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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 08 August 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Specifically, though the IDS indicated an English abstract of JP 2011-21723 and JP 2008-157333, no such abstract can be found in the case file. Applicant should provide the English abstract, full translation, machine translation, explanation of relevance, etc. along with another IDS in order for the references to be considered. Failure to provide such may impact the validity of any patent issued based on the instant application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the other member” in line 9 should read “an other member” as it has not previously been recited, the “wherein” in line 10 should be moved to the beginning of line 11, and there should be a colon after the “wherein” in line 17 and it should begin on a new line by itself. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-3, 6, and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: each of these claims should be a single paragraph or there should be a colon after the “wherein”. 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 5-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the preamble “A backup member…which is disposed together with a sealing member…”. This combination of limitations in indefinite as it is unclear if Applicant is claiming a backup member or a seal structure that includes the backup member, sealing member, seal groove, etc.. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. Examiner assumes Applicant intended to claim “A backup member…which is configured to be disposed together with a sealing member…”.
Claims 6-7 are indefinite at least by virtue of depending on indefinite claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 7, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Monma et al. (US 10,107,401).
With regard to claim 1, Monma discloses a seal structure (as seen in Figs. 4, etc.) for partitioning a high-pressure side (H) and a low-pressure side (L), the seal structure, as viewed in a vertical cross section (as seen in Fig. 4, etc.), comprising: one member (300) having a first seal surface (i.e. the surface with 310 therein as seen in Fig. 4); a seal groove (310) formed in the first seal surface (as seen in Fig. 4, etc.); a sealing member (200) attached in the seal groove and disposed on the high-pressure side (as seen in Fig. 4), a backup member (100) attached in the seal groove and disposed on the low-pressure side (as seen in Fig. 4); and the other member (400) disposed opposite the one member (as seen in Fig. 4) and having a second seal surface (410) abutting the sealing member (as seen in Fig. 4), wherein the seal groove has: a high-pressure side groove bottom (i.e. the portion of the bottom of 310 more proximate H) on the high-pressure side at a certain distance from the second seal surface (as seen in Fig. 4); and a low-pressure side groove bottom (i.e. the portion of the bottom of 310 more proximate L) continuing the high-pressure side groove bottom on the low-pressure side (as seen in Fig. 4), wherein the low-pressure side groove bottom becomes closer to the second seal surface in a direction from the high-pressure side groove bottom toward the low-pressure side (as seen in Fig. 4 due to portion 311), wherein the sealing member is disposed between the high-pressure side groove bottom and the second seal surface (as seen in Fig. 4), the backup member is disposed between the low-pressure side groove bottom and the second seal surface (as seen in Fig. 4), and the backup member has an abutment surface (130) on a side opposite the low-pressure side groove bottom (as seen in Fig. 4), the abutment surface having a shape along the low-pressure side groove bottom (as seen in Fig. 4 as all surfaces have a shape).
With regard to claim 2, Monma discloses that the backup member has a slope surface (120) inclined away from the second seal surface in a direction toward the low-pressure side (as seen in Fig. 4).
With regard to claim 4, Monma discloses that the first seal surface is an outer circumferential surface of a cylindrical member (as seen in Fig. 4), the second seal surface is a bottomed cylindrical inner circumferential surface of a housing accommodating the cylindrical member (as seen in Fig. 4), the bottomed cylindrical inner circumferential surface being in contact with the first seal surface (at least as seen in Fig. 4 via the sealing member and backup member), the seal groove is an annular groove formed in the outer circumferential surface of the cylindrical member (as seen in Fig. 4), and the sealing member and the backup member have annular shapes (as seen in Figs. 4, etc.).
With regard to claim 5, Monma discloses backup member (100) having an annular shape (as seen in Figs. 4, etc.), which is disposed, together with a sealing member, in a seal groove of a seal structure for partitioning a high-pressure side and a low-pressure side (as seen in Fig. 4 and in light of the above 112(b) rejection of this claim, it is configured for such as it is actually disclosed doing such. Additionally see the rejection of claim 1 above detailing such), the backup member, as viewed in a vertical cross section (i.e. as seen in Fig. 4), comprising: a first surface (130); a second surface (120) extending upward from a radially outer end of the first surface (as seen in Fig. 4); a third surface (110) opposite the second surface and extending upward from a radially inner end of the first surface (as seen in Fig. 5); and a fourth surface (140) opposite the first surface and coupling the second surface and the third surface (as seen in Fig. 4), wherein the third surface is inclined in such a manner that the third surface becomes closer to the second surface in a direction toward the fourth surface (as seen in Fig. 4).
With regard to claim 7, Monma discloses that the second surface is inclined in such a manner that the second surface becomes closer to the third surface in a direction toward the fourth surface (as seen in Fig. 4).
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.
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) 3 and 6, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monma et al. (US 10,107,401) in view of Sugimura (US 5,123,662).
With regard to claim 3, Monma fails to disclose that the low-pressure side groove bottom has an arc shape.
Sugimura discloses a similar seal structure (as seen in Figs. 1-2) comprising a sealing member (16) and a backup member (17) in a groove (11), wherein a low-pressure side groove bottom (i.e. the portion of 13 where 17 is, as the entire bottom is shown at arc shaped) of the groove has an arc shape (as seen in Fig. 1).
It would have been considered obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to have modified the seal structure of Monma such that the low-pressure side groove bottom has an arc shape as taught by Sugimura. Such a modification would provide the expected benefit of better fatigue characteristics to the groove and/or less likelihood of damage to the sealing member (see Sugimura col. 1 lines 14-38).
With regard to claim 6, Monma fails to disclose that the third surface includes an inwardly bulging curved portion.
Sugimura discloses a similar backup member (17) with a first surface (i.e. the surface abutting the sealing member (16), second surface (upper surface 17a), third surface (bottom surface 17b, and fourth surface (the surface facing away from the sealing member), wherein the third surface includes an inwardly bulging curved portion (as seen in Fig. 1 art 17b) in order to match an arc shaped groove bottom.
It would have been considered obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to have modified the backup member of Monma such that the third surface includes an inwardly bulging curved portion as taught by Sugimura. Such a modification would provide the expected benefit of less likelihood of damage to the sealing member the backup member is to be used with and/or matching an arc shaped groove bottom which has better fatigue characteristics (see Sugimura col. 1 lines 14-38).
Examiner’s Comments/Recommendations
Examiner recommends claiming the machine element that the seal structure is in (e.g. including that the one member is a header and the other member is a housing, that the header is received in a bore of the housing, and that they are static with respect to each other due to a bolt), incorporating claims 2 and 3 into claim 1, and canceling claims directed solely to the backup member. While it is unclear if such an amendment would be obvious or not over the cited prior art as this is a relatively crowded field, such would at least advance prosecution.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and provides additional examples of similar seal structures with seal members and backup members in a seal groove.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS L FOSTER whose telephone number is (571)270-5354. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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.
/NICHOLAS L FOSTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights