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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “OCo” has been used to designate both: “the inner contact point [this is incorrect, and should be “OCi”: near where callout for 28 is at lower left in Fig 5, as described in paragraph 19 of specification) and “the outer contact point” [this is correct, near callout 46 Fig 5] where callout for 28 is at upper right in Fig 5” as described in paragraph 19 of specification) 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. 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
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation in line 5, “of the outboard inner raceway and the outboard outer raceway” causes the description of the ratio to be confusing, and would be better located after a comma that should be placed after the word ball line 5, for greater clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, the recitation in line 5 “of the outboard inner raceway and the outboard outer raceway” causes the description of the ratio to be confusing, and would be better located after a comma that should be placed after the word ball line 5, for greater clarity.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 6, line 14, “defines an outboard contact angle with a line perpendicular”, should be changed to “defines an outboard contact angle with respect to a line perpendicular”.
Paragraph 7, line 14, “defines an inboard contact angle with a line perpendicular”, should be changed to “defines an inboard contact angle with respect to a line perpendicular”.
Paragraph 19 line 4, “Each line
L
O
”.” should be changed to “A line
L
O
”.
Paragraph 19 line 5, “with any line
L
P
O
”.” ” should be changed to “with respect to any line
L
P
O
”.
Paragraph 19 line 6, “Also, each line
L
O
extending” should be changed to “Also, the line
L
O
extending”.
Paragraph 21 line 4, “Any line
L
I
” should be changed to “A line
L
I
”.
Paragraph 21 line 5, “with any line
L
P
I
” should be changed to “with respect to any line
L
P
I
”.
Paragraph 21 line 6, “Also, each line
L
I
extending” should be changed to “Also, the line
L
I
extending”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 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.
Regarding Claim 1, the recitation in lines 14-15 of “each rolling element of the outboard set of rolling elements contacting the outboard inner raceway at an inner contact point and contacting the outboard outer raceway at an outer contact point, a line extending through the inner and outer contact points defining an outboard contact angle with a line perpendicular to the central axis” is indefinite because:
it implies there is just a single inner contact point and outer contact point related to the outboard set of rolling elements, when the contact being referred to is between the first “a line” and the inner and outer races, and not between the rolling element and the races;
it implies the contact points define the first “a line”, but specification paragraph 19 describes the first “a line” defines the inner and outer contact points by its intersection with the inner and outer races, and defines the contact angle with respect to a perpendicular line; the direction of the first “a line” is defined by its extending between the center of the rolling element and the outboard pressure center;
(the limits are described by specification para 6, 7, 19 and 20 [each having ambiguous wording, see paragraph 3 of this document] and Figs 1, 4-6 [Fig 5 having an error as to the inboard contact point see paragraph 2 of this document].
It is suggested by the examiner to change the recited to: “each rolling element of the outboard set of rolling elements contacting the outboard inner raceway at an inner contact point and contacting the outboard outer raceway at an outer contact point, an inclined line having an inclined direction with respect to a line perpendicular to the central axis, passing through the center of the outboard rolling elements and the inner race and the outer race, to define an inner contact point on the outboard inner raceway, and an outer contact point on the outboard outer raceway, and a contact angle between the inclined line and the line perpendicular to the central axis.
Regarding Claim 1, the recitation in lines 21-22 of “each rolling element of the inboard set of rolling elements contacting the inboard inner raceway at an inner contact point and contacting the inboard outer raceway at an outer contact point, a line extending through the inner and outer contact points defining an inboard contact angle with a line perpendicular to the central axis” is indefinite because:
it implies there is just a single inner contact point and outer contact point related to the inboard set of rolling elements, when the contact being referred to is between the first “a line” and the inner and outer races, and not between the rolling element and the races;
it implies the contact points define the first “a line”, but specification paragraph 21 describes the first “a line” defines the inner and outer contact points by its intersection with the inner and outer races, and defines the contact angle with respect to a perpendicular line; the direction of the first “a line” is defined by its extending between the center of the rolling element and the outboard pressure center;
(the limits are described by specification para 6 , 7 19 and 20 [each having ambiguous wording, see paragraph 3 of this document] and Figs 1, 4-6 [Fig 5 having an error as to the inboard contact point see paragraph 2 of this document].
It is suggested by the examiner to change the recited to: “each rolling element of the inboard set of rolling elements contacting the inboard inner raceway at an inner contact point and contacting the inboard outer raceway at an outer contact point, an inclined line having an inclined direction with respect to a line perpendicular to the central axis, passing through the center of the inboard rolling element and the inner race and the outer race, to define an inner contact point on the inboard inner raceway, and an outer contact point on the outboard outer raceway, and a contact angle between the inclined line and the line perpendicular to the central axis.
Regarding Claim 3, the limitations in lines 2-6 “the outboard pressure center being spaced axially from the outboard axial end of the flange by a distance of no greater than one and one-half millimeters (1.5 mm); and the inboard pressure center is axially spaced from the inboard axial end of the outer ring by a distance of no greater than three millimeters (3 mm).”, contradict the limits of claim 2, stating the distance between the outboard pressure center being spaced axially from the outboard axial end of the flange is greater than the distance between the inboard pressure center is axially spaced from the inboard axial end of the outer ring. For the purposes of examining, Examiner has interpreted the limits in line 2-6, as : “the outboard pressure center being spaced axially from the outboard axial end of the flange by a distance of no greater than three (3 mm); and the inboard pressure center is axially spaced from the inboard axial end of the outer ring by a distance of no greater than one and one-half millimeters (1.5 mm).”.
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) 1- 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-8770850-B2 to Ciulla (“Cuilla”), and further in view of US-20100046870-A1 to Shibuya (“Shibuya”).
Regarding Claim 1, Ciulla discloses a hub bearing unit (10 “hub assembly”) for rotatably coupling a wheel with a vehicle (Col 3 lines 28-30), the wheel being rotatable about a central axis (A), the hub bearing unit comprising: a hub (12) rotatable about (via bearings: two rows C1, C2 of rolling elements, balls 13) the central axis and having an outboard axial end (Fig 1), an inboard axial end (Fig 1), a flange (14, Col 3 lines 37-38) extending radially outwardly from (Fig 1) a remainder of the hub (Fig 1) at least generally adjacent to outboard axial end and configured to mount the wheel to the hub (Col 3 lines 28-31, Fig 1, 2), an outboard inner raceway (122 with concave shape) and an inboard inner raceway (112 with concave shape) spaced axially from the outboard inner raceway; an outer ring (12) disposed about the hub and configured to connect with the vehicle, the outer ring having an outboard outer raceway (121 with concave shape) and an inboard outer raceway (111 with concave shape) spaced axially from the outboard outer raceway; an outboard set of rolling elements (Ro) disposed between the outboard inner raceway and the outboard outer raceway so as to traverse set of rolling elements extending an outboard pitch circle (outer circle of C1 centered on central axis, having diameter P1, Col 3 lines 30-37,Fig 2) having a pitch diameter (P1, Col 3 lines 30-37,Fig 2), each rolling element (13) of the outboard set of rolling elements (C1) contacting the outboard inner raceway at an inner contact point (where L1 contacts 111 Fig 1, 2, load line defined as in instant application paragraph 19) and contacting the outboard outer raceway at an outer contact point (where L1 contacts 121 Fig 1, 2, Col 2 lines 54-58 being defined as in instant application paragraph 19),an inclined line (L1 “outboard line of force/load line”, Col 2 lines 54-58 , Col 4 line 64, Fig 1, 2) having an inclined direction (inclined at angle α, “first angle of contact” [i.e. outboard contact angle]) with respect to a line perpendicular to the central axis (dashed line perpendicular to A Fig 1, 2), passing through the center of the outboard rolling elements (Fig 1) and the inner raceway and the outer raceway (Fig 1), to define an inner contact point (where L1 contacts 111 Fig 1, 2) on the outboard inner raceway (111), and an outer contact point (where L1 contacts 121 Fig 1, 2) on the outboard outer raceway (121), and a contact angle (angle α, “first angle of contact”, Col 2 lines 47-49, 54-58) between the inclined line and the line perpendicular to the central axis; and an inboard set of rolling elements (Ri) disposed between the inboard inner raceway and the inboard outer raceway so as to traverse an inboard pitch circle (outer circle of C2 centered on central axis, having diameter P2 Col 3 lines 30-37,Fig 2) having an inboard pitch diameter (P2, Col 3 lines 30-37, Fig 2), and each rolling element of the inboard set of rolling elements contacting the inboard inner raceway at an inner contact point (where L2 contacts 112 Fig 1, 2, Col 2 lines 54-58 defined as in instant application paragraph 19) and contacting the inboard outer raceway at an outer contact point (where L2 contacts 122 Fig 1, 2, defined as in instant application paragraph 19 ), an inclined line (L2 “in board line of force/load line”, Col 2 lines 54-58, Col 4 line 64, Fig 1, 2) having an inclined direction with respect to a line perpendicular to the central axis, passing through the center of the inboard rolling element and the inner race and the outer race, to define an inner contact point (where L2 contacts 112 Fig 1, 2 ) on the inboard inner raceway (112), and an outer contact point (where L2 contacts 122 Fig 1, 2) on the inboard outer raceway (122), and a contact angle (angle β, “second angle of contact”, Col 2 lines 47-49, 54-58) between the inclined line and the line perpendicular to the central axis.
Ciulla does not disclose the outboard pitch diameter being at least five millimeters greater than the inboard pitch diameter, wherein the outboard contact angle has a value of at least thirty-four degrees and the inboard contact angle has a value within a range of forty-five percent and seventy-five percent of the value of the outboard contact angle.
Shibuya discloses an in wheel supporting rolling bearing unit (1,1a-1d, Para 58-78, Figs 1-7) having outboard set of rolling elements (6a, having a ball diameter of 11.112-.10=11.102 mm, Para 73) with an outboard pitch diameter (60mm), and an inboard set of rolling elements (6b, having a ball diameter of 11.112+.10=11.122 mm, Para 73) with an inboard pitch diameter (50mm), the outboard pitch diameter being at least five millimeters greater than (i.e. the outboard pitch diameter is at least five millimeters greater than the inboard pitch diameter, last 4 lines of Para 60) the inboard pitch diameter, and the outboard set of rolling elements having an outboard contact angle (
α
O
U
T
) and the inboard set of rolling elements having an inboard contact angle (
α
I
N
) wherein the outboard contact angle has a value of at least thirty-four degrees (Para 62-77, specifically para 62 describes
α
O
U
T
and
a
n
d
α
I
N
to be in the range of 20 to 45 degrees; and para 73 describes an Example wherein
α
O
U
T
>
α
I
N
; and paragraph 62 describe the values of the contact angles, being optimized in design for performance considering torque, rigidity, durability etc, and Para 67 describing an equation for determining the contact angle based on design variables including axial preload, ball diameter, raceway radius of curvature, etc., and Para 74 describes an example hub having the outer contact angle being 40±2 degrees, [a range of degrees values that are least 34 degrees, and the inner contact angle being 25±2, Para 77 discloses the invention of Shibuya is not limited and can be modified and improved).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the hub bearing unit and the bearing unit having inner and outer contact angles in the neighborhood of 20 to 45 degrees, and the outer contact angle is greater than the inner contact angle, and the outer contact angle is at least 34 degrees, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the hub bearing unit of Ciulla and the teaching of the bearing unit having inner and outer contact angles in the neighborhood of 20 to 45 degrees, and the outer contact angle is greater than the inner contact angle, and the outer contact angle is at least 34 degrees of Shibuya, to modify and optimize the hub configuration such that the outer contact angle was at least 34 degrees and the inner contact angle was within a range of forty-five percent and seventy-five percent of the value of the outboard contact angle with the motivation to optimize the hub design for performance considering torque, rigidity, durability etc. ( Shibuya Para 62), having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 1, wherein: each of the lines (L1, L2 as described in paragraph 8 of this document) extending through the inner contact point and the outer contact point of each rolling element of the outboard set of rolling elements intersects the central axis at an outboard pressure center (R1 “’outboard reaction center”, R2 “inboard reaction center”, Col 4 lines 58-65, Fig 2) the outboard pressure center being spaced axially from the outboard pitch circle by an outboard pressure center spacing distance (outerX*, Annotated Fig 1 “AF1”); and each of the lines extending through the inner contact point and the outer contact point of each rolling element of the inboard set of rolling elements intersects the central axis at an inboard pressure center, the inboard pressure center being spaced axially from the inboard pitch circle by an inboard pressure center spacing distance (innerX*, AF1), the inboard pressure center spacing distance having a value within a range of fifty percent and seventy percent of a value of the outboard pressure center spacing distance (Fig 2 relative lengths are within this range, ).
PNG
media_image1.png
244
352
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 2, wherein: the flange of the hub has an outboard axial end and an inboard axial end (as described in paragraph 14 of this document), but does not disclose the outboard pressure center being spaced axially from the outboard axial end of the flange by a distance of no greater than one and one-half millimeters (3 mm
The specific dimensions of the distance (X*outer) between outboard pressure center and outboard axial end of the flange and the distance (X*inner) between inboard pressure center and inboard axial end of the outer ring is/are not inventive concepts, but rather design choices made from many possible dimensional choices, made as a part of routine design optimization giving proper consideration of use, design loads, material and dimensional sizing of parts and manufacturing requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected specific dimensions for the distance (X*outer: between outboard pressure center and outboard axial end of the flange) and the distance (X*inner: between inboard pressure center and inboard axial end of the outer ring the hub) of combination of Ciulla and Shibuya, such that the outboard pressure center being spaced axially from the outboard axial end of the flange by a distance of no greater than three millimeters (X*outer <= 3 mm
Regarding Claim, 4 the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 1, wherein the value of the outboard pitch circle diameter is at least seven and one-half percent (7.5%) greater than the value of the inboard pitch circle diameter (60mm -50mm= 10mm, thus 60mm is 10mm greater than 50mm, thus is 20% greater than 50mm, as described in paragraph 14 of this document.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 1 wherein: each one of the outboard inner raceway and the inboard inner raceway is formed as a concave annular groove extending radially inwardly from an outer circumferential surface of the hub; each one of the outboard outer raceway and the inboard outer raceway is formed as a concave annular groove extending radially outwardly from an inner circumferential surface of the outer ring; and each rolling element of the outboard set of rolling elements and each rolling element of the inboard set of rolling elements is a ball (as described in paragraph 14 of this document, and shown in Cuilla Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 5 wherein: each concave annular groove of the hub has a radial section, the radial section of the concave annular groove of the outboard inner raceway facing toward the inboard end of the hub and the radial section of the concave annular groove of the inboard inner raceway facing toward the outboard end of the hub; and each concave annular groove of the outer ring has a radial section, the radial section of the concave annular groove of the outboard outer raceway facing toward the outboard end of the hub and the radial section of the concave annular groove of the inboard outer raceway facing toward the inboard end of the hub (as shown Cuilla, Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 5 wherein: each one of the concave annular grooves of the outboard inner raceway and the outboard outer raceway has a radius of curvature (it is known in the art that ball bearing raceway radius of curvature is a percent of the ball diameter, and depends on type of configuration, for a low noise configuration the raceway radius would be between 52 to 57% of the ball diameter) and each ball of the outboard set of rolling elements has a diameter (11.102 mm, as described in paragraph 14; with associated raceway radius of in range of .5119 to .5699) , a ratio (“osculation ratio”, Ooi, Cuilla Col 3 line 48 to Col 4 line 54) between the radius of curvature of each concave annular groove and the diameter of each ball, of the outboard inner raceway and the outboard outer raceway, is between 0.5175 and 0.539 (the range described above is inclusive of this range); and each one of the concave annular grooves has a radius of curvature and each ball, of the outboard set of rolling elements has a diameter (11.122 mm, as described in paragraph 14; with associated raceway radius of in range of .5199 to .5773), a ratio (“osculation ratio”, Ooi, Cuilla Col 3 line 48 to Col 4 line 54) between the radius of curvature of each concave annular groove and the diameter of each ball, of the inboard inner raceway and the inboard outer raceway is between 0.5175 and 0.529 ( the range described above is overlaps partially with this range).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing unit as recited in claim 1, wherein the hub has a cylindrical main body portion (Cuilla Fig 1) including the annular flange and an annular ring (16 “inner ring”, Cuilla Fig 1) disposed about the main body portion adjacent to the inboard axial end, the annular ring having an outer circumferential surface (Cuilla Fig 1) and a concave annular groove extending radially inwardly from the outer circumferential surface and providing the inboard inner raceway (112).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Ciulla and Shibuya discloses the hub bearing assembly as recited in claim 1, wherein the outer ring (12) has an outer circumferential surface (Cuilla Fig 1) and at least one flange (124 outer flange) extending radially outwardly from the outer circumferential surface, the at least one flange of the outer ring being configured to connect with a steering knuckle or a suspension component (Cuilla Col 3, lines 25-27, Fig 1).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon(listed on PTO-892) is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: discloses asymmetric wheel hub assemblies including inner and outer sets of rolling elements having inner and outer raceways, and associated pitch circles, contact angles, and thus osculation ratios.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights