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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
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, the following limitation must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
“a second end face of the rotor that faces the flywheel is configured to fasten the drive disk of the torsional vibration damper” in claims 1, 14 and 20.
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 Objections
Claims 7, 8 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 7, the limitation “a first siding block” and “a second siding block” were recited twice in lines 4, 5 and lines 8-10.
In claim 8, the limitation “a middle sliding block” was recited twice in line 5.
In claim 12, the limitation “an end face of the rotor that faces the flywheel comprises the groove” was already recited in claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 1-20 are 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 1 recited:
“a first end face of the rotor that faces the flywheel comprises a groove, and a second end face of the rotor that faces the flywheel is configured to fasten the drive disk of the torsional vibration damper”
However, while the original disclosure disclosed a rotor 20 with a groove 22, the original disclosure does not teach said rotor 20 has a second end face that face the flywheel and configured to fasten the drive disk as claimed.
It is noted that the original specification paragraph [00102], the second end face 11 is the second end face of the flywheel 10. The drawing Figure 3 also shows a second end face 11 of the fly wheel 10. Neither the original specification or the drawing disclosed/show a rotor with second end face that configured to fasten the drive disk.
Therefore, such limitation was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art.
Claims 2-13 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1.
Claims 14-19 are rejected for similar reasons as claims 1-13.
Claim 20 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1.
Claims 3-10, 12, 13 and 16-19 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 3 recites the limitation "the inner peripheral wall of the groove and the outer peripheral wall of the drive disk" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recited: “the circumferential direction of the disk generator” in last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recited: “the radial direction of the disk generator” in first line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recited: “the radial direction of the disk generator” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 4-10 are rejected for their dependency on claim 3.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the thickness of each sliding block" and “the depth of the groove” in lines 2 and 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the housing" in lines 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 is rejected for its dependency on claim 12.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the bottom" in lines 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the inner peripheral wall of the groove and the outer peripheral wall of the drive disk" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recited: “the circumferential direction of the disk generator” in last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recited: “the radial direction of the disk generator” in first line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recited: “the radial direction of the disk generator” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 17-19 are also rejected for their dependency on claim 16.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270-5112. 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.
/THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights