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) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matheisl U.S. Patent No. 8,469,176.
Claim 1, Matheisl teaches a bearing positioning structure 2 without radial interference fit, which is used for a step 1 of an escalator Fig. 1, the bearing positioning structure 2 comprising: a bearing seat 3,5 formed on both sides of the step 1 of the escalator Fig. 1; a rolling bearing 40, a bearing inner ring of 40 of which is matched with a circumferential surface of the bearing seat 3,5, such that a step roller 11 is installed on the bearing seat 3,5 through the rolling bearing 40; wherein: the bearing positioning structure 2 also comprises a bolt 38, a washer 39 and a nut 41, the bearing seat 3,5 has a central through hole 28,29 coaxial with its circumferential surface, the bolt 38 successively passes through the washer 39, the bearing inner ring of the rolling bearing 40, the central through hole 28,29 and the nut 41 Figs. 4,6,7, and the inner ring of the rolling bearing 40 is axially clamped between the washer 41 and an axial limit step of the bearing seat 3,5 without radial interference fit between rolling bearing 40 and circumferential surface by tightening the nut 41 C6 L5-25.
Claim 2, Matheisl teaches the step 1 of the escalator is a die-casting step which is made of castable metallic materials through a die-casting process C2 L35-45.
Claim 3, Matheisl teaches an axial length of the circumferential surface of the bearing seat 3,5 is adapted to an axial dimension of the rolling bearing 40 and a geometric dimension of threaded connection, so as to avoid contact between the die-casting step 1 and the washer 39 that is deformed under the pretension force, and the threaded connection is composed of a combination of the bolt 38, the washer 39 and the nut 41 Fig. 7.
Claim 4, Matheisl teaches a transition fillet between the circumferential surface of the bearing seat 3,5 and the axial limit step 1, and the radius of the transition fillet 34 is less than the radius of a fillet between an inner hole of the inner ring the rolling bearing 40 and an end face of the rolling bearing 40 Fig. 7.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matheisl U.S. Patent No. 8,469,176 in view of Ludwig U.S. Patent No. 9,802,791.
Claim 5, Matheisl does not teach as Ludwig teaches the circumferential surface of the bearing seat 28 is a conical surface with small cone angle, and the conical surface gradually tilts outwardly from the transition fillet 24 C7 L35-50 Fig. 6. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the step configuration disclosed in Matheisl with the conical shape taught in Ludwig with a reasonable expectation of success because
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2362. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/KAVEL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
KS