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 .
Applicant’s Submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of response was received on 02/17/2026. Presently claims 1-13 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Abstract and claim objections have been withdrawn based upon Applicant’s amendments.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection for claim 1, Applicant’s remarks and amendments, see page 2, filed 02/17/2026, have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
It Is unclear of the limitation “a total of axial lengths” with respect to B because in Fig. 2 and as discussed in [0022] of Applicant’s specification, it appears that “B” represents a single axial length of the inclined portion 26. It is unclear how there can be multiple “lengths” as recited in the newly amended limitation. For such reasons, the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection is not overcome and a new rejection is issued herewith in light of Applicant’s amendments.
Applicant’s amendments necessitated a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and this action has therefore been made final.
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 1-13 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is indefinite because it is unclear of the multiple lengths denoted by B as recited by the newly amended limitation in line 12: “a total of axial lengths”.
In [0022] of Applicant’s specification and in Fig. 2, it appears that “B” represents a single axial length of the inclined portion 26. It is therein unclear how there can be multiple “lengths” as recited in the newly amended limitation in light of the disclosure.
As a suggestion to overcome the rejection, the last 4 lines of the claim may be amended as follows:
“wherein an axial length [[where]] of the front edge [[is]] provided in the axial direction is denoted by A, and a total [[of]] axial [[lengths]] length of
Dependent claims are also rejected due to their dependency of a rejected independent claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Regarding claim 1, the nearest prior art of record is: Hughes (U.S. 10,487,676) and Yoshida et al. (U.S. 9,874,222). The prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest where a size of a range where the front edge is provided in the axial direction is denoted by A, and a total of sizes of a range where each of the at least one inclined portion is provided in the axial direction is denoted by B, the inner end edge is configured to satisfy B ≥ 0.2A.
Claims 2-13 would be allowable due to their dependency on claim 1.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7928. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am- 5:00 pm EST alternating Fridays off.
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, COURTNEY HEINLE can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 03/05/2026
Prosecution Insights