DETAILED ACTION
This application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
The text of 35 U.S.C. § 103 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Japanese Patent Publication No. 2019-105206 to Oshiro, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0071450 A1 to Tanaka et al.
Claim 7: Oshiro discloses a throttle grip device comprising:
a throttle grip G configured to be rotated by a driver;
an interlocking member 2 including an engaged portion 2a configured to be engaged with an engaging portion of the throttle grip G, wherein the interlocking member 2 is configured to rotate in conjunction with the throttle grip G;
a case 1 including an opening side end portion (right side of 1 shown in FIG. 5) and a bottom side end portion (left side of 1 shown in FIG. 5), wherein the interlocking member 2 is rotatably held by the case 1;
a rotation angle detector 7 configured to detect a rotation angle of the throttle grip G by detecting a rotation angle of the interlocking member 2, wherein a drive source of a vehicle is configured to be controlled according to the rotation angle of the throttle grip G detected by the rotation angle detector 7; and
an urging mechanism 4 configured to urge the interlocking member 2 toward an initial position during rotation of the throttle grip G, wherein:
a resistance force application mechanism 3 configured to generate a sliding resistance during rotation of the interlocking member 2 [is] selectively attachable,
the urging mechanism 4 and the resistance force application mechanism 3 are configured to generate a predetermined operating torque during rotation of the interlocking member 2.
Oshiro does not disclose the plurality of seals recited in Claim 7.
The Office turns to Tanaka, which teaches a similar throttle grip device in which a plurality of seals seal gaps between an interlocking member 57 and a case 36 at predetermined positions, the seals being selectively attachable. In particular, Tanaka teaches a first seal member 42 which seals a gap between an interlocking member 57 and an opening portion of a cover member 37 and a second seal member 41 which seals a gap between a cylindrical portion of the interlocking member 57 and a bottom side end portion of a case 36.
In view of the Tanaka teaching, the Office finds that it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of filing to modify, with a reasonable expectation of success, the throttle grip device disclosed by Oshiro, such that it further comprises a plurality of seals which seal gaps between the interlocking member 2 and the case 1 at predetermined positions, the seals being selectively attachable, in order to limit movement of dust between elements, as taught by Tanaka.
As a result of the proposed modification above, turning resistance between the interlocking member 2 and the case 1 is provided by the urging mechanism 4, the resistance force application mechanism 3, and the plurality of seals taught by Tanaka. Those having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of filing would size and/or select elements which create turning resistance such that the torque required to rotate the interlocking member 2 relative to the case 1 equal a predetermined operating torque. That is, the Office finds that it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of filing that in the throttle grip device disclosed by Oshiro, as modified by Tanaka above to include the plurality of seals between the interlocking member 2 and case 1, the resistance force application mechanism 3 and the plurality of seals (i.e., the seals taught by Tanaka) are selectively attached so that a sum of torques generated by the urging mechanism 4, and the resistance force application mechanism 3, and the plurality of seals equals the predetermined operating torque, in order to achieve a satisfactory torque required to rotate the interlocking member 2 relative to the case 1.
Claim 8: Oshiro, as modified by Tanaka in the rejection of Claim 7 above, includes a seal member which may seal a gap between interlocking member 2 and an opening portion of cover member 9 and a seal member which may seal a gap between a cylindrical portion of interlocking member 2 and a bottom side end portion of case 1. These sealing areas are disposed at different radial positions. Thus, the throttle grip device of Oshioro, as modified by Tanaka, is characterized by a plurality of seals which are formed by seal members having different diameters.
Claim 9: Oshiro discloses a resistance force application mechanism 3 which is formed by a friction material assembled in a state of being in contact with a sliding surface of the interlocking member. Thus, the throttle grip device of Claim 9 is rendered obvious over the combination of Oshiro and Tanaka, as presented above in the rejection of Claim 7.
Claim 10: The throttle grip device disclosed by Oshiro further comprising a cover member 9 covering the opening side end portion of the case 1, wherein:
the cover member 9 includes an opening portion allowing the engaged portion 2a of the interlocking member 2 to be engaged with the engaging portion.
As described above in the rejection of Claim 7, Tanaka teaches a first seal member 42 which seals a gap between an interlocking member 57 and an opening portion of a cover member 37.
Thus, the Office submits that the throttle grip device of Claim 10 is rendered obvious over the combination of Oshiro and Tanaka, as presented above in the rejection of Claim 7, in order to limit movement of dust between elements, as taught by Tanaka.
Claim 11: As described above in the rejection of Claim 7, Tanaka teaches a second seal member 41 which seals a gap between a cylindrical portion of the interlocking member 57 and a bottom side end portion of a case 36.
Thus, the Office submits that the throttle grip device of Claim 11 is rendered obvious over the combination of Oshiro and Tanaka, as presented above in the rejection of Claim 7, in order to limit movement of dust between elements, as taught by Tanaka.
Claim 12: The throttle grip device disclosed by Oshiro further comprising a cover member 9 covering the opening side end portion of the case 1, wherein:
the cover member 9 includes an opening portion allowing the engaged portion 2a of the interlocking member 2 to be engaged with the engaging portion, and
the interlocking member 2 is configured to include a cylindrical portion extending to the bottom side end portion of the case 1.
As described above in the rejection of Claim 7, Tanaka teaches a plurality of seals seal gaps between an interlocking member 57 and a case 36 at predetermined positions, the seals being selectively attachable. In particular, Tanaka teaches a first seal member 42 which seals a gap between an interlocking member 57 and an opening portion of a cover member 37 and a second seal member 41 which seals a gap between a cylindrical portion of the interlocking member 57 and a bottom side end portion of a case 36.
Thus, the Office submits that the throttle grip device of Claim 12 is rendered obvious over the combination of Oshiro and Tanaka, as presented above in the rejection of Claim 7, in order to limit movement of dust between elements, as taught by Tanaka.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's 04/28/2026 arguments relating to amended Claim 1 are persuasive.
Applicant’s 04/28/2026 arguments relating to amended Claim 7 are not found to be persuasive. Applicant argues “neither Oshiro or Tanaka teach or suggest selectively attaching a resistance force application mechanism and a plurality of seals having known operating torques, such that their combined torque equals a predetermined operating torque.” In response, the Office respectfully submits that those having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to select and/or size components that generate radial resistance such that the overall resistance achieves a predetermined operating torque, in order to achieve a torque that is not too low and not too high.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Japanese Patent Publication No. 2019-105206 to Oshiro and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0071450 A1 to Tanaka et al. are the closest prior art.
Regarding amended Claim 1, the closest art does not disclose the features relating to the “annular gap” (i.e., the relationship between the “annular gap,” the “tip portion,” the “bottom side end portion”) and the “second seal member.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANDELL J KRUG whose telephone number is (313) 446-6577. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00-14:00 AZ time.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 571-270-7778. 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.
/RANDELL J KRUG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights