DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Status of claims
Claims 1-6 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
While the language of the claims 1, 2, 4, 6 do not explicitly warrant a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for indefiniteness, Examiner suggests the following amendments be made in order to more clearly recite the intended scope of the claims.
Amending lines 10-12 of claim 1 to read --an annular second portion extending radially outward from the second end, the second portion extending in a direction that is radially outward from an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion--.
Amending lines 3-4 of claim 2 to read --a first annular portion extending outwardly from the second end, the first annular portion extending in a direction that is
Amending claim 4 to read --wherein the first surface has a slope, wherein an angle between the slope and the central axis is within a range of 1 degree
Amending lines 16-18 of claim 6 to read --an annular second portion extending radially outward from the second end, the second portion extending in a direction that is radially outward from an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion--.
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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein the second surface is a slope, an angle between the slope and the reference plane being within a range of 1 degree or more and 90 degrees or less”. Claim 1, of which claim 3 depends from, recites that “the second surface being at an angle greater than 0 degrees relative to the reference plane” in lines 18-19. Being that claim 1 already defines of an angle between the second surface and the reference plane, and that claim 3 is also defining of an angle between the slope of the second surface and the reference plane, it is unclear from the language of the claims if the angle of claim 3 is referring to the same angle defined in claim 1, or if a new angle is being introduced. Based upon Applicant’s disclosure, it would appear that the angle of claim 3 is referring to angle of claim 1 and is further defining of a specific range of the angle between the second surface and the reference plane. Thus, for the purpose of this action, Examiner will interpret that the angle of claim 3 is the same angle defined in claim 1, and will interpret claim 3 as reading as:
“wherein the second surface has a slope, wherein the angle between the slope and the reference plane is within a range of 1 degree
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobbelhoff et al. (DE-102016207957; hereinafter Dobbelhoff) in view of Abels (US 6,913,409).
Regarding claim 1, Dobbelhoff (Fig. 3-4) discloses of a dust cover comprising:
an annular body (13); and
a cover (5),
wherein the annular body includes:
a cylindrical portion (see Annotated Fig. 1 below) including:
a first end in a first direction (see Annotated Fig. 1) along a central axis (26, Annotated Fig. 1) of the annular body; and
a second end opposite to the first end (see Annotated Fig. 1);
an annular first portion connected to the first end (see Annotated Fig. 2 below); and
an annular second portion extending radially outward from the second end (see Annotated Fig. 2), an extending direction of the second portion being a direction extending from an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion radially outward (see Annotated Fig. 2),
wherein the first portion includes an outer circumferential surface (see Annotated Fig. 2),
wherein the second portion includes a surface facing in the first direction (see Annotated Fig. 3 below), the surface of the second portion including a second surface (see Annotated Fig. 3),
wherein the second surface is disposed in the first direction from a reference plane that is perpendicular to the central axis and that includes the second end (see Annotated Fig. 3), the second surface being at an angle greater than 0 degrees relative to the reference plane (see Annotated Fig. 4 below),
wherein the cover includes an annular sealing portion surrounding the cylindrical portion (see Annotated Fig. 5 below), and
wherein the sealing portion is in contact with the annular first portion and the second surface (see Annotated Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
874
1403
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
PNG
media_image2.png
938
1562
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2
PNG
media_image3.png
874
1578
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3
PNG
media_image4.png
887
1629
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 4
PNG
media_image5.png
874
1399
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5
Dobbelhoff does not explicitly disclose wherein the outer circumferential surface of the first portion includes a first surface inclined radially outward relative to the central axis and wherein the annular sealing portion is in contact with the first surface.
Abels (with focus on the embodiment of Fig. 4) teaches of a ball joint comprising a similar dust cover comprising an annular body (9) and a cover (6), wherein the annular body comprises a first annular portion (18) that extends from a first end of a cylindrical portion (10) of the annular body (see Fig. 4), the first annular portion having an outer circumferential surface that includes a sloped first surface (see Annotated Fig. 6 below) which is inclined radially outward at an angle relative to a central axis (see in Annotated Fig. 6 that the sloped first surface is inclined radially outward at an angle relative to the central axis), and wherein a sealing portion (8) of the cover is in contact with the first surface (see Fig. 4), and wherein the sloped first surface is provided on the annular body to prevent the cover from sliding off axially (see Col. 4 lines 16-23).
PNG
media_image6.png
424
829
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 6
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dobbelhoff with the teachings of Abels, to have the outer circumferential surface of the first annular portion include a sloped first surface that is inclined radially outward at an angle relative to the central axis and wherein the annular sealing portion is in contact with the first surface, as in doing so would assist in preventing the cover from sliding off axially.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Dobbelhoff and Abels further teach wherein the second portion includes:
a first annular portion extending outwardly from the second end (see Annotated Fig. 7 below), an extending direction of the first annular portion being perpendicular to the central axis (see Annotated Fig. 7); and
a second annular portion surrounding the first annular portion (see Annotated Fig. 7), and
wherein the second surface is continuous with a surface of the first annular portion facing in the first direction (see Annotated Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image7.png
969
1884
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 7
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dobbelhoff and Abels further teach wherein the second surface (see Annotated Fig. 4) has a slope (it can be seen in Annotated Fig. 4 that the second surface is a sloped surface), wherein the angle between the slope and the reference plane (see Annotated Fig. 4) is within a range of 1 degree and 90 degrees (it can be seen in Annotated Fig. 4 that an acute angle is formed between the second surface and the reference plane, i.e. the angle between the slope and the reference plane is within a range of 1 degree and 90 degrees).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Dobbelhoff and Abels further teach wherein the first surface is a slope (as taught by Abels in claim 1 as the first surface is a sloped surface), and that there is an angle between the sloped first surface and the central axis (as taught in claim 1 by Abels). Neither Dobbelhoff nor Abels explicitly disclose wherein the angle is within a range of 1 degree or more and 15 degrees or less. However, Applicant is reminded that it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim (i.e. an angle between the slope of the first surface and the central axis) are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). As such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the angle between the slope of the first surface and the central axis be within the range of 1 degree and 15 degrees, as such involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Dobbelhoff and Abels further teach wherein the sealing portion (see Annotated Fig. 5) includes:
an annular main body portion surrounding the cylindrical portion (see Annotated Fig. 8 below); and
a lip portion protruding from a surface of the main body portion facing the second portion (see Annotated Fig. 8), and
wherein the lip portion is in contact with the second surface (see Annotated Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image8.png
874
1446
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 8
Regarding claim 6, Dobbelhoff (Fig. 3-4) discloses of a ball joint comprising:
a joint mechanism; and
a dust cover,
wherein the join mechanism includes:
a ball stud (14) having one end having a spherical portion (4); and
a bearing (2) supporting the spherical portion (see Fig. 3),
wherein the dust cover includes:
an annular body (13) surrounding the ball stud (see Fig. 3-4); and
a cover (5),
wherein the annular body includes:
a cylindrical portion (see Annotated Fig. 1) including:
a first end in a first direction (see Annotated Fig. 1) along a central axis (26, Annotated Fig. 1) of the annular body; and
a second end opposite to the first end (see Annotated Fig. 1);
an annular first portion connected to the first end (see Annotated Fig. 2); and
an annular second portion extending radially outward from the second end (see Annotated Fig. 2), an extending direction of the second portion being a direction extending from an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion radially outward (see Annotated Fig. 2),
wherein the first portion includes an outer circumferential surface (see Annotated Fig. 2),
wherein the second portion includes a surface facing in the first direction (see Annotated Fig. 3), the surface of the second portion including a second surface (see Annotated Fig. 3),
wherein the second surface is disposed in the first direction from a reference plane that is perpendicular to the central axis and that includes the second end (see Annotated Fig. 3), the second surface being at an angle greater than 0 degrees relative to the reference plane (see Annotated Fig. 4),
wherein the cover includes an annular sealing portion surrounding the cylindrical portion (see Annotated Fig. 5), and
wherein the sealing portion is in contact with the annular first portion and the second surface (see Annotated Fig. 5).
Dobbelhoff does not explicitly disclose wherein the outer circumferential surface of the first portion includes a first surface inclined radially outward relative to the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion and wherein the annular sealing portion is in contact with the first surface.
Abels (with focus on the embodiment of Fig. 4) teaches of a ball joint comprising a similar dust cover comprising an annular body (9) and a cover (6), wherein the annular body comprises a first annular portion (18) that extends from a first end of a cylindrical portion (10) of the annular body (see Fig. 4), the first annular portion having an outer circumferential surface that includes a sloped first surface (see Annotated Fig. 9 below) with is inclined radially outward at an angle relative to an outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion (see in Annotated Fig. 9 that the sloped first surface is inclined radially outward at an angle relative to the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion), and wherein a sealing portion (8) of the cover is in contact with the first surface (see Fig. 4), and wherein the sloped first surface is provided on the annular body to prevent the cover from sliding off axially (see Col. 4 lines 16-23).
PNG
media_image9.png
499
829
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 9
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dobbelhoff with the teachings of Abels, to have the outer circumferential surface of the first annular portion include a sloped first surface that is inclined radially outward at an angle relative to the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical portion and wherein the annular sealing portion is in contact with the first surface, as in doing so would assist in preventing the cover from sliding off axially.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN J BAYNES whose telephone number is (571)270-1852. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30AM-4:30PM 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, Amber Anderson can be reached on 571-270-5281. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KEVIN J BAYNES/Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights