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, and 6-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by D1 (Toth et al., US 6,257,587).
For claim 1, D1 discloses, in Figures 1-7, a shaft sealing kit (10) for a sealing gap formed between a shaft (18) and a machine part (16) engaging around the shaft, wherein the shaft and the machine part are adjustable relative to one another about an axis of rotation L, comprising
a foam ring (86) of an elastically deformable foam material (Col.3, L 63-65; Col.4, L 1-8) configured to be arranged in the sealing gap to be sealed off; and
a kneading ring (24,64), configured to be arranged in a rotationally fixed manner on the shaft or on the machine part and has a main body (body of 24 and 64) away from which at least one cam (68) extends, which engages in a displacing manner in the foam ring (86) in the assembled state of the shaft sealing kit (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 2, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the kneading ring (24, 64) has a plurality of cams (74, 68), which are arranged spaced apart from one another in the circumferential direction of the kneading ring (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 3, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 2, wherein at least some of the cams are radial cams (radial portion of 24, 64. Figures 1-2.)
For claim 4, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 2, wherein at least some of the cams are axial cams (74, 68. Figures 1-2.)
For claim 6, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, wherein each cam is of a rounded design (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 7, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 2, wherein at least some of the cams of the kneading ring coincide in their geometry and/or size (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 8, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the kneading ring has at least one supporting flange (62, 26) for the foam ring, which extends away from the main body of the kneading ring in a radial direction (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 9, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 8, wherein the kneading ring has two supporting flanges (62, 82), between which the foam ring engages in the assembled state of the shaft sealing kit (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 10, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the kneading ring (24, 64) consists of metal, plastic or a composite material or in that the kneading ring is an injection-molded part (MPEP 608.02 (IX).)
For claim 11, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, wherein the foam material of the foam ring is at least partly an open cell or mixed cell foam (Col.4, L1-3.)
For claim 12, D1 discloses a shaft arrangement including the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, the shaft arrangement comprising: a first machine part in the form of the shaft (18) and the machine part being a second machine part (16) engaging around the shaft, which are arranged rotatably relative to one another about an axis of rotation L thereby forming the sealing gap; and at least one of the shaft sealing kit (10), wherein the foam ring (86) of the shaft sealing kit is arranged in the sealing gap and the kneading ring (24, 64) is arranged in a rotationally fixed manner on the other machine part respectively wherein, when the shaft (18) is rotating, the foam ring (86) is progressively compressed in the direction of rotation of the shaft by each cam (68, 74) of the kneading ring (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 13, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein the foam ring (86) fully peripherally contacts the kneading ring (24, 64) or is in sections at a distance from it in the circumferential direction (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 14, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein the shaft arrangement comprises at least one sealing ring (40,42, 46) with a sealing edge, which lies peripherally against the shaft in a dynamically sealing manner (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 15, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein the shaft sealing kit is arranged offset with respect to the sealing ring (246) in an axial direction toward the outside N of the sealing gap (Figure 3.)
For claim 16, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein the shaft sealing kit is arranged offset with respect to the sealing ring (430) in an axial direction toward the inside H of the sealing gap (Figure 4.)
For claim 17, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein the shaft arrangement has a plurality of sealing rings (42, 46), which are arranged lying one behind the other in an axial direction (Figures 1-2), wherein a shaft sealing kit is respectively arranged between two of the sealing rings lying next to one another in pairs (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 18, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 17, wherein each foam ring (686) lies respectively with its two side flanks in interlocking engagement against one of the sealing rings (682, 127. Figure 7.)
For claim 19, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein each foam ring is indirectly or directly supported at the outer circumference in a radial direction on the second machine part (Figure 3.)
For claim 20, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein each sealing ring and the foam ring of each shaft sealing kit are arranged wherein they are held together in a machine part formed as a mounting sleeve (Figures 1-7.)
For claim 21, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein the foam ring (86) is arranged for conjoint rotation on one of the two machine parts (Figures 1-2.)
For claim 22, D1 discloses the shaft arrangement as claimed in claim 17, wherein each foam ring lies respectively with its two side flanks in interlocking engagement against one of the sealing rings over its entire radial extent (Figures 1-7.)
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 (Toth et al., US 6,257,587) alone.
For claim 5, D1 discloses the shaft sealing kit as claimed in claim 1, wherein, in the assembled state of the shaft sealing kit, the foam ring is compressible by each cam respectively by at least 10% of its radial or axial extent (d1, d2) (During operation, form ring 86 is compressible by cams 74, 68. Figures 1-2.)
D1 discloses the claimed invention except for the foam ring is compressible by each cam respectively by at least 10% of its radial or axial extent (d1, d2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have the foam ring compressible by each cam respectively by at least 10% of its radial or axial extent, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 167 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). One skill in the art would realize that compressing the form ring at least 10% would yield the expected result of sealing.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and provides example of invention. A few of the prior art cited but not applied includes Carter (US 2,276,225); Belsanti (US 4,427,201); and Wilkinson (US 5,687,974).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN CUMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3112. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 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, KRISTINA FULTON can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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.
/NATHAN CUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights