DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the AIA first to invent provisions. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim 6 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 6 recites “the inner wall is smooth.” The term “smooth” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “smooth” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As such, the particular structure of “the inner wall” as recited in claim 6 is indefinite.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu (U.S. P.G. Publication No. 2012/0170991 A1; “Liu”).
Regarding claim 1:
A connector (100; FIG. 2) for adjustably connecting an RVDT (intended use; see MPEP § 2111.02(II)) and a reductor shaft (500; FIG. 2), the connector comprising:
a body (10, 20) defining a bore (1311) configured to receive the reductor shaft (depicted in FIG. 4), the bore having an inner wall (113; FIG. 4); and
a threaded tightening member (30) which is substantially parallel to a main axis of the bore (FIG. 4 reasonably depicts/discloses the respective axes of the screws 30 and shaft portions 50, 60 being parallel; see MPEP § 2125);
wherein a portion of the body is configured to deform upon tightening of the tightening member such that, when the reductor shaft is received by the bore, the reductor shaft is gripped by at least a portion of the inner wall (¶ [0017], “Since the fastening member 20 is fixed to the latching member 10, and the conical inner wall 211 tightly resists against the conical outside wall 111, in use, when the pivot shaft 500 rotates and causing the threaded portion 60 end of the pivot shaft 500 to vibrate, the conical inner wall 211 is urged to deform and generate an elastic resisting force against the corresponding conical outside wall 111, thereby efficiently preventing the latching member 10 from loosening. Thus, the latching portion 11 of the latching member 10 is reliably assembled to the threaded portion 60 of the pivot shaft 500.”),
wherein the body comprises a first part (10) and a second part (20) which are separately formed (depicted in FIG. 2),
wherein the first part comprises a frustoconical portion defining the bore (111 as depicted in FIG. 4; ¶ [0017], “conical inner wall 211”), the frustoconical portion comprising one or more splits (1110; FIG. 2) which are substantially parallel to the main axis of the bore (splits/spaces at 1110 have a directional component that extends vertically as seen in FIG. 2 in the same direction i.e. parallel with the axis of the bore 113).
Regarding claim 2:
The connector according to claim 1, comprising a shaft (500) for engaging the RVDT (intended use statement e.g. makes optional but does not require an RVDT; see MPEP § 2111.04).
Regarding claim 3:
The connector according to claim 2, wherein the shaft extends in a direction parallel to the bore (FIG. 4 depicts e.g. an outer surface portion of the shaft extending vertically i.e. in a direction parallel wo the bore 1311).
Regarding claim 6:
The connector according to claim 1, wherein the inner wall is smooth (inner wall 113 is “smooth” insofar as FIG. 4 reasonably depicts/discloses the inner wall having threads having flank surfaces that are not jagged or rough; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 7:
The connector according to claim 1, wherein the second part defines a cavity (21) configured to receive the frustoconical portion (depicted in FIG. 4), the cavity having a shape which corresponds to that of the frustoconical portion (the cavity 211 is also frustoconical so as to correspond to the shape of the frustoconical portion of the first part, see in FIG. 4), but with reduced dimensions such that, when the reductor shaft is received by the bore and the tightening member is tightened, the second part urges the frustoconical portion onto the shaft by closing the split (¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 8:
The connector according to claim 7, wherein the tightening member acts to urge the frustoconical portion of the first part into the cavity of the second part (¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 9:
The connector according to claim 1, wherein the connector comprises a plurality of tightening members (FIG. 3 depicts multiple tightening members 30).
Regarding claim 10:
The connector according to claim 1, wherein the tightening member(s) is a screw (¶ [0015], “the connecting members 30 are a plurality of bolts”; [0016], “The connecting members 30 extend through the fixing holes 23 and engage the connecting holes 1332, thereby fixing the fastening member 20 to the latching member 10”).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (see at least paragraph [0032] in the instant specification; “AAPA”).
Regarding claim 4, Liu discloses the limitations of claim 3, see above, further including its device is used for a generic rotary shaft (¶ [0001]) and that the shaft is mounted with respect to the bore (depicted in FIG. 4). However, it does not expressly disclose that the shaft is mounted eccentrically.
AAPA teaches a shaft mounted eccentrically to help generate torque necessary to rotate an input of a particular application (¶ [0032], “As is known, connecting the RVDT to the reductor shaft 5 eccentrically helps to generate the torque necessary to rotate the RVDT input”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, Liu such that the shaft is mounted eccentrically, as taught by AAPA, to help generate torque necessary to rotate an input of a particular application.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Kelley (U.S. Patent No. 3,023,035 A; “Kelley”).
Regarding claim 5, Liu discloses all the limitations of claim 1, see above, but does not expressly disclose that the inner wall is non-threaded.
Kelley teaches an inner wall (17 in FIG. 2; 37 in FIG. 3) that is non-threaded (FIG. 1-3 depict inner wall 17 as having no threads; col. 2, ll. 21-30, “It will be 15 apparent that the screw heads 24 are accessible for manipulation and that, when said screw heads are rotated in a direction to cause the screw shanks 23 to penetrate more deeply into their sockets 21, the collar 16 will be drawn toward the shoulder 14, whereby the frusto-conical surface 18 will eccentrically engage the frusto-conical surface 15 and, as the screws are tightened, the surfaces 15 and 18 will cooperate to press a portion of the internal wall of the bore 12 forcibly into frictional engagement with the shaft 10 and to press a diametrically-opposite portion 25 of the internal wall of the bore 17 forcibly into frictional engagement with the shaft 10.” the term “frictional engagement” indicating engagement via friction only i.e. no threads) as an effective means to secure the body to the shaft (col. 2, ll. 30-36) without the use of special attachments (col. 1, ll. 9-18).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, Liu such that the inner wall is non-threaded, as taught by Kelley, as an effective means to secure the body to the shaft without the use of special attachments.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hund (U.S. P.G. Publication No. 2016/0327084 A1; “Hund”).
Regarding claim 11, Liu discloses the connector according to claim 1, see above, but does not expressly disclose that the body is formed of precipitated steel.
Hund teaches that a body is formed of steel (¶ [0002]) so as to allow a high force application (¶ [0002]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, Liu such that the body is formed of steel, as taught by Hund, so as to allow a high force application. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the body formed as precipitated steel since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL D YABUT whose telephone number is (571)270-5526. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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 Olszewski can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL D YABUT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3656