DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-6 have been cancelled.
Claims 7-11 are pending.
This action is in response to the amendment filed 7/17/2026.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages filed 7/17/2026, with respect to pending claims 7-10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of the prior action have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species I in the reply filed on 4/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-10 are allowable and claim 11 pending. The restriction requirement between inventions, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 3/2/2026, has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn as to any claim that requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. Specifically, the restriction requirement of 3/2/2026 is fully withdrawn.
In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or non-statutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 2/9/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2024-18524 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 1/30/2025. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
Applicant’s amendments would have overcome the objection to the disclosure, and therefore, the amendment to the specification filed 7/17/2026 has not been entered, due to paragraph numbering.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: due to inconsistent numbering of paragraphs, as some of the paragraphs are not numbered, see MPEP 707.07(k).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Applicant’s amendments overcomes the objection to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s amendments overcomes the rejection to the claims.
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.
Claim 11 is 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 11 recites the limitation "the second surface" in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 are allowed.
None of the prior art of record anticipates or renders as obvious, “a gap is defined between a second surface of the annular seal member and the bottom surface of the annular accommodation portion; a recess is defined in the annular seal member such that the first surface of the annular seal member has a peripheral side separated from an outer peripheral surface of the annular cushion member; the annular cushion member is retained in the recess; and the gap is defined between the bottom surface of the annular accommodation portion and the second surface of the annular seal member which is further radially outward than the recess”, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 7.
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of this base claim.
None of the prior art of record anticipates or renders as obvious, “the annular cushion member is sandwiched between a first surface of the annular seal member and the bottom surface of the annular accommodation portion; the annular cushion member includes an inner peripheral surface configured to mate with the inner peripheral surface of the annular accommodation portion; a recess is defined in the annular seal member such that the first surface of the annular seal member has a peripheral side separated from an outer peripheral surface of the annular cushion member; the annular cushion member is retained in the recess; and a gap is defined between the bottom surface of the annular accommodation portion and “the second” surface of the annular seal member which is further radially outward than the recess”, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 11.
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 Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
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) Form at Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights