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 1, 2, 6, 13 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 12, “each between” should read - - each of the cage claw portions is disposed between - -.
Claim 2, lines 4 – 5, “wherein each of the cage claw portions has circumferentially opposed surfaces which are circumferentially opposed” should read - - wherein each of the cage claw portions has circumferentially opposed surfaces that are circumferentially opposed - -.
Claim 2, lines 6 – 7, “and of which portions configured to circumferentially support the corresponding pair of the balls are flat surfaces” should read - - wherein portions of the circumferentially opposed surfaces configured to circumferentially support the corresponding pair of the balls are flat surfaces - -.
Claim 6, “each having” should read - - each axial protrusion having - -.
Claim 13, lines 4 – 5, “wherein each of the cage claw portions has circumferentially opposed surfaces which are circumferentially opposed” should read - - wherein each of the cage claw portions has circumferentially opposed surfaces that are circumferentially opposed - -.
Claim 17, lines 11 – 12, “wherein the cage claw portions have, respectively, distal-end-side guided surfaces each formed” should read - - wherein the cage claw portions have, respectively, distal-end-side guided surfaces, each distal-end-side guide surface formed - - .
Claim 18, lines 2 and 5, “remoter” should read - - remote - -.
Claim 18, lines 6 – 7, “and of which portions configured to circumferentially support the corresponding pair of the balls are flat surfaces” should read - - wherein portions of the circumferentially opposed surfaces configured to circumferentially support the corresponding pair of the balls are flat surfaces - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 8 and 17 – 19 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.
The term “smoothly” in claim 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smoothly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Accordingly, use of the term “smoothly,” renders the limitation “smoothly connected” indefinite.
Claim 17, the limitation “the cage claw portions have, respectively, distal-end-side guided surfaces each formed on a radially outer surface of an axial end portion of the cage claw portion on a distal end side thereof” lacks antecedent basis, as the limitation appears to be mutually exclusive of the limitation “each of the cage claw portions has: an outer-diameter-side axial groove formed in a radially outer surface of the cage claw portion, and axially extending from a distal end of the cage claw portion toward the cage circular annular portion; and an inner-diameter-side axial groove formed in a radially inner surface of the cage claw portion, and axially extending from the distal end of the cage claw portion toward the cage circular annular portion, wherein due to the outer-diameter-side axial groove and the inner-diameter-side axial groove of each of the cage claw portions, a cross section of the cage claw portions perpendicular to an axial direction has an H shape of which the openings of the letter H face radially outward and radially inward, respectively” set forth in claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Zhong USP 11078959.
Claim 1, Zhong discloses a ball bearing 10 (Fig. 1)(col. 2, l. 14) comprising: an inner ring 22 (col. 2, l. 15); an outer ring 14 (col. 2, ll. 15 – 16) arranged radially outwardly of, and coaxially with, the inner ring; a plurality of balls (ball rollers 20)(col. 2, l. 21) disposed in an annular space between the inner ring and the outer ring; and a cage 22 (Fig. 1)(col. 2, l. 25) made of resin (Abstract, l. 2: “plastic”) and retaining the balls, wherein the cage comprises: a cage circular annular portion (flange portion 24)(Fig. 2)(col. 2, l. 8) extending circumferentially adjacent to a space through which the balls pass; and cage claw portions (wings 26)(col. 2, l. 29) having a cantilevered structure axially extending from the cage circular annular portion (see Fig. 3), each of the cage claw portions is disposed between a corresponding pair of the balls circumferentially adjacent to each other, wherein each of the cage claw portions has: an outer-diameter-side axial groove (mass reduction cutout 30)(col. 2, ll. 32 – 33) formed in a radially outer surface of the cage claw portion, and axially extending from a distal end of the cage claw portion toward the cage circular annular portion; and an inner-diameter-side axial groove (mass reduction cutout 32)(col. 2, ll. 33 – 34) formed in a radially inner surface of the cage claw portion, and axially extending from the distal end of the cage claw portion toward the cage circular annular portion, wherein due to the outer-diameter-side axial groove and the inner-diameter-side axial groove of each of the cage claw portions, a cross section of the cage claw portions perpendicular to an axial direction has an H shape of which the openings of the letter H face radially outward and radially inward, respectively.
Regarding claim 20, the recitation “the ball bearing is used as a bearing of an electric motor of an electric vehicle, or a bearing of an electric vehicle speed reducer for reducing rotation of the electric motor” represents intended use. A recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus, if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected since all claim limitations have been met as disclosed above (MPEP 2114). Nonetheless, Zhong discloses the ball bearing used for electric motor of an electric vehicle (col. 1, ll. 6 – 16: [t]he disclosure applies to the general area of roller bearings. More particularly, it applies the area of roller bearings designed for high-speed operation..[t]he desire to reduce fossil fuel consumption has led to the adoption of vehicle powertrains that utilize electric motors. Some of these motors operate at significantly higher speeds than typical internal combustion engines. These higher operating speeds put additional demands on bearings”)
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) 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong USP 11078959 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ryono JP 2012067827 (incl. machine translation).
Claim 2, Zhong discloses all of the limitations of the invention set forth in claim 1, including each of the cage claw portions having an axial length larger than a radius of each of the balls.
Zhong does not expressly disclose each of the cage claw portions having circumferentially opposed surfaces that are circumferentially opposed to the corresponding pair of the balls, respectively, wherein portions of the circumferentially opposed surfaces configured to circumferentially support the corresponding pair of the balls are flat surfaces extending such that when the cage claw portion is moved radially outwardly by a centrifugal force, the circumferentially opposed surfaces do not interfere with the corresponding pair of the balls.
Zhong discloses a prior art cage device upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” (Zhong discloses the cage claw portions having spherical circumferentially opposed surfaces that are opposed to the corresponding pair balls).
Ryono teaches a known technique that is applicable to bearing device of Zhong, namely, the technique of having each of the cage claw portions (pillar portions 22)(Fig. 1)([0021], l. 1) having circumferentially opposed surfaces (surface 4)[0025], l. 4) that are circumferentially opposed to a corresponding pair of balls 1 ([0021], l. 1), respectively, wherein portions of the circumferentially opposed surfaces 4 configured to circumferentially support the corresponding pair of the balls are flat surfaces ([0025], l. 4: “[t]he surface 4 is flat and has no irregularities in the axial direction”).
Thus, it would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that applying the known technique taught by Ryono to the cage device of Zhong would have yielded predictable result enabling of the circumferentially opposed surfaces not interfering with the corresponding pair of the balls, when the cage claw portion moves radially outwardly by a centrifugal force, and resulted in an improved circumferential support system in Zhong that would decrease the ball contact surface to point contact, thereby reducing the friction torque in the bearing.
Claim 3, Ryono does not expressly disclose the cage circular annular portion having axially opposed surfaces axially opposed to the respective balls, and each of the circumferentially opposed surfaces of the cage claw portions being connected to a corresponding one of the axially opposed surfaces via a curved surface having a concave circular arc-shaped cross section.
Zhong discloses a prior art cage device upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” (Zhong discloses the cage circular annular portion 24 having spherical surfaces opposed to the respective balls).
Ryono teaches a known technique that is applicable to bearing device of Zhong, namely, the technique of a cage circular annular portion 21 (Fig. 1)([0021], l. 1) having axially opposed surfaces (inner surface 5 having a flat shape)([0026], ll. 1 – 3) axially opposed to respective balls 1, and each of the circumferentially opposed surfaces 4 of the cage claw portions being connected to a corresponding one of the axially opposed surfaces 5 via a curved surface having a concave circular arc-shaped cross section (Fig. 3)([0026], ll. 5 – 6: “[t]he surface 4 on the both sides in the circumferential direction and the surface 5 on the rear side are connected via a curve”).
Thus, it would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that applying the known technique taught by Ryono to the cage device of Zhong would have yielded the predictable result of creating point contact with the cage circular annular portion, and resulted in an improved axial support system in Zhong that would reduce friction torque in the bearing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 – 7 and 9 – 16 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.
Claims 8 and 17 – 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP A JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5216. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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 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.
/PHILLIP A JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617