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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities:“the nozzles are designed” should read –wherein the nozzles are designed --. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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(s) 13, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB1321287A.
Re Claim 13, GB1321287A discloses a device for quenching a wheel having a hub portion, a rim portion, and spokes comprising:a housing defining a cavity configured to receive the wheel (Fig. 3); at least one hub outer cooling unit (i.e. any of sprayers of 4 or 3; Fig. 3) arranged within the cavity and [configured to spray a cooling medium on an outer side of the hub portion]; at least one hub inner cooling unit (i.e. any of sprayers of 4 or 3; Fig. 3) arranged within the cavity and [configured to spray the cooling medium on an inner side of the hub portion]; at least one spoke cooling unit (i.e. any of sprayers of 4 or 3; Fig. 3) arranged within the cavity and [configured to spray the cooling medium on the spokes]; and at least one rim cooling unit (i.e. any of sprayers of 4 or 3; Fig. 3) arranged within the cavity and [configured to spray the cooling medium on the rim portion] (Fig. 3; pg. 2, lines 30-95; pg. 3, lines 10-25). The recitations in brackets [ ] is considered functional language. The reference discloses all the structural components of the device, which read on those of the instant invention. Therefore, the device is capable of performing the same desired functions as the instant invention as claimed. GB1321287A does not disclose wherein the at least one hub outer cooling unit, the at least one hub inner cooling unit, the at least one spoke cooling unit, and the at least one rim cooling unit are configured to spray the cooling medium independently of each other.However, GB1321287A discloses that separate cooling systems 4 and 3 can be independently controlled (pg. 3, lines 10-25). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to duplicate this independent control for a plurality of cooling units since this could easily be done using the teachings of GB1321287A in order to optimize quenching of desired areas of a wheel or other component and also since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Re Claim 15, GB1321287A discloses the at least one rim cooling unit is [configured to spray the cooling medium on an inner flange of the rim portion] (Fig. 3; pg. 2, lines 30-95; pg. 3, lines 10-25). The recitations in brackets [ ] is considered functional language. The reference discloses all the structural components of the device, which read on those of the instant invention. Therefore, the device is capable of performing the same desired functions as the instant invention as claimed.
Re Claim 16, GB1321287A discloses the at least one hub outer cooling unit, the at least one hub inner cooling unit, the at least one spoke cooling unit, and the at least one rim cooling unit each include a nozzle [configured to spray the cooling medium onto the wheel] (Fig. 3; pg. 2, lines 30-95; pg. 3, lines 10-25). The recitations in brackets [ ] is considered functional language. The reference discloses all the structural components of the device, which read on those of the instant invention. Therefore, the device is capable of performing the same desired functions as the instant invention as claimed.
Re Claim 17, GB1321287A discloses the nozzles are designed to spray the cooling medium with pressures of at least 30 bar onto the wheel (see pg. 2, line 40: “at least 10 atmospheres more than atmospheric pressure” this converts to at least 11.14575 bar and thus meets the claim limitation).
Re Claim 18, GB1321287A discloses the nozzles are [configured to spray the cooling medium onto the wheel] (Fig. 3; pg. 2, lines 30-95; pg. 3, lines 10-25). The recitations in brackets [ ] is considered functional language. The reference discloses all the structural components of the device, which read on those of the instant invention. Therefore, the device is capable of performing the same desired functions as the instant invention as claimed. GB1321287A does not disclose to achieve wheel cooling rates of at least 75 Kelvin per second. However, GB1321287A discloses varying the pressure and time of application and thus would allow obtaining desired cooling rate. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the spraying to achieve cooling rates of at least 75 Kelvin per second in order to effectively cool the component in a desired and effective manner and also since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Re Claim 19, GB1321287A discloses the cooling medium includes water (pg. 2, line 39).
Re Claim 20, GB1321287A discloses the housing includes a first device part 4 and a second device part 4 (i.e. 4 on opposite side) that cooperate to define the cavity, wherein a first subset of the at least one hub outer cooling unit, the at least one hub inner cooling unit, the at least one spoke cooling unit, and the at least one rim cooling unit is arranged on the first device part, and wherein a second subset of the at least one hub outer cooling unit, the at least one hub inner cooling unit, the at least one spoke cooling unit, and the at least one rim cooling unit is arranged on the second device part (Fig. 3).
Re Claim 20, Alternatively, assuming arguendo that Applicant argues that the parts 4 are not separate parts in rejection above. GB1321287A does not specifically disclose that first device part and second device part are separate parts. GB1321287A discloses the housing includes a first device part portion 4 and a second device part portion 4 (i.e. 4 on opposite side) that cooperate to define the cavity, wherein a first subset of the at least one hub outer cooling unit, the at least one hub inner cooling unit, the at least one spoke cooling unit, and the at least one rim cooling unit is arranged on the first device part, and wherein a second subset of the at least one hub outer cooling unit, the at least one hub inner cooling unit, the at least one spoke cooling unit, and the at least one rim cooling unit is arranged on the second device part (Fig. 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to organize the cooling units as separate parts since this could easily be done in order to optimize construction of the device and allow easy assembly and disassembly and also since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 are allowed.
Claim 14 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN J WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)270-5429. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/Ryan J. Walters/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights