Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 19/120,094

BEARING DEVICE AND SPINDLE DEVICE WITH BEARING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 10, 2025
Priority
Oct 11, 2022 — JP 2022-163209 +1 more
Examiner
PILKINGTON, JAMES
Art Unit
3617
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
NTN Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
1127 granted / 1606 resolved
+18.2% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1633
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
39.3%
-0.7% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
38.7%
-1.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1606 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the alternative arrangement of the inner ring side being fixed with the two member spacer (alternative covered by language in lines 18-20 of claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The summary (means for solving the problems) portion of the disclosure includes numbers 1-5 in reference to arrangements, however these numbers also exist as reference characters in the disclosure. The use of duplicate numbers to reference different things in a disclosure should be avoided. In the case of the summary it is suggested that the recitations be amended to read - -a first arrangement- -, - -a second arrangement- -, etc. The disclosure also includes a listing of reference characters, however this list is not complete, either the list should be amended to include all the reference characters or, since the list is not a requirement in US practice, the list can be deleted. 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. Claim 7 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 7 recites the limitation "the bearing device” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 is an independent claim drafted in a shorthand format, this is the first recitation of the bearing in the claim and comes prior to the inclusion of claim 1 and thus should read - -a bearing device- -. 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, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shohei, JP2020159547. Regarding claim 1, Shohei discloses a bearing device comprising: a spindle (4); a first bearing (5a) and a second bearing (5b) disposed on an outer periphery of the spindle (4) so as to be axially located side by side; and spacers (6) disposed between the first bearing (5a) and the second bearing (5b), wherein each of the first bearing and the second bearing (5a, 5b) comprises: an inner ring (5ia, 5ib); an outer ring (5ga, 5gb); and a plurality of rolling elements (Ta, Tb) disposed between the inner ring and the outer ring, wherein the spacers (6) comprise: an inner ring spacer (6i) disposed between the inner ring of the first bearing and the inner ring of the second bearing (between 5ia and 5ib), which are axially arranged side by side; and an outer ring spacer (6g) disposed between the outer ring of the first bearing and the outer ring of the second bearing (between 5ga and 5gb), which are axially arranged side by side, wherein one spacer of the inner ring spacer and the outer ring spacer is a fixed spacer (whichever side of spindle assembly is fixed or prevented from rotating would define the fixed spacer, in the case of Shohei the outer ring side is fixed making 6g the fixed spacer), and the other spacer of the inner ring spacer and the outer ring spacer is a rotatable spacer that is rotatable relative to the one spacer (6i is part of the rotating side of the assembly), wherein the fixed spacer is divided into a first member (main body holding 40) and a second member (46) radially overlapping with each other, wherein the first member has an axial width dimension larger than an axial width dimension of the second member (see figure 2), and wherein a circuit board (41, 141, unit where all the circuit elements are located making it a circuit board) on which a sensor or a processing circuit (53) is mounted is disposed in a space between the first member and the second member (46 covers the hole in the main spacer body that circuit unit is placed and thus the circuit unit is between the two parts). Regarding claim 2, Shohei discloses that the first member (main body of spacer) is a cylindrical member (annular member that surrounds the spindle), and wherein at least a portion of the first member opposed to the second member has a uniform wall thickness (the axial ends in the regions where 46 contacts is a wall portion opposed to the second member and the thickness is uniform in this region, alternative the bottom of the hole in the main body defines a thickness that is also uniform and opposed to 46). Regarding claim 7, Shohei discloses a spindle device (see figure 1) comprising: the [a] bearing device according to claim 1; and a motor (50) configured to rotate the spindle (4) about a center axis of the spindle. 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. Claim(s) 3-5 and 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shohei, JP2020159547. Regarding claims 3 and 8, Shohei discloses that an axial preload applied between the first bearing and the second bearing acts on, of the first member and the second member, only the first member (the bearing arrangement shown in Shohei is identical to that of the instant application where the force passes from nut/spacer 9/10 to the inner ring of the bearing 5ib through the ball and then to the outer ring 5gb, the force would then travel through the main body of the spacer, not element 46) to the other bearing assembly. Shohei does not disclose that the first member is made of a metal material or a ceramic material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to make the first member of the spacer assembly out of metal or ceramic, 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. Regarding claims 4, 9 and 10, Shohei does not disclose that the second member is made of a resin material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to make the second member of the spacer assembly out of resin, 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. Regarding claims 5 and 11-13, Shohei is silent with regards to how the first member 46 is secured to the main body or first member of the spacer, while the illustration and lack of specific disclosure is suggestive of a press fit connection that relies on pressure or some form of adhesive connection, does not explicitly disclose that the first member and the second member are fixed to each other by adhesion or press-fitting. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Shohei and secure the member 46 in place using any previously known connecting means, including joining the parts with adhesive or holding the parts together using a pressure or press fit force, as a matter of design choice, since Applicant has not disclosed that the securement means or mechanism between the first and second members solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well regardless of how the two members are secured. Regardless of how the parts are secured the same predictable result of joining the two members together in a manner that protects the circuity and components that make up the pumping system is achieved. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 and 14-17 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The available prior art of record does not teach nor render obvious the combination of features set forth in claim 1 with the additional features of both members including oil supply paths that communicate with each other and a sealing portion as defined by claims 6 and 14-17. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES PILKINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-5052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7-3. 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 at 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 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. /JAMES PILKINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 10, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704150
BEARING ARRANGEMENT FOR A ROTATING COMPONENT OF A WIND TURBINE
2y 2m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12704149
FLEXIBLE SHOE FOR A THRUST BEARING
1y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12698803
SUPPORT ASSEMBLY FOR MOVEABLE SHAFTS
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12698802
ROLLING BEARING, IN PARTICULAR A WHEEL HUB ASSEMBLY, HAVING AN IMPROVED SERVICE LIFE AND RELATED METHOD
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12687200
CAGE SEGMENT OF A SEGMENTED BEARING CAGE
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.8%)
2y 6m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1606 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month