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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Group I subcombination invention, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 7/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected combination invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a), which states “The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims”.
Therefore, the “an elastic insert accommodated in the rotation interference groove” (claim 5) and “a first side end of the elastic insert faces one side boundary, in the circumferential direction, of the rotation interference groove, and wherein a second side end of the elastic insert faces the interference region” (claim 6) must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. Note that the sole depiction of the elastic insert (295) in figure 4 is a mere dotted line that lacks the claimed particulars, e.g., accommodation within the groove, etc. Since the above noted features appear to be critical to invention novelty, a detailed illustration is essential for a proper understanding of the claim invention. Accordingly, a mere graphical symbol or labeled representation is not acceptable.1
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a first side” of the body, twice. It is unclear whether the recitations are to set forth distinct sides or if both are referring to a common side. See MPEP 2173.05(o) which states "where a claim directed to a device can be read to include the same element twice, the claim may be indefinite".
Claim 1 recites “an outer surface of the sleeve… comprises… a second sleeve surface region… having a second curvature…” However, this limitation is contrary to the disclosure and thus unclear. See applicant’s figures showing the second sleeve surface region (220-2a, 220-2b) as being flat (i.e., without curvature). See MPEP 2173.03 which states that a claim may be "indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty."
Claim 1 recites that the second curvature is “different from the first curvature” but fails to specify in what manner thereby rendering the claims unclear (e.g., different in location, shape, color, size, weight or other manner). See MPEP 2173.05(b).
Claims 2 and 8 each recite a “line segment”. However, the figures fail to identify any element with reference character described as such in the written description such that the scope of the claim is unclear, thereby rendering the full scope of the claim unclear.
Claims 5 and 6 are contrary to the disclosure and is thus unclear. Applicant’s element (295) as seen in figure 4 as a mere dotted line is not accommodated in the rotation interference groove in the manner specified by claims 5 and 6. See MPEP 2173.03 as quoted previously above.
Claim 7 is contrary to the disclosure and is thus unclear. Applicant’s element (112) as seen in fig.2 does not meet the claim 7 guide groove particulars, e.g., element 112 is not depicted as a groove in the outer surface of body 110 as claimed.
The remaining claims depend from the above and are thus similarly unclear/rejected.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Thome US6349884.
Claim 1 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections). An assembly structure comprising: an assembling part (30); and a coupling part (20) configured to be attachable to or detachable from the assembling part, wherein the assembling part comprises: a body (body of 30) comprising a first side (see 35 USC 112 rejections) that forms a first opening; and a flange (flange of 30) fixedly coupled to a first side (see 35 USC 112 rejections) of the body, wherein the coupling part comprises: a base (base of 8, 24); and a sleeve (sleeve of 20a) configured to surround a periphery of the base and comprising a second side that forms a second opening, wherein the flange is configured to penetrate the sleeve, in a direction facing the base, such that a rotational mobility, about a rotation center axis of the assembly structure, of the flange is restricted relative to a rotational mobility of the base about the rotation center axis, wherein the sleeve is configured to be rotatable relative to the base, wherein the sleeve and the flange are configured to, based on a rotation angle of the sleeve with respect to the base being within a predetermined range, interfere with each other in an longitudinal direction parallel to the rotation center axis, and wherein an outer surface of the sleeve, in a radial direction perpendicular to the rotation center axis, comprises: a first sleeve surface region (a first region of the outer surface of 20) having a first curvature (curvature of the first region of the outer surface of 20) relative to the rotation center axis; and a second sleeve surface region (a second region of the outer surface of 20) connected to the first sleeve surface region in a circumferential direction around the rotation center axis and having a second curvature (curvature of the second region of the outer surface of 20, see 35 USC 112 rejections), relative to the rotation center axis, different (different shape or location as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections) from the first curvature.
Claim 2 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejection). The assembly structure of claim 1, wherein a cross section of the second sleeve surface region in a direction perpendicular to the rotation center axis comprises a line segment (see numerous lines and segments thereof throughout figures, see 35 USC 112 rejection).
Claim 3. The assembly structure of claim 2, wherein the second sleeve surface region comprises two second sleeve surface regions (left and right regions) spaced apart from each other in the circumferential direction with the first sleeve surface region (middle region) interposed therebetween.
Claim 4. The assembly structure of claim 3, wherein the two second sleeve surface regions are parallel with each other (see left 27 and right 27 in fig.4).
Claim 5. The assembly structure of claim 1, wherein the base comprises: a base flange (upper part of 8, as seen in fig.4); and a base protrusion (radially large protrusion at top of 8, as seen in fig.4) protruding from the base flange, wherein the base protrusion comprises an outer peripheral surface (outer upper peripheral surface of 8) comprising an interference region (protruding outer upper peripheral surface of 8) protruding radially outward, wherein the sleeve comprises a first sleeve (20) positioned in the longitudinal direction away from the second opening and around the outer peripheral surface of the base protrusion, wherein the first sleeve comprises an inner peripheral surface (inner peripheral surface of 20) that forms a rotation interference groove (groove in 20) configured to accommodate the interference region, wherein the interference region is configured to interfere with the first sleeve at a boundary (boundary between 20 and 8), in the circumferential direction, of the rotation interference groove, and wherein the coupling part further comprises an elastic insert (the thin wall between 8 and 20 has cross-hatching designating metal in accordance with MPEP 608.02(I)(IX), which inherently has some elasticity noting that applicant does not claim any specific magnitude of elasticity) accommodated in the rotation interference groove and extending in the circumferential direction.
Claim 7 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejections). The assembly structure of claim 1, wherein the body 30 comprises an outer surface (outer surface of 30) that forms a guide groove (groove in outer surface of 30 receiving 22 therein, see 35 USC 112 rejection) as seen in fig.4) extending in the circumferential direction and recessed radially inward, and wherein an outer surface of the guide groove comprises: a first guide groove region (a first region of outer surface of 30, see 35 USC 112 rejections) having a third curvature relative to the rotation center axis; and a second guide groove region (a second region of outer surface of 30, see 35 USC 112 rejections) connected to the first guide groove region in the circumferential direction and having a fourth curvature different (in at least location or shape) from the third curvature.
Claim 8. The assembly structure of claim 7, wherein a cross-section of the second guide groove region in a direction perpendicular to the rotation center axis comprises a line segment shape (see numerous lines and segments/shapes thereof throughout figures, see 35 USC 112 rejection).
Claim 9. The assembly structure of claim 8, wherein the second guide groove region comprises two second guide groove regions (left and right regions) spaced apart from each other in the circumferential direction with the first guide groove region (middle region) interposed therebetween.
Claim 10. The assembly structure of claim 9, wherein the two second guide groove regions extend in directions intersecting each other (left and right directions intersect horizontally).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The art of record does not suggest the totality of limitations recited in claim 6 (in combination with claims 5 and 1 from which it depends), does not provide any teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify toward the entirety of applicant's claim, nor was there any readily apparent cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the prior art to obtain the entirety of applicant’s claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
1 See 37 CFR 1.83 which states: "(a) The drawing in a nonprovisional application must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. However, conventional features disclosed in the description and claims, where their detailed illustration is not essential for a proper understanding of the invention, should be illustrated in the drawing in the form of a graphical drawing symbol or a labeled representation (e.g., a labeled rectangular box). In addition, tables that are included in the specification and sequences that are included in sequence listings should not be duplicated in the drawings. (b) When the invention consists of an improvement on an old machine the drawing must when possible exhibit, in one or more views, the improved portion itself, disconnected from the old structure, and also in another view, so much only of the old structure as will suffice to show the connection of the invention therewith. (c) Where the drawings in a nonprovisional application do not comply with the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the examiner shall require such additional illustration within a time period of not less than two months from the date of the sending of a notice thereof."
Prosecution Insights