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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huling (US 3408084).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Huling discloses a machine assembly 17 Fig. 1 comprising: a machine component 11 rotatable around a component axis; a wear sleeve 31 having an inner sleeve surface in contact with the machine component, an outer sleeve surface 29 made of a fluoropolymer material (Teflon, PTFE, Col. 3, Ln. 45-49), and the inner sleeve surface is formed at least in part by the fluoropolymer material, and wherein a continuous thickness of the fluoropolymer material is defined from the inner sleeve surface to the outer sleeve surface; and a lip seal 24 including an outer seal surface, an inner seal surface, and a first sealing lip 27 in sealing contact with the fluoropolymer material of the outer sleeve surface at a first axial location.
Regarding claim 2, Huling discloses wherein the lip seal 24 is elastically deformed in circumferential sealing contact with the outer sleeve surface 29 at the axial location.
Regarding claim 3, Huling discloses a seal housing 13, and the elastic deformation of the lip seal 24 includes elastic deformation stretching the lip seal in an axial direction so as to space the axial location of sealing contact axially outward of the seal housing.
Regarding claim 9, Huling discloses wherein the wear sleeve 31 has a uniform thickness, in a radial direction, along at least a portion of a wear sleeve length between the first axial sleeve end and the second axial sleeve end. Regarding claim 10, Huling discloses a seal housing 13, and wherein the lip seal 24 is fitted upon the wear sleeve 1 and at least one of the first axial sleeve end or the second axial sleeve end extends axially outward of the seal housing.
Regarding claim 11, Huling discloses wherein the fluoropolymer includes polytetrafluorethylene (Teflon, PTFE).
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(s) 4, 5, 13, 14, 15, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huling.
Regarding claim 4, Huling discloses wherein the wear sleeve 31 further includes a material element 33 forming the inner sleeve surface at least in part. However, Huling fails to explicitly disclose that the material of the element is a metallic element. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended used as a matter of obvious design choice. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)
Regarding claim 5, Huling as modified discloses wherein the wear sleeve 31 further includes a wear sleeve body, and an adhesive securing the element 31 to the wear sleeve body Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 15, Huling as modified discloses a seal assembly 17 comprising: a wear sleeve 31, the wear sleeve having an outer sleeve surface made of fluoropolymer material (Teflon): the wear sleeve further including an inner sleeve surface forming a slot 32, and a cylindrical element 33 seated within the slot and forming the inner sleeve surface at least in part; and a lip seal 24 made of an elastic material: the lip seal defining a seal axis extending between a first axial seal end and a second axial seal end, and including an outer seal surface and a circumferentially extending inner seal surface forming an opening receiving the wear sleeve; and the lip seal further including a sealing lip 27 in sealing contact with the outer sleeve surface, and the outer sleeve surface forming a running surface rotatable relative to the sealing lip. However, Huling fails to explicitly disclose that the material of the element is a metallic element. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended used as a matter of obvious design choice. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)
Regarding claim 19, Huling as modified discloses wherein the inner sleeve surface is made of fluoropolymer (Teflon) material at locations axially outward of the slot 32.
Regarding claim 20, Huling as modified discloses wherein the metallic element forms a majority of an axial length of the inner sleeve surface.
Claim(s) 6, 7 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huling in view of Stoeck et al. (US 2015/0145215).
Regarding claims 6 and 12, Huling discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to explicitly disclose a second sealing lip. Stoeck et al., a machine assembly Fig. 2, discloses the use of a second sealing lip 52. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the seal of Huling with a second seal as taught by Stoeck et al. in order to provide an enhanced sealing efficacy. (Para. 0028 of Stoeck et al.)
Regarding claim 7, the combination discloses wherein the first sealing lip (50 of Stoeck et al.) and the second sealing lip (52 of Stoeck et al.) ride in contact with the wear sleeve 25 at the first axial location and a second axial location, respectively.
Regarding claim 13, the combination discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to explicitly disclose that the material of the element is a metallic element. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended used as a matter of obvious design choice. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)
Regarding claim 14, the combination discloses bonding layer securing the material element 33 to the elastomer material 31. But fails to explicitly disclose where the element is a metallic material. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended used as a matter of obvious design choice. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 are have been considered but are moot because the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUGENE G BYRD whose telephone number is (571)270-1824. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm.
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 Fulton can be reached at 5712727376. 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.
/EUGENE G BYRD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675