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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “11” has been used to designate both second inner side and second outer side.
The drawings are objected to because the reference character “68” in fig. 4 and 7 should not be there as it is pointing to the wrong part.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 18, 57, 61, 62, 63, 67, 73, 78 (first upper side), and 79 (second upper side).
The drawings are objected to because the first clamping surface uses 60, 61, and 68 as reference characters but the figures only use 60. Second clamping surface uses 61 and 71 as reference characters but both the first and second embodiments (fig. 4 and 7, respectively) uses the same reference characters in the figures.
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. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The reference character 78 is used for both “the transverse direction” and “a first upper side.”
The reference character 79 is used for both “the vertical direction” and “a second upper side.”
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.
Claims 1-12 are 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.
In claim 1, the limitation “wherein a first support surface of the first mounting extension and a second support surface of the second mounting extension lie in a common plane and project from the bottom side in the opposite direction to the vertical direction” is unclear as what is opposite the vertical direction? Does opposite the vertical direction mean transverse? If something projects in an opposite “direction” from something else, it is still in the same direction. It seems like Applicant means the elements are projected along the vertical direction but by opposite he means away from everything else but that’s not clear in the limitation.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the ratio" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the upper ridge" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 4, 6, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iida (US 20070234832 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Iida discloses (in annotated fig. 4) linear guide unit (fig. 4) comprising:
a profiled body (12), wherein the profiled body (12) has a base plate (30) with a longitudinal direction,
a transverse direction perpendicular thereto and a vertical direction orthogonal to the longitudinal direction and transverse direction,
wherein a first leg (1L) and a second leg (2L) project from an upper side (UP) of the base plate (30) in the vertical direction and are spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction,
wherein the profiled body (12) has a first inner side (right 38) and a first outer side (FO) and a second inner side (left 38) and a second outer side (SO),
wherein the first inner side (right 38) and the second inner side (left 38) face each other,
wherein a first guiding surface (GS1) is provided on the first inner side (right 38) and a second guiding surface (GS2) is provided on the second inner side (38),
and wherein the base plate (30) has a bottom side (BT) opposite the upper side (UP),
and a movement unit (20, 36a, 36b) comprising a carriage (20) which has a guiding unit (36a, 36b) with a first guiding module (36a) arranged on the carriage (20) and a second guiding module (36b) arranged opposite the first guiding module (36a) at a distance in the transverse direction on the carriage (20),
wherein the movement unit (20, 36a, 36b) is mounted on the profiled body (12) so as to be linearly movable in the longitudinal direction,
in that the first guiding module (36a) abutting movably against the first guiding surface (GS1) and the second guiding module (36b) abutting movably against the second guiding surface (GS2),
wherein a first mounting extension (1MS) and a second mounting extension (2MS) project from the bottom side (BT) and are spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction,
wherein a first support surface (1SS) of the first mounting extension (1MS) and a second support surface (2SS) of the second mounting extension (2MS) lie in a common plane and project from the bottom side (BT) in the opposite direction to the vertical direction,
wherein a first clamping surface (1CS) opposite the first support surface (1SS) is provided on the first mounting extension (1MS) and a second clamping surface opposite the second support surface (2SS) is provided on the second mounting extension (2MS),
and wherein the first support surface (1SS) completely overlaps the first clamping surface (1CS) and the second support surface (2SS) completely overlaps the second clamping surface (2CS) in the transverse direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
637
877
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Iida discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the extent of the first support surface (1SS) in the transverse direction corresponds to the extent of the first clamping surface (1CS) and the extent of the second support surface (2SS) in the transverse direction corresponds to the extent of the second clamping surface (2CS).
Regarding claim 6, Iida discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the first mounting extension (1MS) is located in a first outer region (FR) of the base plate (30) and the second mounting extension (2MS) is located in a second outer region (SR) of the base plate (30)
Regarding claim 9, Iida discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein a distance between a first base plate end face (1BP) opposite the first clamping surface (1CS) decreases with increasing distance from the first outer side (FO) of the profiled body (12) and a distance between a second base plate (2BP) end face opposite the second clamping surface (2CS) decreases with increasing distance from the second outer side (SO) of the profiled body (12, there are regions along the inclined surface that decreases with increasing distance from the outer side, especially going past the curve and toward the inside wall).
Regarding claim 11, Iida discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein an outer side (MFO) of the first mounting extension (1MS) is oriented parallel to the first outer side (FO) of the profiled body (12) and an outer side of the second mounting extension (2MS) is oriented parallel to the second outer side (SO) of the profiled body (12), wherein the outer side (MFO) of the first mounting extension (1MS) and the first outer side (FO) of the profiled body (12) lie in a common plane and the outer side (MSO) of the second mounting extension (2MS) and the second outer side (SO) of the profiled body (12) lie in a common plane.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida (US 20070234832 A1) alone.
Regarding claim 3, Iida discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1 but does not disclose the ratio of the extent of the first support surface in the transverse direction to the extent of the base plate in the transverse direction and the ratio of the extent of the second support surface in the transverse direction to the extent of the base plate in the transverse direction is at most 0.1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the ratio of the extent of the first support surface in the transverse direction to the extent of the base plate in the transverse direction and the ratio of the extent of the second support surface in the transverse direction to the extent of the base plate in the transverse direction is at most 0.1, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It also would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the ratio of the extent of the first support surface in the transverse direction to the extent of the base plate in the transverse direction and the ratio of the extent of the second support surface in the transverse direction to the extent of the base plate in the transverse direction is at most 0.1, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Further, in Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Since Applicant has not disclosed that the ratio of the support surfaces to the base plate being 0.1 solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose (the claimed ratios lacks any clear criticality), it appears that the invention would perform equally well regardless ratio of the support surfaces to the base plate being 0.1 or not. For example, the ratio can depend on how much load the linear guide unit needs to support and guide.
Alternative rejection #1
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, 10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Neff (EP 0322509 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Neff discloses (in annotated fig. 4N) linear guide unit (fig. 4) comprising:
a profiled body (2), wherein the profiled body (2) has a base plate (BP) with a longitudinal direction,
a transverse direction perpendicular thereto and a vertical direction orthogonal to the longitudinal direction and transverse direction,
wherein a first leg (1L) and a second leg (2L) project from an upper side (UP) of the base plate (BP) in the vertical direction and are spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction,
wherein the profiled body (2) has a first inner side (1IS) and a first outer side (FO) and a second inner side (2IS) and a second outer side (SO),
wherein the first inner side (1IS) and the second inner side (2IS) face each other,
wherein a first guiding surface (right 17) is provided on the first inner side (1IS) and a second guiding surface (left 17) is provided on the second inner side (38),
and wherein the base plate (BP) has a bottom side (BT) opposite the upper side (UP),
and a movement unit (13, right 15, left 15) comprising a carriage (13) which has a guiding unit (right 15, left 15) with a first guiding module (right 15) arranged on the carriage (13) and a second guiding module (left 15) arranged opposite the first guiding module (right 18) at a distance in the transverse direction on the carriage (13),
wherein the movement unit (13, right 15, left 15) is mounted on the profiled body (2) so as to be linearly movable in the longitudinal direction,
in that the first guiding module (right 15) abutting movably against the first guiding surface (right 17) and the second guiding module (left 15) abutting movably against the second guiding surface (left 17),
wherein a first mounting extension (1MS) and a second mounting extension (2MS) project from the bottom side (BT) and are spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction,
wherein a first support surface (1SS) of the first mounting extension (1MS) and a second support surface (2SS) of the second mounting extension (2MS) lie in a common plane and project from the bottom side (BT) in the opposite direction to the vertical direction,
wherein a first clamping surface (1CS) opposite the first support surface (1SS) is provided on the first mounting extension (1MS) and a second clamping surface opposite the second support surface (2SS) is provided on the second mounting extension (2MS),
and wherein the first support surface (1SS) completely overlaps the first clamping surface (1CS) and the second support surface (2SS) completely overlaps the second clamping surface (2CS) in the transverse direction.
PNG
media_image2.png
823
787
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Neff discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the first mounting extension (1MS) is located in a first outer region (FR) of the base plate (30) and the second mounting extension (2MS) is located in a second outer region (SR) of the base plate (BP).
Regarding claim 7, Neff discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein an upper ridge (UR) and a lower ridge (LR) are formed by a recess (RE) formed between the upper side (UP) and the bottom side (BT) and which extends in longitudinal direction through the entire base plate (BP).
Regarding claim 8, Neff discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1 but does not disclose wherein a ratio of a first distance of a central plane of the upper ridge (UP) to the first support surface (1SS) and/or to the second support surface (2SS) to a second distance of the central plane of the upper ridge (UP) to a first upper side of the first leg (1L) and/or to a second upper side of the second leg (2L) corresponds to the ratio of the second distance to the sum of the first and second distance (correspond does not define any specific correspondence or anything specific).
Regarding claim 10, Neff discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein a first guiding step (1GS, which is shown better in the other recess label 6 where (the dovetail style groove as illustrated, from the base of the groove the bottom side would project upward along the vertical), which does a small step) adjacent to the first clamping surface (1CS) is provided on the first mounting extension (1MS) and a second guiding step (2GS) adjacent to the second clamping surface (2CS) is provided on the second mounting extension (2MS), the first guiding step (1GS) and the second guiding step (2GS) projecting in the vertical direction.
Regarding claim 12, Neff discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the first guiding surface (right 17) is formed on a first guide rail (right 18) and the second guiding surface (left 17) is formed on a second guide rail (left 18), the first guide rail (right 18) being force-locked and/or material-locked connected to the first inner side (1IS) and the second guide rail (left 18) being force-locked and/or material-locked connected to the second inner side (2IS, there is an interference fit as there are no space between the two elements).
Alternative rejection #2
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bosch (DE 8809689 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bosch discloses (in annotated fig. 1) linear guide unit (fig. 1) comprising:
a profiled body (4), wherein the profiled body (4) has a base plate (BP) with a longitudinal direction,
a transverse direction perpendicular thereto and a vertical direction orthogonal to the longitudinal direction and transverse direction,
wherein a first leg (top part of 12) and a second leg (top part of 11) project from an upper side (UP) of the base plate (BP) in the vertical direction and are spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction,
wherein the profiled body (4) has a first inner side (14) and a first outer side (FO) and a second inner side (13) and a second outer side (SO),
wherein the first inner side (14) and the second inner side face (13) each other,
wherein a first guiding surface (GS1) is provided on the first inner side (14) and a second guiding surface (GS2) is provided on the second inner side (13),
and wherein the base plate (BP) has a bottom side (BT) opposite the upper side (UP),
and a movement unit (17, right 15, left 15) comprising a carriage (17) which has a guiding unit (right 15, left 15) with a first guiding module (right 15) arranged on the carriage (17) and a second guiding module (left 15) arranged opposite the first guiding module (right 15) at a distance in the transverse direction on the carriage (17),
wherein the movement unit (17, right 15, left 15) is mounted on the profiled body (12) so as to be linearly movable in the longitudinal direction,
in that the first guiding module (right 15) abutting movably against the first guiding surface (GS1) and the second guiding module (left 15) abutting movably against the second guiding surface (GS2),
wherein a first mounting extension (12) and a second mounting extension (11) project from the bottom side (BT) and are spaced apart from one another in the transverse direction,
wherein a first support surface (1SS) of the first mounting extension (12) and a second support surface (2SS) of the second mounting extension (11) lie in a common plane and project from the bottom side (BT) in the opposite direction to the vertical direction,
wherein a first clamping surface (1CS) opposite the first support surface (1SS) is provided on the first mounting extension (12) and a second clamping surface (2CS) opposite the second support surface (2SS) is provided on the second mounting extension (11),
and wherein the first support surface (1SS) completely overlaps the first clamping surface (1CS) and the second support surface (2SS) completely overlaps the second clamping surface (2CS) in the transverse direction.
PNG
media_image3.png
433
548
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Bosch discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the extent of the first support surface (1SS) in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the first clamping surface (1CS) and/or the second support surface (2SS) in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the second clamping surface (2CS).
Regarding claim 4, Bosch discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the extent of the first support surface (1SS) in the transverse direction corresponds to the extent of the first clamping surface (1CS) and the extent of the second support surface (2SS) in the transverse direction corresponds to the extent of the second clamping surface (2CS).
Regarding claim 5, Bosch discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the first clamping surface (1CS) is oriented parallel to the first support surface (1SS) and the second clamping surface (2CS) is oriented parallel to the second support surface (1SS).
Regarding claim 6, Bosch discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1, wherein the first mounting extension (12) is located in a first outer region (FR) of the base plate (BP) and the second mounting extension (11) is located in a second outer region (SR) of the base plate (BP).
Assuming it is later concluded that Bosch does not disclose the first and second support surfaces corresponding to 0.5 to 1.25 times their respective clamping surfaces:
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bosch (DE 8809689 A1) alone.
Regarding claim 2, Bosch discloses the linear guide unit according to claim 1 but does not disclose wherein the extent of the first support surface in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the first clamping surface and/or the second support surface in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the second clamping surface.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the extent of the first support surface in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the first clamping surface and/or the second support surface in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the second clamping surface, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It also would have been an obvious matter of design choice to set the extent of the first support surface in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the first clamping surface and/or the second support surface in the transverse direction corresponds to 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent in the transverse direction of the second clamping surface, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Further, in Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Since Applicant has not disclosed that the support surfaces being 0.5 to 1.25 times the extent of the clamping surfaces solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose (the claimed ratios lacks any clear criticality), it appears that the invention would perform equally well regardless if the first and second support surfaces corresponding to 0.5 to 1.25 times their respective clamping surfaces or not. For example, the ratio can depend on how much load the linear guide unit needs to support and guide and how compact the linear guide unit needs to be.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Keller (US 20070189647 A1) discloses a linear guide device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIMEE T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5250. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7 EST.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/AIMEE TRAN NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3617
/JAMES PILKINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617