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
Claims 2 and 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing farther from the push rod is in contact with the inner surface of the bearing damper…” (of claim 2) should read “a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing, farther from the push rod, is in contact with the inner surface of the bearing damper…”;
“a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing farther from the push rod is in contact with the inner surface of the bearing damper…” (of claim 8) should read “a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing, farther from the push rod, is in contact with the inner surface of the bearing damper…”; and
“a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft closer to the push rod than the farther portion is spaced apart from the inner surface of the bearing damper” (of claim 8) should read “a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing closer to the push rod than the farther portion is spaced apart from the inner surface of the bearing damper.”.
Appropriate correction is required. For examination purposes, the subject matter of claims 2 and 8 will be interpreted as underlined above.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6-7, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Kirschstein (US 20200102002).
Regarding claim 1, Kirschstein teaches an anti-rattle device ([0005] and [0054]) comprising:
a plug 18 positioned within a plug aperture 34 extending at least partially through a housing 36 accommodating a worm shaft 14 and a worm wheel 16 that meshes with the worm shaft 14 ([0046] and [0051], Figs. 2-3);
a bearing damper 30 positioned within the housing 36 and at least partially surrounding a worm shaft bearing 28 that rotatably supports the worm shaft 14 ([0051], Fig. 2), the bearing damper 30 configured to expand from a resting state to an expanded state in response to absorbing moisture and displace the worm shaft bearing 14 away from the worm wheel 16 ([0012]-[0013] and [0050], Figs. 2-4; the bearing damper is a c-ring, which are designed to expand and contract with an expansion of the worm shaft);
a push rod 38 positioned between the plug 18 and the worm shaft bearing 28 and extending through a push rod through-hole 32 in the bearing damper 30 ([0051], Fig. 3); and
a biasing element 42 biasing the push rod 38 toward the worm shaft bearing 28 ([0051], Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Kirschstein teaches an electric power steering system 10 ([0046]) comprising:
an electric motor ([0046]);
a worm shaft 14 rotating by rotational power of the electric motor ([0048], Fig. 1);
a worm shaft bearing 28, rotatably supporting the worm shaft 14 ([0051], Fig. 2);
a worm wheel 16 meshing with the worm shaft 14 ([0051], Fig. 2);
a housing 36 accommodating the worm shaft 14, the worm shaft bearing 28, and the worm wheel 16 ([0046] and [0051], Figs. 2-3); and
an anti-rattle device ([0005] and [0054]) comprising:
a plug 18 positioned within a plug aperture 34 extending at least partially through the housing 36 ([0051], Figs. 2-3);
a bearing damper 30 positioned within the housing 36 and at least partially surrounding the worm shaft bearing 28 ([0051], Fig. 2), wherein the bearing damper 30 is configured to expand from a resting state to an expanded state in response to absorbing moisture and displace the worm shaft bearing 28 away from the worm wheel 16 ([0012]-[0013] and [0049]-[0050], Figs. 2-4; the bearing damper is a c-ring, which are designed to expand and contract with an expansion of the worm shaft; the worm shaft bearing 28 is a floating bearing which gets displaced away from the worm wheel along axis-A as the worm shaft expands);
a push rod 38 positioned between the plug 18 and the worm shaft bearing 28 and extending through a push rod through-hole 32 in the bearing damper 30 ([0051], Fig. 3); and
a biasing element 42 biasing the push rod 38 toward the worm shaft bearing 28 ([0051], Fig. 3).
Regarding claims 6 and 12 (same limitations, different dependencies), Kirschstein teaches wherein:
an inner surface of the plug aperture 34 includes a female thread pattern ([0053], Fig. 3; the inner surface of the aperture 34 of the housing portion 36 contains threads), and
an outer surface 48 of the plug 18 includes a male thread pattern meshing with the female thread pattern ([0053], Fig. 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 2 and 8 (same limitations, different dependencies), Kirschstein teaches wherein:
the bearing damper 30 comprises a C-ring having an inner surface contacting an outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing 28 and having two ends spaced apart from and facing each other ([0050], Figs. 3-4; variant “b” of fig. 4 has two spaced apart ends which face each other).
Kirschstein does not expressly teach “wherein while the bearing damper is in the resting state, a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing farther from the push rod is in contact with the inner surface of the bearing damper, and a portion of the outer peripheral surface of the worm shaft bearing closer to the push rod than the farther portion is spaced apart from the inner surface of the bearing damper”, nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anti-rattle electronic power steering system of Kirschstein to have the above limitations without resorting to impermissible hindsight.
By nature of their dependencies, claims 3-5 and 9-11 are also objected to.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20120193901 teaches a power steering system with a C-ring that surrounds a shaft and comprises a pair of jaws at one end.
US 20180304915 teaches a bearing damper for a bearing that surrounds a worm shaft in an anti-rattle system wherein the inner surface of the bearing damper has a maximum inner diameter in a first direction parallel to a lengthwise direction of a push rod that is greater than a maximum inner diameter in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction.
KR 101069516 teaches an anti-rattle steering system.
DE 202022101315 teaches a C-ring with a pair of jaws projecting out of one end.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL WILLIAM WATKINS whose telephone number is (703)756-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30 am -6:00 pm EST; Friday 8:30 am - 2:00 pm 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 5712722706. 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.
/N.W.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3617
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights