col. 7, Lines 17-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a ball and detent to the modified Potratz reference in view of the teachings of the Glawion reference in order to ensure proper centering.
Regarding claims 16 and 20, the modified Potratz reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claims 15 and 19.
However, the modified Potratz reference fails to explicitly disclose each of the plurality of seal ring retention assemblies includes a spring to bias the seal ring retention assembly toward the retracted operating position.
The Glawion reference, a positioning screw, discloses the addition of a spring (Col. 7, Lines 17-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a spring to the modified Potratz reference in view of the teachings of the Glawion reference in order to ensure proper centering.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the combination of reference, the argument is not persuasive because one of ordinary skill in the art would know to modify the surroundings of the Protratz reference to accommodate the seal ring retention of the Allen reference.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the retracted position, the argument is not persuasive because during installation of the seal retainer of the Allen reference, the assembly is in a retracted position and the seal is movable for centering.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the rejection of claim 4, the argument is not persuasive because the claim do not require a biasing element.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the rejection of claim 6, the argument is not persuasive because the claim does not require the whole seal ring retention assembly to be rotatable.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the rejection of claim 8, the argument is not persuasive because the claim does not require any movement after installation, it only requires movement in the retracted position.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERT Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571)272-8322. 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.
/GILBERT Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights