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, 11, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1 and 14 include the reference character OD, not all instances of which are in parentheses as required (see section 3 below). Furthermore, a reference character cannot be used in place of the full proper name of an element of the invention (i.e. the reference character “OD” cannot be used in place of the phrase “outer diameter”).
The term - -An- - should be inserted prior to the term “Apparatus” in line 1 of claim 11, for grammatical clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
The claims are objected to because they include reference characters which are not enclosed within parentheses.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is being claimed by the phrase “configured for rotation”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 6 below) and fails to define any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 1 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what element of the invention is being referred to by the term “its”.
Claim 3 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the limitation that the spindle nut is “operatively connected to” the spindle washer. This phrase fails to define any physical structure of the invention.
Claim 5 is indefinite due to the fact that use of the term “can” renders it unclear whether or not the washer actually “engage(s)” the outboard bearing cone.
Claims 10 and 15 are indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is being claimed by the phrase “configured to engage”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 6 below) and fails to define any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 11 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is being claimed by the phrases “configured to be interactive” and “configured to interact”. These phrases are generally narrative (see section 6 below) and fails to define any actual physical structure of the invention.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is allowed.
Claims 1-19 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references show spindle nut assemblies for preventing axial movement of bearings with respect to a hub prior to installation on a spindle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R BELLINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6680. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571)272-6684. 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.
/JASON R BELLINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights