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 . 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.
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 at least one garter spring having two free ends, as set forth in claim 9, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(h) and 37 CFR 1.84(u) because Figure3 includes multiple views under a single label, and therefore the views are not “clearly separated from one another”. Further, “[t]he different views must be numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals”.
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.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 8,414,215 (Langendoen).
Regarding claim 1, Langendoen discloses a ball joint assembly (10; see Figures 1-3) comprising:
a ball joint (12, 14, 16) including a ball stud (12) with a shaft portion (16) and a ball head portion (14);
a housing (24), the ball head portion being rotatably retained within the housing (see column 2, lines 55-62);
a dust cover (32) adapted to cover the ball joint and including an upper-end portion (34) fixed to the housing and a lower-end portion (42) fixed to the shaft portion of the ball stud (see Figure 1); and
at least one garter spring (36, 48; see column 4, line 13) arranged at the upper-end portion of the dust cover and configured to fasten the dust cover to the housing and/or at the lower-end portion of the dust cover and configured to fasten the dust cover to the shaft portion (see Figure 1 and column 3, lines 7-35).
Regarding claim 2, Langendoen discloses the dust cover (32) is provided with an annular groove (shown accepting 36 in Figure 1, or 50) at the upper-end portion (34) and/or at the lower-end portion (42) for accommodating the at least one garter spring (36, 46; see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Langendoen discloses the at least one garter spring (36, 46) has a cross-section diameter less than or equal to an inner diameter of the annular groove (shown accepting 36 in Figure 1) at the upper end portion (34) or less than or equal to an inner diameter of the annular groove (50) at the lower end portion (42; see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, Langendoen discloses the at least one garter spring (36, 46) provides a radial force of sufficient magnitude to fasten the dust cover (32) to the housing (24) or to the shaft portion (16; see Figure 1 and column 3, lines 20-35, and column 4, lines 8-18).
Regarding claim 5, Langendoen discloses the at least one garter spring (36) includes a first garter spring arranged at the upper-end portion (34) of the dust cover (32) to fasten the dust cover to the housing (24) and a second garter spring (46) arranged at the lower-end portion (42) of the dust cover to fasten the dust cover to the shaft portion (16; see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Langendoen discloses the first garter spring (36) has a wire diameter different than a wire diameter of the second garter spring (46; see Figure 1) and/or the first garter spring provides a radial force different in magnitude than a radial force provided by the second garter spring.
Regarding claim 7, Langendoen discloses the first garter spring (36) has a wire diameter greater than a wire diameter of the second garter spring (46; see Figure 1, where the diameter of the first garter spring is greater than the diameter of the second garter spring).
Regarding claim 9, Langendoen discloses at least one garter spring (36, 46) has two free ends adapted to be connected to each other (see column 4, lines 8-18).
Regarding claim 10, Langendoen discloses the housing (24) has a recess (30) and the dust cover (32) has a rim-like structure (at 34) protruding from the upper-end portion (34) of the dust cover and configured to be fixed at the recess of the housing (see Figure 1).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langendoen in view of US 4,786,272 (Baker).
Langendoen discloses the ball joint assembly according to claim 5, but does not expressly disclose the first garter spring (36) provides a radial force with a greater magnitude than a radial force provided by the second garter spring (46).
Baker teaches, in the art of dust covers (10), it is known to provide a first retaining member (20) which provides a radial force with a greater magnitude than a radial force provided by a second retaining member (21) in order to compensate for larger forces that are typically placed on the larger end of the dust cover (see column 1, lines 45-51). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ball joint assembly of Langendoen, such that the first garter spring provides a radial force with a greater magnitude than a radial force provided by the second garter spring, as taught in Baker, in order to compensate for larger forces that are typically placed on the larger end of the dust cover.
Conclusion
The prior art set forth in the attached Notice of References Cited (PTO-892) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure in the field of ball joint assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Josh Skroupa whose telephone number is (571)270-3220. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM – 3:30 PM ET.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached on (571)270-5281. 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.
/Josh Skroupa/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
October 7, 2026
