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 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 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 limitation "the side plate" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bariage et al. (EP 2397340).
Bariage discloses in figures 1 – 3 a chassis for a commercial vehicle, having a control arm (2) which has at a first end a bearing eye (22 ref area) for pivotably mounting the control arm in a retaining device (24) on the frame, at a first distance from the bearing eye a holder for attaching an axle element to the control arm, and at a second distance from the bearing eye a support section (32 ref area) for connecting the control arm to a spring element (figure 3 not shown), characterized in that the holder is in the form of a connecting piece (18) which has on its side facing a wheel carrier (14) a flange surface (figure 1, closest to ref 18) via which the connecting piece is connected to the wheel carrier via a flange connection (claims 1, 10). the connecting piece is in the form of a tubular connecting section (Claim 2). The flange surface is in the form of a flange ring which engages around the outside of the connecting piece (claim 3). The wheel carrier has an axle stub (10) which is placed on the connecting piece and the flange surface on the wheel side of the control arm, and a wheel bearing (8) is mounted on the outer circumference of the axle stub (claim 4). the axle stub has, on its side facing the control arm, a protrusion which, in the mounted position of the axle stub, projects into a cavity (figure 1, closest to ref 18) which is formed in the connecting piece, wherein the outwardly facing surface of the protrusion bears in a form-fitting manner on the adjacent inner surface of the cavity and as a result the axle stub is supported in a position centering manner on the inner wall of the connecting piece (claim 5). As best understood by the Examiner the connecting piece has, on its outer circumference, a shaping which, when the control arm is assembled with the connecting piece, ensures that the connecting piece is positioned precisely on the control arm and that the connecting piece and the side plate of the control arm are connected in a form-fitting manner (claim 6). The axle stub internally has a cavity (figure 1, closest to ref 10) which extends along the length of the axle stub, wherein the cavity is open at its end faces (claim 7).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bariage et al. as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Leroux (WO 2011/117511).
Bariage discloses the axle tube (4) which is arranged in the cavity (42) formed in the connecting piece but does not explicitly disclose the driveshaft. However, Leroux discloses in figures 1 -5 a driveshaft (28) passes through the cavity in the axle stub, said driveshaft protruding, at the wheel-side end face of the cavity, beyond the wheel-side end of the axle stub and being connected to a wheel there via an output (claim 8). In combination the driveshaft is supported by a bearing (8, 10) which is arranged in the cavity formed in the connecting piece (claim 9). At the time of filing PHOSITA would have found it obvious to incorporate the driveshaft of Leroux with Bariage. The motivation would have been delivering power to the wheels while the tube itself anchors the axle and allows suspension movement, which is also common knowledge in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicole Verley whose telephone number is (571)270-3542. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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.
/NICOLE T VERLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights