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 Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9, line 2, recites “in in” which appears that it should just recite - - in - -. 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.
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(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 1, line 11, recites “ring-like manner” which renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). As such, the limitation renders the claim as 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, 2, and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Genouille (EP 0790419 A1; “Genouille”).
Genouille discloses:
Regarding claim 1:
A rigid connecting portion (1; FIG. 2) for mechanical coupling of at least a first component and a second component (abstract “connecting rod consists of a body (1) with a small (2) and a large end with bearings for a piston pin and crankshaft journal respectively”), the rigid connecting portion comprising:
at least one opening (at 4; FIG. 2);
a longitudinal center axis (at 9; FIG. 2) with a center point assigned to the opening (FIG. 2 depicts the intersection between axis 9 and a horizontal axis as the center point of the opening at 4); at least one end region (at 2 in FIG. 2) in which the opening is arranged; an outer boundary surface at least partially surrounding the opening (outer surface of the end at 2 in FIG. 2); and
an inner boundary surface (inner circumferential surface defining the opening at 4; FIG. 2) configured such that the opening is entirely bounded in a radial direction by the inner boundary surface (inner circumferential surface defining the opening at 4 surrounds the opening at 4; FIG. 2), the inner boundary surface and the outer boundary surface being arranged at a distance from each other such that the rigid connecting portion partially surrounds the opening in a ring-like manner (depicted in FIG. 2) with a ring thickness varying in an angular range oriented toward an outer end of the at least one end region from 0° to 90° relative to the longitudinal center axis (taking the vertical and horizontal intersecting axes as an x-y graph, at quadrant I, the profile of the inner surface is circular and the outer surface varies thereby indicating a varying ring thickness of end region 2 ),
the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 80° to 90° relative to the longitudinal center axis being greater than the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 30° to 60° relative to the longitudinal center axis (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses/discloses the thickness at 90 degrees being relatively thicker than that at 45 degrees; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 2:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the at least one opening is configured to accommodate a bearing (abstract, “a small (2) and a large end with bearings”).
Regarding claim 8:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the inner boundary surface in a longitudinal plane, formed by the longitudinal center axis and the radial direction of the opening, is circular in shape according to a first circle with a first radius (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses the opening 4 being circular and having a radius smaller than e.g. the outer surface of the end region 2; see MPEP § 2125), wherein the outer boundary surface in the longitudinal plane is partially circular in shape according to a second circle with a second radius (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses the outer surface of the end region 2 being circular at 0 degrees and having a radius greater that of the opening 4; see MPEP § 2125), wherein the first and the second circles are arranged concentrically relative to each other (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses the thickness around zero degrees being consistent indicating that the circles are concentrically arranged; see MPEP § 2125), and the second radius is greater than the first radius (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses the outer surface of the end region 2 being circular at 0 degrees and having a radius greater that of the opening 4; see MPEP § 2125), wherein the outer boundary surface follows a circumferential course of the second circle in a first angular range relative to the longitudinal center axis and in a third angular range relative to the longitudinal center axis (range e.g. under 45 degrees versus range over 45 degrees), and wherein the outer boundary surface deviates from a course of the second circle in a second angular range relative to the longitudinal center axis (in the range over 45 degrees, the ring thickness gets larger thereby indicating said deviation).
Regarding claim 9:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 8, wherein the first and second circles are arranged concentrically relative to each other in in the longitudinal plane, around the center point of the opening (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses the thickness around zero degrees being consistent indicating that the circles are concentrically arranged about the center point i.e. 0, 0 on the x-y graph as defined above; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 10:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 9, wherein the ring thickness is reduced (FIG. 2 depicts the thickness reducing as it goes from 90 degrees to 0 degrees).
Regarding claim 11:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 8, wherein the outer boundary surface in the second angular range is a plane (FIG. 2 reasonably depicts/discloses the outer surface at 45 degrees and increasing toward 90 being linear i.e. a plane).
Claim(s) 1 and 3-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trotter et al. (U.S. P.G. Publication No. 2003/0086756 A1; “Trotter”).
Trotter discloses:
Regarding claim 1:
A rigid connecting portion (10) for mechanical coupling of at least a first component and a second component (via first and second end regions at 12), the rigid connecting portion comprising:
at least one opening (20);
a longitudinal center axis (16; FIG. 1) with a center point assigned to the opening (FIG. 1 depicts the axis extending through the center of opening 12); at least one end region (12) in which the opening is arranged; an outer boundary surface at least partially surrounding the opening (outer surface of the end region 12); and
an inner boundary surface (inner circumferential surface defining the opening at 20; FIG. 4-6) configured such that the opening is entirely bounded in a radial direction by the inner boundary surface (inner circumferential surface defining the opening at 20 surrounds the opening at 20; FIG. 6), the inner boundary surface and the outer boundary surface being arranged at a distance from each other such that the rigid connecting portion partially surrounds the opening in a ring-like manner (depicted in FIG.4-6) with a ring thickness varying in an angular range oriented toward an outer end of the at least one end region from 0° to 90° relative to the longitudinal center axis (taking the embodiment of FIG. 6, FIG. A below depicts an x-y graph, at quadrant I, the profile of the inner surface is square, see ¶ 28, thereby creating a varying thickness between 0 and 90 degrees),
the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 80° to 90° relative to the longitudinal center axis being greater than the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 30° to 60° relative to the longitudinal center axis (FIG. A below reasonably depicts/discloses/discloses the thickness at 90 degrees being relatively thicker than that at 45 degrees, the square shape of the opening creating the variance; see MPEP § 2125).
PNG
media_image1.png
672
703
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIGURE A: ANNOTATED VIEW OF TROTTER
Regarding claim 3:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region from at least 0 to 10° relative to the longitudinal center axis is greater than the ring thickness in the angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 30° to 60° relative to the longitudinal center axis (FIG. A below reasonably depicts/discloses/discloses the thickness at less than 45 degrees e.g. 10 degrees being relatively thicker than that at 45 degrees, the square shape of the opening creating the variance; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 4:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region, starting from the longitudinal center axis, in a first angular range of at least 5°, is greater than the ring thickness in the angular range oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region, starting from the longitudinal center axis, in a second angular range around an angle bisector of the angular range oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region (FIG. A below reasonably depicts/discloses/discloses the thickness at less than 45 degrees e.g. 5 degrees being relatively thicker than that at 45 degrees, the square shape of the opening creating the variance; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 5:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region, starting from the longitudinal center axis, in a first angular range of at least 10°, is greater than the ring thickness in the angular range oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region, starting from the longitudinal center axis, in a second angular range around an angle bisector of the angular range (at and around 45 degrees) oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region (FIG. A below reasonably depicts/discloses/discloses the thickness at less than 45 degrees e.g. 10 degrees being relatively thicker than that at 45 degrees, the square shape of the opening creating the variance; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 6:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 4, wherein the second angular range around an angle bisector of the angular range (at and around 45 degrees) oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region includes a region of at least 5° on both sides of the angle bisector relative to the longitudinal center axis (FIG. A below reasonably depicts/discloses a thickness at 40 and 50 degrees being smaller than the thicknesses closer to 0 and 90 degrees, the square shape of the opening creating the variance; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 7:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 5, wherein the second angular range around an angle bisector of the angular range (at 45 degrees) oriented toward the outer end of the at least one end region includes a region of at least 10° on both sides of the angle bisector relative to the longitudinal center axis (FIG. A below reasonably depicts/discloses a thickness at 35 and 55 degrees being smaller than the thicknesses closer to 0 and 90 degrees, the square shape of the opening creating the variance; see MPEP § 2125).
Claim(s) 1 and 14-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boveroux et al. (U.S. P.G. Publication No. 20150267739 A1; “Boveroux”).
discloses:
Regarding claim 1:
A rigid connecting portion (1; FIG. 3) for mechanical coupling of at least a first component and a second component (¶ 3), the rigid connecting portion comprising:
at least one opening (depicted as circular in a middle region of the end region at 3 in FIG. 15);
a longitudinal center axis (axial center axis extending the length of the body e.g. see axis in FIG. 2) with a center point assigned to the opening (the longitudinal axis extends through the center axis of opening near reference number 3 in FIG. 3); at least one end region (3) in which the opening is arranged (FIG. 15); an outer boundary surface at least partially surrounding the opening (outer surface of the end region 3); and
an inner boundary surface (inner circumferential surface defining the opening, see in FIG. 15) configured such that the opening is entirely bounded in a radial direction by the inner boundary surface (inner circumferential surface defining the opening surrounds the opening, see in FIG. 15), the inner boundary surface and the outer boundary surface being arranged at a distance from each other such that the rigid connecting portion partially surrounds the opening in a ring-like manner (depicted in FIG.15) with a ring thickness varying in an angular range oriented toward an outer end of the at least one end region from 0° to 90° relative to the longitudinal center axis (¶ 91 discloses that the outer boundary surface can be an “oval” shape),
the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 80° to 90° relative to the longitudinal center axis being greater than the ring thickness in an angular range oriented toward the outer end from at least 30° to 60° relative to the longitudinal center axis (taking the opening i.e. inner boundary as circular, as reasonably depicted/disclosed in FIG. 15, the thickness at the minor axis of the oval outer boundary e.g. at 0 degrees would be thinner than that at 45 degrees as it approaches the major axis e.g. at 90 degrees, see FIG. 15 reasonably depicting/discloses the minor axis being at a transverse axis i.e. at 0 degrees and a major axis being at a longitudinal axis i.e. 90 degrees; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 14:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the at least one end region includes a first end region symmetrical to the longitudinal center axis in a longitudinal plane, formed by the longitudinal center axis and a radial direction of the opening (reasonably depicted/disclosed in FIG. 15; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 15:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 14, wherein the at least one end region includes a second end region arranged opposite the first end region in a direction of the longitudinal center axis (FIG. 3 depicts end regions 3 on both sides of the connecting portion).
Regarding claim 16:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 15, wherein the second end region is symmetrical to the first end region, wherein an associated transverse symmetry axis extends through a center point of the connecting portion perpendicular to the longitudinal center axis in the longitudinal plane (reasonably depicted/disclosed in FIG. 15; see MPEP § 2125).
Regarding claim 18:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the rigid connecting portion is a control arm (¶ 3, “In the aeronautics field, a large number of connecting rods are used. Connecting rods may be used in flight control elements, the landing gear, for door opening, etc” i.e. control arm).
Regarding claim 19:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the rigid connecting portion is a coupling rod (abstract, “connecting rod” i.e. coupling rod).
Regarding claim 20:
The rigid connecting portion according to claim 1, wherein the rigid connecting portion is a motor vehicle component (¶ 3, “In the aeronautics field, a large number of connecting rods are used. Connecting rods may be used in flight control elements, the landing gear, for door opening, etc” i.e. motor vehicle).
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) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boveroux in view of Lieber et al. (DE 102008053300 A1; “Lieber”).
Regarding claim 17, Boveroux teaches the rigid connecting portion according to claim 15, see above, including wherein the at least one end region includes a third end region with a third opening (FIG. 3, 15 depicts heads 3 being bifurcated, each fork portion corresponding to an end wherein there is a third end region among the four, each with the opening, see FIG. 3). However, it does not expressly disclose that the rigid connecting portion is star-shaped.
Lieber teaches a rigid connecting portion being star-shaped (pg. 2, “”push and pull rod in cross-section star-shaped. . . . A star-shaped configuration can be designed such a longitudinal element is provided, from which the single arms extend in a star shape”) for the purpose of enhancing the rigidity of the rod (pg. 2, “One Disadvantage of pull and push rods of the above type exists in their comparatively low stiffness.”).
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, Boveroux such that the rigid connecting portion is star-shaped, as taught by Lieber, for the purpose of enhancing the rigidity of the rod.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
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
Prosecution Insights