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 Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21 recites “above them”. The claims should avoid using pronouns for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 15-19 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 15 recites “at least one third elongated element is an intermediate element”. Claim 1 previously recited “at least one plain bearing element which can be fixed stationary to the first telescopic element and is in sliding contact with the second telescopic element.” Applicant has not described in the specification, nor shown in the drawings how both limitations are possible. If there is an intermediate element between the first and second telescopic elements, then there is no way to both fix the plain bearing element to the first telescopic element and also provide sliding contact with the second telescopic element. Applicant has recited two mutually exclusive limitations.
Claim 21 recites “the side elements have a height which is sufficient to enclose the telescopic elements arranged above them laterally.” Applicant has not described in the specification or shown in the drawings side walls that enclose the telescopic elements above them. Enclose is defined as: ‘to surround or close off on all sides’. This is not shown or described in the specification or the drawings. Since the top of the telescopic elements are not surrounded, the walls cannot be enclosing the elements.
Claim 23 recites “a mounting plane for any attachments”. The language is outside the scope of the disclosure. Applicant has claimed a mounting plane capable of mounting any attachment. Put another way, Applicant claimed a plane which is capable of mounting any conceivable or known attachment. Applicant has not disclosed how such a function is achievable.
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 3-7 and 13-14, 17, 19 and 21-22 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.
Claim 3 recites “the inner contour of the plain bearing body”. Claim 4 recites “the outer contour of the plain bearing body”. Claim 2 previously recited “each…plain bearing body”. It is unclear if claims 3 and 4 are referencing each plain bearing body, or a specific one of the plain bearing bodies.
Claim 5 recites “differently designed plain bearing bodies”. The limitation is unclear, it is unclear in what way the bodies are “differently designed”. It is unclear what, if any, structural limitation is imparted by the phrase. For example, the bearing bodies could be designed by two different people, or on two different devices/mediums (pad and paper vs computer aided design). Applicant should rewrite the claim to clearly state the intent of the claim.
Claim 6 recites “the first type”. Claim 7 recites “the second type”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 13, 14 and 17 recite “in each case”. Claim 19 recites “the case”. No cases have been previously recited. There is a lack of antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claims 13, 14 and 19 recite “can be applied”. It is unclear if the limitations that follow the phrase are optional or structurally necessary. Put another way, are the limitations that follow “can be” required to meet the claim limitation or are they optional/alternatives?
Claim 19 recites “(supporting rail or sliding rail)”. It is improper to use parenthesis with claim limitations. As written, the claim is confusing and unclear.
Claim 21 recites “the base element has two side elements” and “the side elements have a height which is sufficient to enclose the telescopic elements arranged above them”. The limitation as written is unclear and confusing. How can the base element (which includes the side walls) be both enclosing the telescopic elements and be below them? Put another way, if the telescopic elements are above the base element (and thus by extension the side elements), then how can they also be enclosed by the base element?
Claim 22 recites “a closed side wall”. Claim 24 recites “a closed mounting surface”. It is unclear what structure is intended or imparted by the term “closed side wall” or “closed mounting surface”. Does this mean the wall/surface has no holes?
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.
Claims 1, 5-14, 20 and 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dutot U.S. 3,649,090.
Re clm 1, Dutot discloses a telescopic guide (Fig. 1-3) comprising a first elongated telescopic element (either of 1 or 2) as a base element and a second elongated telescopic element (the other of 1 or 2) as an end element, and wherein these two telescopic elements are arranged parallel to each other and are movable relative to each other in the a longitudinal direction, wherein a plain bearing (3, 10 and/or 11) is provided indirectly or directly between the first telescopic element and the second telescopic element, wherein the plain bearing has a first plain bearing unit (10) with at least one plain bearing element (10 or 101) which can be fixed stationary to the first telescopic element and is in sliding contact with the second telescopic element, and a second plain bearing unit (11) with at least one plain bearing element (11 or 111) which can be fixed stationary to the second telescopic element, whereas the second plain bearing unit is in sliding contact with the first telescopic element, wherein the plain bearing elements are sleeve- shaped plain bearing bodies which have a C-shaped cross section (shown in Fig. 1), and in that a lateral opening (channel in 10 and 11 into which 9s are inserted) is formed on the plain bearing body by the C-shaped cross section.
Re clm 5, Dutot further discloses two types of plain bearing elements (3 and 10/11) are provided, which have differently designed bearing bodies (shown in Fig. 1-3; different in size, attachment location and feature).
Re clm 6, Dutot further discloses the first type of plain bearing body (3) includes an inner contour with a plain bearing surface and an outer contour having a fixing means (force-fitting or glued; col. 1: lines 60-69) for a stationary fixing to one of the telescopic elements.
Re clm 7, Dutot further discloses the second type of plain bearing body (10/11) includes an outer contour with a plain bearing surface and an inner contour having a fixing means (inner slot of sleeve 10 accepts tabs 9 and fixes sleeve to corresponding telescopic guide) for a stationary fixing to one of the telescopic elements.
Re clm 8, Dutot further discloses the telescopic elements have complementary means which are set up to cooperate with the fixing means of the blain bearing body (41, 51 and 61 complement 3; 9s complement 10 and 11).
Re clm 9, Dutot further discloses the opening of the C-shaped cross section of the plain bearing body can be temporarily enlarged by elastic deformation of the plain bearing body (sleeves are made of “flexible plastic material”; col. 2: lines 12-15; sleeves 10 and 11 can be opened wider since they are flexible).
Re clm 10, Dutot further discloses the first elongated telescopic element provided as the base element includes a supporting rail, and the supporting rail has a cross section with a rail channel (61 forms a rail channel).
Re clm 11, Dutot further discloses the second elongated telescopic element provided as the end element includes a sliding rail, and the sliding rail is complementary to the supporting rail of the first elongated telescopic element and has a cross section with a raised head (42 is a ‘raised head’ relative to 62 as it is ‘raised’ or extended from 62).
Re clm 12, Dutot further discloses the cross section of the raised rail head is complementary to an inner contour of the plain bearing bodies (shape of 42 is complementary to inside of 3) and a cross section of the rail channel is complementary to an outer contour of the plain bearing bodies (shape of 61 and 41 is complementary to outside of 3).
Re clm 13, as best understood, Dutot further discloses in each case a first type of the plain bearing body (3) having the outer contour of which is provided with a fixing means that serves for a stationary fixing to the respective telescopic element, can be applied to the telescopic element which has the supporting rail with the raised head or the sliding rail with the raised head (shown in Fig. 1).
Re clm 14¸ as best understood, Dutot further discloses in each case a second type of the plain bearing body (10 and/or 11) having the inner contour of which is provided with fixing means which serves for a stationary fixing to the respective telescopic element can be applied to the telescopic element which having the support rial with the rail channel or the sliding rail with the rail channel (shown in Fig. 1).
Re clm 20, Dutot further discloses the base element is provided with a stand (lower extending portion of 2; or left side surface of 2).
Re clm 23, Dutot further discloses the end element has a mounting plane for any attachments (left side of 2 and right side of 1 in Fig. 1 show mounting planes).
Re clm 24, Dutot further discloses the mounting plane is a closed mounting surface (shown in Fig. 2).
Re clm 25, Dutot further discloses at least one of the telescopic elements is formed in a single piece (shown in Fig. 1 and 2).
Re clm 26, Dutot further discloses the sleeve-shaped plain bearing bodies with the lateral opening are produced from plastic (col. 2: lines 12-15).
Claims 1-2, 4, 9-11 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wilmer U.S. 2,757,051.
Re clm 1, Wilmer discloses a telescopic guide (Fig. 1-5) comprising a first elongated telescopic element (either of C or D) as a base element and a second elongated telescopic element (the other of 1 or 2) as an end element, and wherein these two telescopic elements are arranged parallel to each other and are movable relative to each other in the a longitudinal direction, wherein a plain bearing (B) is provided indirectly or directly between the first telescopic element and the second telescopic element, wherein the plain bearing has a first plain bearing unit (upper B) with at least one plain bearing element which can be fixed stationary to the first telescopic element and is in sliding contact with the second telescopic element, and a second plain bearing unit (lower B) with at least one plain bearing element which can be fixed stationary to the second telescopic element, whereas the second plain bearing unit is in sliding contact with the first telescopic element, wherein the plain bearing elements are sleeve- shaped plain bearing bodies which have a C-shaped cross section (shown best in Fig. 2 and 5), and in that a lateral opening is formed on the plain bearing body by the C-shaped cross section.
Re clm 2, Wilmer further discloses each sleeve-shaped plain bearing body has an inner contour and an outer contour, wherein the inner contour and the outer contour extend in an axial direction of the plain bearing body, and wherein the inner contour and the outer contour are arranged concentric to each other (shown in Fig. 2 and 5).
Re clm 4, Wilmer further discloses the outer contour of the plain bearing body has a circular cross section (Fig. 2 and 5).
Re clm 9, Wilmer further discloses the opening of the C-shaped cross section of the plain bearing body can be temporarily enlarged by elastic deformation of the plain bearing body (as it is installed, the c-shaped cross section widens).
Re clm 10, Wilmer further discloses the first elongated telescopic element provided as the base element includes a supporting rail (as formed by D above upper B), and the supporting rail has a cross section with a rail channel (channel of D into which upper B sits).
Re clm 11, Wilmer further discloses the second elongated telescopic element provided as the end element includes a sliding rail (39), and the sliding rail is complementary to the supporting rail of the first elongated telescopic element and has a cross section with a raised head (shown in Fig. 2, 4 and 5).
Re clm 20, Wilmer further discloses the base element is provided with a stand (for example, where C contacts C’).
Re clm 21, Wilmer further discloses the base element has two side elements (for example C and C’ or C’ above C and C’ below C), and in that the side elements have a height which is sufficient to enclose the telescopic element arranged above them.
Re clm 22, Wilmer further discloses at least one of the side elements is formed as a closed side wall (Fig. 2).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilmer U.S. 2,757,051 as applied to claim above, and further in view of Moshammer U.S. 2006/0083447.
Wilmer discloses all the claimed subject matter as described above.
Re clm 3, Wilmer does not disclose the inner contour of the plain bearing body has a polygonal cross section.
Moshammer teaches a sliding bearing comprising the inner contour of the plain bearing body has a polygonal cross section (at 12, Fig. 3).
Since both Wilmer and Moshammer disclose linear sliding bearings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the inner contour shape and rail shape of Wilmer with that of Moshammer and provide the inner contour of the plain bearing body has a polygonal cross section to achieve the predictable result of allowing sliding between two elements. Furthermore, the polygonal shape of Moshammer also prevents rotating and twisting of the bearing relative to the rail.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN B WAITS whose telephone number is (571)270-3664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 6-4 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 R 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.
/ALAN B WAITS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617