DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 9, Figure 13, Claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 07/28/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the common technical feature is the structure of the gasket. This is not found persuasive because based on the disclosure, the different structural arrangements of the gaskets in each species listed in the restriction requirement are the different technical features that present additional examination burden if the restriction is not required. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (US 2022/0074496) in view of Lee et al. (US 2003/0098964).
In re claim 1, Watanabe, in figures 1-8, discloses a gasket having at least one rubber layer (12) and a metal layer (11). Watanabe does not disclose using the gasket in a machine table and an armature. Lee however, in figures 1-7, shows an example of using a gasket (103, see figure 5)) in a structure having a machine table (20) and an armature (positioned below table 20 in figure 4a). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have adapted the structure of the gasket taught by Watanabe to the gasket of Lee to improve sealing.
In re claim 2, Watanabe, in figures 1-8, discloses that the gasket has at least two rubber layers and a metal layer interposed between the at least two rubber layers (as shown in figure 2 and other figures).
In re claims 3-4, Watanabe discloses the claimed gasket except for the specific thickness values of the layers. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the gasket with thickness values in the claimed range, 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. Please note that in the instant application, paragraphs 19-20, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
In re claim 5, Watanabe, in figures 1-8, discloses a bolt hole (16) is formed in the gasket.
In re claim 6, Watanabe, in figures 1-8, discloses that the gasket has a first surface and a second surface on a rear side of the first surface, a convex portion is formed on the first surface, a concave portion is formed on the second surface at a position corresponding to the convex portion, and the concave portion and the convex portion are formed to surround one or more of the bolt holes (this is best seen in figures 4-7).
In re claim 7, Lee teaches a linear motor (14).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Talpalatski whose telephone number is (571)270-3908. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM PT.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 5712723985. 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.
/Alexander Talpalatski/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights