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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference characters which are mentioned in the description: 29 (in paragraph 0024) and 56A-F (in paragraph 0024). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters which are not mentioned in the description: 26 (in figure 1) and 27 (in figure 1). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “54A” has been used to designate both the end of the spool (in figure 5) and the end plate (in figure 54A). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters “54” (in figure 5) and “54A” (in figure 6) have both been used to designate the end plate. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the seat belt webbing (recited in claim 1) must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities that requires appropriate corrections:
In paragraph 0025, line 2, the phrase “spool end 44” should read -- end cap 44 --.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities that requires appropriate corrections:
In claim 1, line 1, the limitation “for seat belt webbing” should read -- for a seat belt webbing --.
In claim 1, line 2, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 1, line 5, the limitation “the spool interior cavity” should read -- the interior cavity of the spool --.
In claim 2, line 1-3, the limitation “comprising; the spool body forming adjacent to the open end an external third torsional coupling surface and the end plate forming an internal fourth torsional coupling surface wherein” should read -- comprising: the spool body forming, adjacent to the open end, an internal third torsional coupling surface, and the end plate forming an external fourth torsional coupling surface; wherein --.
In claim 2, line 4, the limitation “the third and fourth torsional coupling surface” should read -- the internal third and external fourth torsional coupling surfaces --.
In claim 3, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 4, line 1-2, the limitation “comprising; the first and second torsional coupling surfaces” should read -- comprising: the external first and internal second torsional coupling surfaces --.
In claim 5, line 1-2, the limitation “comprising; the second and third torsional coupling surfaces” should read -- comprising: the internal second and internal third torsional coupling surfaces --.
In claim 6, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 7, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 8, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 9, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 10, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 11, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 12, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
In claim 13, line 1, the limitation “comprising;” should read -- comprising: --.
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2, 5, and 10-11 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 claims contain 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 2 limitation “the spool body forming, adjacent to the open end, an external third torsional coupling surface, and the end plate forming an internal fourth torsional coupling surface…the third and fourth torsional coupling surface are engaged with one another” (in lines 1-4) lacks sufficient support in the disclosure for the claimed invention. According to the specification (e.g. paragraphs 0022-0030) and the drawings (e.g. figures 5-11), the spool body of the spool (12A-12F) is provided with an internal torsional coupling surface (52) at the open end (50) of said spool (12A-12F), and the end plate (54A-54F) is provided with an external torsional coupling surface that is configured to engage the internal torsional coupling surface (52). Although, the end plate (54A-54F) does include an internal torsional coupling surface (56), said internal torsional coupling surface (56) is configured to engage/conforms with an external torsional coupling surface (39) formed on the stop nut (38) of the tread head assembly (36), instead of an external torsional coupling surface formed on the spool body of the spool (12A-12F). In other words, both the specification and the drawings does not recite/illustrate, an external torsional coupling surface being formed on the spool body of the spool for engaging an internal fourth torsional coupling surface being formed on the end plate. Therefore, claim 2 limitations contradict the descriptions in the specification, and thereby fails to meet the written description recruitment.
Claim 5 depends from claim 2. Subsequently, claim 5 is also rejected for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 10 recited the limitation “the spool body forming, adjacent to the open end, an annular rib, and the end plate forming a groove receiving the rib when the end plate is affixed to the spool body and a rim, whereby the rim may be cold formed to engage the rib to affix the end plate to the spool body” (in lines 1-5) lacks sufficient support in the disclosure for the claimed invention. According to the specification (e.g. paragraph 0028) and the drawings (e.g. figures 10A-10C), the end plate (54E) is formed with a rim (74) that is formed over/received by the annular rib (76) and a groove (82) formed on the spool body of the spool (12E); wherein the rim (74) of the end plate (54E) is cold formed to another wrap around rim (78) formed on the spool body of the spool (12E) so as to engage the groove (82), when the end plate (54E) is assembled with/affix to the spool body of the spool (12E). In other words, contradicting to the he limitations in lines 1-5 of claim 10, the specification/drawings for the claimed invention recite/illustrated, the rim being formed on the end plate, while the annular rib and the groove (which revived said rim) both being formed on the spool body of the spool. Therefore, claim 10 limitations fails to meet the written description recruitment.
Claim 11 depends from claim 10. Subsequently, claim 11 is also rejected for the reasons set forth above.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 5, 7-8, and 10-12 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 2 limitation “the spool body forming, adjacent to the open end, an external third torsional coupling surface, and the end plate forming an internal fourth torsional coupling surface” (in lines 1-3) renders the claim vague and indefinite. As explained above, according to the specification and the drawings for the claimed invention, the end plate is mounted to the spool body of the spool via an external fourth torsional coupling surface formed on the end plate and an internal third torsional coupling surface formed on the spool body of the spool; in other words, the claim 2 limitations appear to contradicts the written description for the claimed intention (i.e. in the specification and the drawings). Therefore, it is unclear if the spool body of the spool includes an external torsional coupling surface (as recited within claim 2) or an internal torsional coupling surface (as recited/shown in the specification/drawings), and if the end plate includes an internal torsional coupling surface (as recited within claim 2) or an external torsional coupling surface (as recited/shown in the specification/drawings). Clarification by the applicant is required.
Claim 5 depends from claim 2. Subsequently, claim 5 is also rejected as being indefinite for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the post” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 depends from claim 7. Subsequently, claim 8 is also rejected as being indefinite for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 8 limitation “a plurality of radially inward projecting tabs” (in lines 1-2) renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if the radially inward projecting tabs in claim 8 is referring to the same radially inward projecting tabs introduced in parent claim 7 (which are formed on the radial surface adjacent to the open end of the spool body), or if they are another additional/distinct radially inward projecting tabs from those in parent claim 7. Furthermore, are the plurality of radially inward projecting tabs described within claim 8 provided on the spool body of the spool, or another component/part of the claimed spool assembly? Clarification by the applicant is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the tabs” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the tabs in line 3 of claim 8 is referring to the plurality of radially inward projecting tabs recited in lines 1-2 of claim 8, or if they are referring to the plurality of radially inward projecting tabs recited within parent claim 7. Clarification by the applicant is required.
Claim 10 limitation “the spool body forming, adjacent to the open end, an annular rib, and the end plate forming a groove receiving the rib when the end plate is affixed to the spool body and a rim, whereby the rim may be cold formed to engage the rib to affix the end plate to the spool body” (in lines 1-5) renders the claim vague and indefinite. As explained above, according to the specification and the drawings for the claimed invention, the annular rib and the groove are both formed on the spool body of the spool, while the rim is formed on the end plate; in other words, the claim 10 limitations appear to contradicts the written description for the claimed intention (i.e. in the specification and the drawings). Therefore, it is unclear if the spool body of the spool includes only the annular rib (as recited within claim 10) or if it includes both the annular rib and the groove (as recited/shown in the specification/drawings), and if the end plate includes the groove (as recited within claim 10) or includes only the rim. Furthermore, there is ambiguity as to how a rim, which seems to be part of the end plate, can be received in a groove that is also formed on said end plate. Clarification by the applicant is required.
Claim 11 depends from claim 10. Subsequently, claim 11 is also rejected as being indefinite for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the rim” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 3, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ijiri (U.S. PGPUB 2015/0158457 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Ijiri teach (Figures 1-19) a spool assembly (take-up drum unit 6) that is configured as a seat belt retractor (seatbelt retractor 1) for a seat belt webbing (vehicle webbing 3) and that provides load limiting and protraction limiting stop functions, comprising: a spool (take-up drum 61) having an exterior surface (outer periphery surface of the take-up drum 61 which defines the webbing insertion hole 74) for receiving the seat belt webbing (vehicle webbing 3), an interior cavity (shaft hole 61A), and a spool body (cylindrical body of the take-up drum 61 which is defined between the take-up-spring-side flange portion 67 and the lock-unit-side flange portion 76) with an open end (lock-unit-side flange portion 76); a torsion bar (torsion bar 62) received by the interior cavity (shaft hole 61A) of the spool (take-up drum 61); a tread head assembly (lock gear 35 and stopper mechanism 88) having a rotor (ratchet gear 65), a stop post (fixation boss 78 of the ratchet base 66), and a stop nut (stopper nut 63) that is threaded (via the internal thread portion 63B and the external thread portion 78A) onto the stop post (fixation boss 78 of the ratchet base 66); and an end plate (stepped portion 77) affixed to the open end (lock-unit-side flange portion 76) of the spool body (cylindrical body of the take-up drum 61); wherein the stop nut (stopper nut 63) forming an external first torsional coupling surface (square-shaped splines 63A), and the end plate (stepped portion 77) forming an internal second torsional coupling surface (groove portions 77A formed on the inner periphery of the fitting hole 77B) that mates with the external first torsional coupling surface (square-shaped splines 63A) of the stop nut (stopper nut 63) (see also paragraphs 0075-0220).
In regards to claims 3 and 12-13, Ijiri teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Ijiri further teach (Figures 1-19), the interior cavity (shaft hole 61A) of the spool body (cylindrical body of the take-up drum 61) being free of a die-lock condition before the end plate (stepped portion 77) is affixed to the spool body (cylindrical body of the take-up drum 61) (Because the groove portions 77A are formed on the inner periphery of the fitting hole 77B that is defined by the stepped portion 77, instead of being formed within the shaft hole 61A of the cylindrical body of the take-up drum 61 that is is defined between the take-up-spring-side flange portion 67 and the lock-unit-side flange portion 76, said shaft hole 61A would not include any features related to said groove portions 77A; where the shaft hole 61A is formed prior to the formation of the groove portions 77A/fitting hole 77B/stepped portion 77, during the construction of the take-up drum 61 using the die-casting process described in paragraph 0096); and the spool assembly (take-up drum unit 6) additionally comprising a rim (disk-like base portion 66A of the ratchet base 66) forming an annular surface (brim-like portion 66B) that includes a plurality of notches (notch portions 86); wherein the spool (take-up drum 61) and the end plate (stepped portion 77) both consisting of a metal (aluminum, as described in paragraph 0096) and being formed by a die-casting process (paragraph 0096 disclose, the take-up drum 61 being made of aluminum through a die-casting process. Since the stepped portion 77 is integrally formed as a part of the take-up drum 61, it is evident that said stepped portion 77 is also made of aluminum during the same die-casting process that is used to manufacture said take-up drum 61).
Claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stroki Jr. (U.S. PGPUB 2013/0126657 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Stroki Jr. teach (Figures 4-5) a spool assembly (spool assembly illustrated in figures 4-5, which includes the spool 130, the torsion bar 140, the locking base 150, the collar/nut 160, the energy management device 170, and the pinion 180) that is configured as a seat belt retractor (retractor 20) for a seat belt webbing (webbing 12) and that provides load limiting and protraction limiting stop functions, comprising: a spool (spool 130) having an exterior surface (outer periphery surface of the spool 130) for receiving the seat belt webbing (webbing 12), an interior cavity (axially extending hallow inner cavity of the spool 130, which accommodates the torsion bar 140), and a spool body (annular body 133) with an open end (first end 131); a torsion bar (torsion bar 140) received by the interior cavity of the spool (axially extending hallow inner cavity of the spool 130); a tread head assembly (locking base 150 and collar/nut 160) having a rotor (shoulder 156 of the locking base 150), a stop post (annular shaped body 151 of the locking base 150), and a stop nut (collar/nut 160) that is threaded (via the threaded outer surface 152 and the threaded inner surface 162) onto the stop post (annular shaped body 151 of the locking base 150); and an end plate (radially inward extending disc-shaped flange portion of the spool 13 that defines the opening 134/mating portions 135) affixed to the open end (first end 131) of the spool body (annular body 133); wherein the stop nut (collar/nut 160) forming an external first torsional coupling surface (lugs 163 or the hexagonal shaped outer surface of the collar/nut 160, as described in paragraph 0034), and the end plate (radially inward extending disc-shaped flange portion of the spool 13 that defines the opening 134/mating portion 135) forming an internal second torsional coupling surface (mating portions 135 or the mating hexagonal shaped opening 134, as described in paragraph 0034) that mates with the external first torsional coupling surface of the stop nut (lugs 163 or the hexagonal shaped outer surface of the collar/nut 160, as described in paragraph 0034) (see also paragraphs 0023-0049).
In regards to claims 3-4, Stroki Jr. teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Stroki Jr. further teach (Figures 4-5), the interior cavity of the spool (axially extending hallow inner cavity of the spool 130) being free of a die-lock condition (figures 5 clearly illustrate, the axially extending hallow inner cavity of the spool 130, having a uniform/smooth inner cylindrical surface that is devoid of any die-lock features) before the end plate (radially inward extending disc-shaped flange portion of the spool 13 that defines the opening 134/mating portions 135) is affixed to the spool body of the spool (annular body 133 of the spool 130); wherein the external first torsional coupling surface (lugs 163 or the hexagonal shaped outer surface of the collar/nut 160, as described in paragraph 0034) of the stop nut (collar/nut 160) and the internal second torsional coupling surface (mating portions 135 or the mating hexagonal shaped opening 134, as described in paragraph 0034) of the end plate (radially inward extending disc-shaped flange portion of the spool 13 that defines the opening 134/mating portions 135), are both hexagonal in shape (as disclosed in paragraph 0034).
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takamatsu et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2017/0291571 A1 hereinafter referred to as “Takamatsu”).
In regards to claim 1, Takamatsu teach (Figures 1-4) a spool assembly (combined structure of the spool 18, the lock mechanism 28, the first force limiter mechanism 34, the second force limiter mechanism 38, and the force limiter stopper mechanism 92) that is configured as a seat belt retractor (webbing take-up device 10) for a seat belt webbing (webbing 22) and that provides load limiting and protraction limiting stop functions, comprising: a spool (spool 18) having an exterior surface (outer peripheral surface of the spool body 20) for receiving the seat belt webbing (webbing 22), an interior cavity (axially extending hallow inner cavity of the spool body 20, which accommodates the torsion bar 36), and a spool body (spool body 20) with an open end (attachment portion 42); a torsion bar (torsion bar 36 of the first force limiter mechanism 34) received by the interior cavity (axially extending hallow inner cavity of the spool body 20) of the spool (spool 18); a tread head assembly (combined structure of the lock mechanism 28, the second force limiter mechanism 38, and the force limiter stopper mechanism 92) having a rotor (rotational force transmitting mechanism 46 of the second force limiter mechanism 38), a stop post (threaded shaft 96 of the lock base 32 of the lock mechanism 28), and a stop nut (stopper 94 of the force limiter stopper mechanism 92) that is threaded onto the stop post (threaded shaft 96 of the lock base 32); and an end plate (support member 40 of the second force limiter mechanism 38) affixed to the open end (attachment portion 42) of the spool body (spool body 20); wherein the stop nut (stopper 94) forming an external first torsional coupling surface (hexagonal shaped outer peripheral surface of the stopper 94, as described in paragraph 0057), and the end plate (support member 40) forming an internal second torsional coupling surface (portion of the hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the support member 40 that engages the stopper 94, as described in paragraph 0038) that mates with the external first torsional coupling surface of the stop nut (hexagonal shaped outer peripheral surface of the stopper 94) (see also paragraphs 0026-0082).
In regards to claims 2 and 4-5, Takamatsu teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Takamatsu further teach (Figures 4-5), the spool body (spool body 20) forming, adjacent to the open end (attachment portion 42), an external third torsional coupling surface (cross-sectional shape/outer peripheral surface of the attachment portion 42, which is same as the hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the support member 40, as described in paragraphs 0038-0039); the end plate (support member 40) forming an internal fourth torsional coupling surface (portion of the hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the support member 40 that engages the attachment portion 42, as described in paragraphs 0038-0039); the external third torsional coupling surface (cross-sectional shape/outer peripheral surface of the attachment portion 42) and the internal fourth torsional coupling surface (portion of the hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the support member 40 that engages the attachment portion 42) are engaged with one another, when the end plate (support member 40) is mounted to the spool body (spool body 20); wherein the external first torsional coupling surface of the stop nut (hexagonal shaped outer peripheral surface of the stopper 94), the internal second torsional coupling surface of the end plate (portion of the hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the support member 40 that engages the stopper 94), and internal third torsional coupling surface (portion of the hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the support member 40 that engages the attachment portion 42) of the spool body (spool body 20), are all hexagonal in shape (as disclosed in paragraphs 0038-0039 and 0057).
In regards to claim 12, Takamatsu teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Takamatsu further teach (Figures 4-5), the spool assembly (combined structure of the spool 18, the lock mechanism 28, the first force limiter mechanism 34, the second force limiter mechanism 38, and the force limiter stopper mechanism 92) additionally comprising a rim (carrier plate 48) forming an annular surface (inner peripheral surface of the carrier plate 48, which defines the through hole 50) that includes a plurality of notches (plural recessed portions 52).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 9 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, for the following reasons:
In regards to claims 6 and 9, Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, independently teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Yet, Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, either individually or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious: a plurality of posts being formed on a radial surface at the open end of the spool body, and a plurality of bores being formed on the end plate for receiving the posts when the end plate is affixed to the spool body (as required by claim 6); a radial surface adjacent to the open end, a plurality of first bores being formed on a radial surface at the open end of the spool body, a plurality of second bores formed on the end plate for aligned with the first bores when the end plate is affixed to the spool body, and a plurality of fasteners passing through the first and second bores to affix the end plate with the spool body (as required by claim 6). Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, also does not allude to a cold forming process being involved when the end plate and the spool body are fixed together. On the contrary, the end plate in the spool assembly taught by either Ijiri or Stroki Jr, is integrally formed with the spool body of the spool in said spool assembly, without employing any posts, bores, or fasteners as in applicant’s claimed invention. Furthermore, as explained above, the end plate in Takamatsu’s spool assembly is fixed to the spool body of the spool in said spool assembly, via a hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the end plate and a matching hexagonal shaped outer peripheral surface at the open end of the spool body. Additionally, none of the other prior art of record, neither explicitly disclose nor propose, an end plate of a spool assembly being affixed to a spool of said spool assembly, in the specific manner recited within claims 6 or 9 (i.e. using posts provided on the spool body and bores provided in the end plate, or via inserting fasteners through first bores provided in the spool body and second bores provided in the end plate); where said spool assembly also has the precise structural arrangement that is described by parent claim 1. Accordingly, claims 6 and 9 limitations appear to include allowable subject matter over the cited prior art references; specially when said limitations are viewed in light of applicant’s specification, and when they are considered along with the superseding limitations in parent claim 1.
Claims 7-8 and 10-11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, for the following reasons:
In regards to claim 7, Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, independently teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Yet, Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, either individually or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious: a plurality of radially inward projecting tabs being formed on a radial surface at the open end of the spool body, and a plurality of notches being formed on the end plate for receiving the radially inward projecting tabs when the end plate is affixed to the spool body; or a cold forming process being employed when the end plate and the spool body are fixed together. Instead, the end plate in the spool assembly taught by either Ijiri or Stroki Jr, is integrally formed with the spool body of the spool in said spool assembly, without using any posts, bores, or fasteners as in applicant’s claimed invention. Furthermore, as explained above, the end plate in Takamatsu’s spool assembly is fixed to the spool body of the spool in said spool assembly, via a hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the end plate and a matching hexagonal shaped outer peripheral surface at the open end of the spool body. Additionally, none of the other prior art of record, neither explicitly disclose nor propose, an end plate of a spool assembly being affixed to a spool of said spool assembly, in the specific manner recited within claim 7 (i.e. using radially inward projecting tabs provided on the spool body and notches provided on the end plate); where said spool assembly also has the precise structural arrangement that is described by parent claim 1. Consequently, claim 7 limitations appear to include allowable subject matter over the cited prior art references; specially when said limitations are viewed in light of applicant’s specification, and when they are considered along with the superseding limitations in parent claim 1.
Claim 8 depends from claim 7. Subsequently, claim 8 include the above noted allowable subject matter in parent claim 7.
In regards to claim 10, Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, independently teach all intervening claim limitations as shown above. Yet, Ijiri, Stroki Jr, and Takamatsu, either individually or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious: an annular rib being formed at the open end of the spool body, and a groove being being in the end plate for receiving the annular rib when the end plate is affixed to the spool body and a rim; or a rim that is cold formed to engage the rib, when the end plate fixed to the spool body. Conversely, the end plate in the spool assembly taught by either Ijiri or Stroki Jr, is integrally formed with the spool body of the spool in said spool assembly, without using any annular rib features or groove features. Furthermore, as explained above, the end plate in Takamatsu’s spool assembly is fixed to the spool body of the spool in said spool assembly, via a hexagonal shaped inner peripheral surface of the end plate and a matching hexagonal shaped outer peripheral surface at the open end of the spool body. Additionally, none of the other prior art of record, neither explicitly disclose nor propose, an end plate of a spool assembly being affixed to a spool of said spool assembly, in the specific manner recited within claim 10 (i.e. using an annular rib provided on the spool body and a rib receiving groove provided on the end plate); where said spool assembly also has the precise structural arrangement that is described by parent claim 1. Consequently, claim 10 limitations appear to include allowable subject matter over the cited prior art references; specially when said limitations are viewed in light of applicant’s specification, and when they are considered along with the superseding limitations in parent claim 1.
Claim 11 depends from claim 10. Subsequently, claim 11 include the above noted allowable subject matter in parent claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: See the attached PTO-892 for complete list of pertinent prior art references made of record by the examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAVEEN J DIAS whose telephone number is (571) 272-2195. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:00AM - 4:30PM, Alternate Fridays.
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, VICTORIA P AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313) 446-4858. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.J.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights