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 because figures 2, 3, 5 and 8 are showing the invention in cross section, however no hatching has been provided, hatching is required in cross sectional views, see 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3).
Also, 120 is said to indicate the rear side, however in figure 2 the reference character appears in two spots, one on the rear side of the gearbox 132 and one on the top of gearbox 132. There is only one rear side and thus the reference character 120 on top of the gearbox appears to be incorrect and should be deleted.
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, a configuration that results in radially deformation (alternative of claim 4, see rejection under 35 USC 112(a) below) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 claim(s) contains 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 4 defines two alternatives, option i being clearly shown in all embodiments, however option ii, while mentioned as an option in the specification, is not illustrated. The specification also does not provide any details about a configuration that works off of radial deformation in a manner that would allow one having ordinary skill in the art that would allow one having ordinary skill in the art to understand what Applicant was in possession of at the time of filing. A brief mention of an alternative in the disclosure does not provided any significant or meaningful details that would allow one skilled in the art to fully understand what arrangements Applicant was in possession of that would perform the function.
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) 1-5, 7 and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pick, USP 9,284,949.
Regarding claim 1, Pick discloses a bearing arrangement for a rotating component of a wind turbine (14, the wind turbine recitation is intended use, however see the background of the reference), the bearing arrangement comprising a first roller bearing and a second roller bearing (28A and 28B); said rotating component (14) defining a rotational axis and being supported by said first roller bearing and said second roller bearing; a stationary component (8) supporting said first roller bearing and said second roller bearing; said first roller bearing, said second roller bearing, said rotating component and said stationary component being arranged to conjointly form a pretension circuit (circuit indicated by reference character 42); said first roller bearing (28A) including a first bearing inner ring (30), a first bearing outer ring (32) and rolling elements (34) arranged between said first bearing inner ring and said first bearing outer ring; and, a pretensioning device (at 38) being configured, upon actuation, to cause a resulting force to be applied to the first bearing inner ring (the pretensioning assembly contacts inner ring 30) or the first bearing outer ring to adjust the pretension of the bearing arrangement, wherein the resulting force is unevenly distributed over a circumference of the first roller bearing with respect to the rotational axis (the claim is defining the device based on its function resulting in the claim being generally broad, in this case the claim would be limited to any arrangement where the force is not homogenously applied as this would result in even distribution, in the instant application this is done by individual adjustment devices positioned around the assembly, these adjustment devices can be bolts or pistons that work with or without a pressure distribution ring, figures 6-10 of Pick shows configurations with individual bolts 56 or piston type devices 62, these devices would be spread around the ring and result in localized regions of higher force at each contact point and lower force regions between adjacent bolts and pistons thus disclosing a configuration that meets the broadly defined function of the claim). NOTE: Applicant’s intent is to define different regions where bolts have different spacing or pistons have different sizes, claim 1 is not limited to this, however see the indication of allowable subject matter below.
Regarding claim 2, Pick discloses that said pretensioning device is configured to adjust a homogeneous pretension over the circumference of the first rolling bearing by the unevenly distributed resulting force (like in claim 1 this recitation is not limited to any particular structure, in the embodiments with a pressure ring 58 the uneven force applied by the spaced apart pressing elements is made homogeneous through the use of the pressure ring which evenly press on the ring of the bearing on the opposite side of the ring in which the pressing elements are applied).
Regarding claim 3, Pick discloses that said pretensioning device is configured to adjust an inhomogeneous pretension over the circumference of the first rolling bearing by the unevenly distributed resulting force (in figure 6 the bolt element 56 presses directly on the inner ring of the bearing, thus the localized loading by each bolt creates an uneven distribution of force around the bearing, higher at the bolt location and reduced in regions between adjacent bolts).
Regarding claim 4, Pick discloses that, upon actuation of the pretensioning device, said first bearing inner ring or said first bearing outer ring is moved in at least one of the following ways: i) axially along said rotational axis with respect to said stationary component (the bolts or pistons push the inner ring of the bearing axially along the same direction in which the axis extends in figure 2); and, ii) radially deformed with respect to the rotational axis.
Regarding claim 5, Pick discloses that said pretensioning device is either force-controlled or displacement-controlled for applying the uneven force (the specification defines these as either setting a force on the bolt or displacing the bolt by a set distance, this is not structurally limiting the claim to any particular structure, the bolts in Pick can be adjusted to displace by a particular amount or a particular torque can be applied to each bolt individually to set the force).
Regarding claim 7, Pick discloses that said pretensioning device includes several single adjustment devices (multiple bolts or pistons are positioned around the assembly, see column 11, lines 17-30), which are configured to be actuated to commonly cause said resulting force (all the bolts/pistons work together to press the bearing ring).
Regarding claim 9, Pick discloses that said adjustment devices are evenly distributed around the circumference of the first roller bearing and are configured or actuated differently to generate the uneven resulting force (the bolts or pistons are space by range of 10-20 degrees from each other, see column 11, lines 17-30, in the case of the bolts each bolt can be adjusted individual and can deliver slightly different forces when compared to other bolts, the “configured” language of the claim is not limiting the invention to any particular structure).
Regarding claim 10, Pick discloses that each of said adjustment devices extends through an opening of said stationary component and is accessible from outside said stationary component (each bolt extends through clamping ring 38, clamping ring 38 is secured to the stationary component 8 and forms part of the subassembly of the stationary component).
Regarding claim 11, Pick discloses that each of said adjustment devices is arranged inside said stationary component (in the embodiment of figure 9 the piston is inside a blind bore in ring 38, as explained above ring 38 is part of the stationary component).
Regarding claim 12, Pick discloses that each one of said adjustment devices directly acts on said first bearing inner ring or said first bearing outer ring (see the embodiment if figure 6).
Regarding claim 13, Pick discloses a ring-shaped force transfer element (15) provided between said adjustment devices and said first bearing inner ring or said first bearing outer ring (see figure 7 for example), such that a force, which is set or adjusted upon actuation of each adjustment device, can be transferred between said adjustment devices and said first bearing inner ring or said first bearing outer ring.
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) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pick, USP 9,284,949, in view of Reichhart, EP2801729.
Regarding claim 16, Pick further discloses that the bearing arrangement is a rotor bearing arrangement but does not disclose that the stationary component is a bearing housing since Pick shows the opposite arrangement where the stationary component is 8 that forms the inner element of the assembly or a bearing seat, not a housing.
Reichhart discloses a similar bearing arrangement layout however the rotor element is the inner element 2 and the stator is the outer element 4 where the stator is forming the bearing housing.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Pick and configure the bearing with a reversed functionality for the inner and outer elements thus making the outer stationary element the housing, as taught by Reichhart, since reversing what ring is fixed and what ring rotates in a bearing assembly, and thus what connected element is the rotor and which is the housing, does not change the overall functionality of the bearing elements themselves and bearing performs the same predictable function. Ultimately which ring of a rolling element bearing is fixed does not change the structure of the bearing but rather this is directed toward how the bearing is used, in the case of Pick the outer element forms part of the rotating hub, thus this is a fixed inner ring system with a rotating housing, however Reichhart is showing the same general layout but discloses the opposite, where the inner element is the rotating component and the outer element is the stator or fixed side of the assembly, this is a reversal of the functionality of the overall device, a reversal which is previously known, and thus not inventive.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8, 14, and 15 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 claim 6, the prior art of record does not teach nor render obvious a pretensioning device that provides an uneven distribution of the force to the bearing assembly that is located between said first roller bearing and said second roller bearing with respect to said rotational axis. When using a pretensioning device between adjacent bearings the configuration is more commonly a hydraulic configuration with an annular chamber that provides an even distribution of force rather than a configuration with individual pressing elements, thus providing an uneven force like in the instant application.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record does not teach or render obvious the combination that includes several or multiple single adjustment elements (clm 7) that are all the same structure but unevenly distributed around the assembly (clm 8).
Regarding claim 14, the prior art of record does not teach or render obvious a configuration with an annular piston ring that has a variable radial dimension around the assembly (see figure 6 of the instant application), the variable dimension causing different contact areas and thus a different force at different annular locations around the assembly.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art of record does not teach or render obvious the combination using several/multiple piston ring segments that are spaced apart and are of different arcuate extensions (different arcuate lengths).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES PILKINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-5052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7-3.
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.
/JAMES PILKINGTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617