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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 24 April 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would not be a serious burden to examine the invention of Group II. This is not found persuasive because the assembly of bearings has its own classification area (F16C 43/04). Applicant further fails to address the method specific features required by the claims such as the fastening or metallurgical bonding of claim 17 or the machining of the raceways of claim 19 and 20. The products of Group I can be made by a materially different process, such as one which does not require fastening or metallurgical bonding of the raceway components (for example, by additive manufacturing of the components as a one-piece element) or such as one which does not require machining of the raceways (for example, by additive manufacturing). Furthermore, the invention of Group II also requires a different search query such as searching for the different assembly processes.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 24 April 2026.
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.
Claims 5 and 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.
Claims 5 and 12 recite “the square geometry is characterized in that the raceway comprises at the side thereof…forming a right angle or up to a right angle with the first raceway portion”. It is unclear how “up to a right angle can be considered “square geometry”. For example, does an 80 degree angle mean “square geometry”? Put another way, it is unclear what the limitation “square geometry” is intended to mean.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Atkinson U.S. 3,528,711.
Re clm 1, Atkinson discloses a roller bearing (Fig. 2), comprising: an outer race (33); an inner race (41 and 42s); and a roller element (36) radially interposed between the outer race and the inner race, the inner race comprising: outer portions (42s) having axially facing surfaces (axially inward surfaces of 42 facing roller 36) to contact axially facing surfaces of the roller element (top, inner axial surfaces of 42 are at least capable of contacting axial roller faces); and a central portion (41) disposed between the outer portions and having a raceway to contact a raceway facing surface of the roller element under normal operating loads of the roller bearing, the raceway having a side (axial ends of raceway) proximate to one of the axially facing surfaces of the outer portions to contact the raceway facing surface of the roller element under ultimate operating loads of the roller bearing, and the side of the raceway comprising a raceway undercut (47) with a compliant geometry deformable by contact with the raceway facing surface of the roller element under the ultimate operating loads.
Re clm 3, Atkinson further discloses the raceway has first and second opposite sides, each of which is proximate to a corresponding one of the axially facing surfaces of a corresponding one of the outer portions (shown in Fig. 2), and each of the first and second opposite sides comprises the raceway undercut (47) with the compliant geometry deformable by the contact with the raceway facing surface of the roller element under the ultimate operating loads.
Re clm 4, Atkinson further discloses the compliant geometry is a square geometry (at 48).
Re clm 6, Atkinson further discloses the compliant geometry is a winglet geometry (Fig. 2).
Re clm 8, Atkinson discloses a roller bearing (Fig. 2), comprising: an outer race (33); a multi-part inner race (41 and 42s); and a roller element (36) radially interposed between the outer race and the multi-part inner race, the multi-part inner race comprising: outer portions (42s) having axially facing surfaces to contact axially facing surfaces of the roller element; and a central portion (41) disposed between the outer portions and having a raceway to contact a raceway facing surface of the roller element under normal operating loads of the roller bearing, the raceway having a side (axial ends) proximate to one of the axially facing surfaces of the outer portions to contact the raceway facing surface of the roller element under ultimate operating loads of the roller bearing, and the side of the raceway comprising a raceway undercut (47) with a compliant geometry deformable by the contact with the raceway facing surface of the roller element under the ultimate operating loads.
Re clm 9, Atkinson further discloses the outer portions and the central portion of the multi-part inner race are formed separately and affixed together (via 46).
Re clm 10, Atkinson further discloses the raceway has first and second opposite sides (axial ends), each of which is proximate to a corresponding one of the axially facing surfaces of a corresponding one of the outer portions, and each of the first and second opposite sides comprises the raceway undercut with the compliant geometry deformable by the contact with the raceway facing surface of the roller element under the ultimate operating loads.
Re clm 11, Atkinson further discloses the compliant geometry is a square geometry (at 48).
Re clm 13, Atkinson further discloses the compliant geometry is a winglet geometry (at 47).
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawai JP 2018135921.
Re clm 1, Kawai discloses a roller bearing (Fig. 1), comprising: an outer race (20); an inner race (10); and a roller element (31) radially interposed between the outer race and the inner race, the inner race comprising: outer portions (left and right ribs) having axially facing surfaces (portions of ribs that face roller, such as 12) to contact axially facing surfaces of the roller element; and a central portion (at 11) disposed between the outer portions and having a raceway to contact a raceway facing surface of the roller element under normal operating loads of the roller bearing, the raceway having a side (axial ends of raceway) proximate to one of the axially facing surfaces of the outer portions to contact the raceway facing surface of the roller element under ultimate operating loads of the roller bearing, and the side of the raceway comprising a raceway undercut (shown below 12 in Fig. 2) with a compliant geometry deformable by contact with the raceway facing surface of the roller element under the ultimate operating loads (any removed raceway portion allows the raceway end to become compliant relative to a race in which no removed raceway portion is provided).
Re clm 2, Kawai further discloses the outer portions and the central portion of the inner race are integrally formed as a monolithic unitary body (Fig. 1).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson U.S. 3,528,711 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Formica WO 2025068641.
Atkinson discloses all the claimed subject matter as described above.
Re clm 2, Atkinson does not disclose the outer portions and the central portion of the inner race are integrally formed as a monolithic unitary body.
Formica teaches manufacturing outer rings in multiple parts and as one piece as being equivalents (page 7: 7th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the multipart design of Atkinson with the one piece construction of Formica to achieve the predictable result of forming an outer ring for a bearing.
Claims 5, 7, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson U.S. 3,528,711 as applied to claims 4, 6, 11 and 13 above, and further in view of Tsugumi WO 2024048601 (U.S. 2026/0063171 as English equivalent).
Atkinson discloses all the claimed subject matter as described above.
Re clm 5 and 12, Atkinson further discloses the square geometry is characterized in that the raceway comprises at the side thereof: a first raceway portion (for example, radially facing surface of raceway at axial ends of raceway) facing the raceway facing surface of the roller element; and a second raceway portion (axially facing surface at 48 ) extending from the first raceway portion to the raceway facing surface of the roller element and forming a right angle (at 48) or up to a right angle with the first raceway portion.
Atkinson does not disclose a material of the raceway is softer than a material of the raceway facing surface of the roller element.
Tsugumi teaches a material of the raceway is softer than a material of the raceway facing surface of the roller element ([0016]) for the purpose of suppressing damage to the rolling element as much as possible ([0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Atkinson and provide a material of the raceway is softer than a material of the raceway facing surface of the roller element for the purpose of suppressing damage to the rolling element as much as possible.
Re clm 7 and 14, Atkinson further discloses the winglet geometry is characterized in that the raceway comprises at the side thereof: a first raceway portion facing the raceway facing surface of the roller element (bottom of 47 facing radially outward); and a second raceway portion (angled and vertical portion of 47) extending from the first raceway portion to the raceway facing surface of the roller element and having a section forming an acute angle with the first raceway portion (shown in Fig. 2).
Atkinson does not disclose a material of the raceway is softer than a material of the raceway facing surface of the roller element.
Tsugumi teaches a material of the raceway is softer than a material of the raceway facing surface of the roller element ([0016]) for the purpose of suppressing damage to the rolling element as much as possible ([0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Atkinson and provide a material of the raceway is softer than a material of the raceway facing surface of the roller element for the purpose of suppressing damage to the rolling element as much as possible.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN B WAITS whose telephone number is (571)270-3664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 6-4 EST.
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 R 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.
/ALAN B WAITS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights