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 .
This Office Action is in response to the applicant’s filing on 06/10/2025.
Claims 1-7 are pending and examined below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/10/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 4 and 6-7 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4 line 3, the phrase “of an internal tooth” renders claim 4 vague and indefinite because it is unclear if this is a new or previously mentioned feature. When a new feature is introduced, the feature should be preceded by “a”. When a previous feature is being referred to, the feature should be preceded by "the" or "said". Claim 4 is dependent of claim 1, and claim 1 discloses a plurality of internal teeth, which is the plural word for tooth. It is unclear if the tooth in claim 4 is the same or different from the teeth disclosed in claim 1. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “of the internal tooth”.
Regarding claim 6 line 7, the phrase “around its longitudinal axis” renders claim 6 vague and indefinite because it is unclear what feature is referred to by the term “its”. Prior to the quoted phrase, claim 6 discloses several features. It is unclear which of these features the term “its” is referring to. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “around the longitudinal axis of the shank adapter”.
Regarding claim 7 lines 1-5, the phrase “A method of manufacturing a rotating sleeve … the method comprising: providing the rotating sleeve” renders claim 7 vague and indefinite because it is unclear how the making of a sleeve includes providing said sleeve. Manufacturing implies a process of making something. It is unclear the making of the sleeve simple involves providing said sleeve. For examining purposes, the phrase is interpreted as “A method of providing a rotating sleeve … the method comprising: providing the rotating sleeve”.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Muuttonen (2014/0360743) in view of reference Dancer (9,062,496).
Regarding claim 1, Muuttonen discloses a rotating sleeve (14) comprising a plurality of internal teeth (27), wherein the plurality of internal teeth (27) are provided with opposing first flank surfaces and second flank surfaces (pg 4 para 64 ln 15) for transmitting rotation to a shank adaptor (6), wherein the plurality of internal teeth (27) have end surfaces at the longitudinal ends of the internal teeth (27), wherein the first flank surfaces include lubricating grooves (28) having opposing ends, and wherein both ends of the lubricant grooves (28) are open to the end surfaces. (Figure 7, 10 and Page 4 paragraph 64, Page 5 paragraph 73)
However, Muuttonen does not disclose end reliefs including chamfers.
Dancer discloses a sleeve (302) comprising a plurality of internal teeth (420), wherein the plurality of internal teeth (420) are provided with opposing flank surfaces (see figure 4A below), wherein the plurality of internal teeth (420) have end surfaces (see figure 4A below) at the longitudinal ends of the internal teeth (420), and wherein the internal teeth (420) are provided with end reliefs (see figure 4A below) including chamfers between the flank surfaces and the end surface. (Figure 4A and Column 7 lines 54-65)
[AltContent: textbox (First Flank Surface)][AltContent: textbox (Second Flank Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Muuttonen)]
PNG
media_image1.png
307
347
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Relief)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Second Relief)][AltContent: textbox (End Surface)][AltContent: textbox (Second Flank Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Flank Surface)][AltContent: textbox (Dancer)]
PNG
media_image2.png
175
303
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the internal teeth of Muuttonen by incorporating the chamfers between the flank surfaces and the end surface as taught by Dancer, since column 7 lines 59-65 of Dancer states such a modification would allow a meshing relationship with the central shaft without the teeth binding with each other.
Since Muttonen discloses both ends of the lubricant grooves are open to the end surfaces, when modifying Muttonen in view of Dancer, the lubricant grooves are interpreted to be open to the end reliefs.
Regarding claim 2, Muuttonen modified by Dancer disclose the plurality of internal teeth are provided with second end reliefs (Dancer – see figure 4A above) having second chamfers between the second flank surfaces (Muttonen – pg 4 para 64 ln 15) and the end surfaces. (Dancer – Figure 4A and Column 7 lines 54-65)
Regarding claim 3, Muuttonen modified by Dancer disclose the rotating sleeve (Muttonen – 14) includes an inner sleeve component (Muttonen – 14b) and an outer sleeve component (Muttonen – 14a) arrangeable inside one another, wherein the inner sleeve component (Muttonen – 14b) includes the plurality of internal teeth (Muttonen – 27) provided with the end reliefs (Dancer – see figure 4A above). (Muttonen – Figure 10 and Page 4 paragraph 63)
Regarding claim 4, Dancer discloses a chamfer between the flank surfaces and the end surface. (Column 7 lines 54-65) A chamfer is understood to be a flat, angled surface that extends between two 90º surfaces. Therefore, Muuttonen modified by Dancer is interpreted to disclose an angle between a surface of the end relief and a longitudinal axis of the internal tooth.
However, Muuttonen modified by Dancer do not explicitly disclose the angle to be between 9º and 16º.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art to have the angle between the end relief and the longitudinal axis to be between 9º and 16º, 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. [MPEP 2144.05 (II-A)]
On page 5 lines 18-20 of the Specification, the angle between a surface of the end relief and longitudinal axis of the internal tooth is between 9º and 16º. The Specification as originally filed does not disclose any criticality for the claimed feature. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Muuttonen and Dancer to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 6, Muuttonen modified by Dancer disclose a rock drilling machine (Muuttonen – 4) comprising:
a body (Muuttonen –13);
an impact device (Muuttonen – 19) arranged for generating impact pulses;
a shank adapter (Muuttonen – 6) arranged for receiving the impact pulses and transmitting the impact pulses as stress waves to a drilling tool (Muuttonen –7) connectable to the shank adapter (Muuttonen – 6);
a rotation device (Muuttonen – 10) arranged for turning the shank adapter (Muuttonen – 6) around the longitudinal axis of the shank adapter (Muuttonen – 6); and
a rotating sleeve (Muuttonen – 14) surrounding the shank adapter (Muuttonen – 6) and transmitting torque from the rotation device (Muuttonen – 10) to the shank adapter (Muuttonen – 6),
wherein the rotating sleeve (Muuttonen – 14) is in accordance with claim 1.
(Muuttonen – Figure 2 and Page 4 paragraph 62, 64)
(Dancer – Column 7 lines 54-65)
Regarding claim 7, Muuttonen discloses a method providing a rotating sleeve (14), the method comprising the steps of:
providing the rotating sleeve (14) with a plurality of internal teeth (27),
wherein the plurality of internal teeth (27) are provided with opposing first flank surfaces and second flank surfaces (pg 4 para 64 ln 15);
providing the internal teeth (27) with end surfaces at longitudinal ends of the teeth (27);
providing lubricating grooves (28) having opposing ends on at least the first flank surfaces,
wherein both ends of the lubricant grooves (28) are open to the end surfaces
(Figure 7, 10 and Page 4 paragraph 64, Page 5 paragraph 73)
However, Muuttonen does not disclose the step of providing end reliefs having chamfers.
Dancer discloses a sleeve (302) comprising a plurality of internal teeth (420), wherein the plurality of internal teeth (420) are provided with opposing flank surfaces (see figure 4A below), wherein the plurality of internal teeth (420) have end surfaces (see figure 4A below) at the longitudinal ends of the internal teeth (420), and wherein the internal teeth (420) are provided with end reliefs (see figure 4A below) including chamfers between the flank surfaces and the end surface. (Figure 4A and Column 7 lines 54-65)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the method of Muuttonen by incorporating the step of providing chamfers between the flank surfaces and the end surface as taught by Dancer, since column 7 lines 59-65 of Dancer states such a modification would allow a meshing relationship with the central shaft without the teeth binding with each other.
Since Muttonen discloses both ends of the lubricant grooves are open to the end surfaces, when modifying Muttonen in view of Dancer, the lubricant grooves are interpreted to be open to the end reliefs.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over reference Muuttonen (2014/0360743) in view of reference Dancer (9,062,496) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of reference Woolmer et al. (2024/0106308).
Regarding claim 5, Muuttonen modified by Dancer disclose the claimed invention as stated above but do not disclose forming the end reliefs by means of a wire cutting method.
Woolmer et al. disclose forming a metal object by means of wire cutting method based on electrical discharge machining. (Page 3 paragraph 31, 33)
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention, to have modified the rotating sleeve of Muuttonen by forming the end relief by means of wire cutting method as taught by Woolmer et al., since page 3 paragraph 32 of Woolmer et al. states such a process allows for more fine cuts and improved eddy current loss.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B FRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0396. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thur 7am-4pm.
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, Shelley Self can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/PATRICK B FRY/Examiner, Art Unit 3731 September 23, 2026
/SHELLEY M SELF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3731
