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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 11 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: “any one of claim 1” should read --claim 1--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “compensation element” in claims 1-14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 and/or 102a2 as being anticipated by Liu (US 2024/0060523), which discloses:
1. A fastening assembly for fastening a first component to a second component, the fastening assembly having an axis, and the fastening assembly comprising:
a compensation element (620), the compensation element having a receiving channel running through the compensation element in an axial direction (the open space therethrough, e.g. see FIG 6), and the compensation element being capable of rotating about the axis so as to be connected to the first component (it is so capable, such as with first component 130);
a bolt (120), the bolt having a shank (125) and a limiting portion (122), the limiting portion protruding outwardly from an outer peripheral surface of the shank (see FIG 8), the limiting portion of the bolt being received by the receiving channel of the compensation element (as similarly shown in FIGS 1A and 8), and the shank of the bolt extending out of the compensation element from the receiving channel and being configured to be securely connected to the second component (as similarly shown in FIG 1A and 8); and
a washer (150; alternatively 220 of FIG 4B), the washer being received by the receiving channel (FIG 8), and the washer abutting against the limiting portion of the bolt to prevent the bolt from moving in the axial direction (FIG 8; alternatively FIG 6 taken with FIG 8),
wherein the washer is connected to the compensation element in such a way that the washer is capable of rotating together with the compensation element (they are capable of rotating together, such as by virtue of frictional engagement therebetween).
2. The fastening assembly according to claim 1, wherein the bolt and the washer are made of metal materials (see the hatching pattern of FIG 8, and para. 0013), and the compensation element is made of a plastic material (para. 0032).
3. The fastening assembly according to claim 2, wherein the compensation element is provided with a limiting flange (622) arranged at one end, the limiting flange protrudes inwardly in a radial direction (see FIG 6), and the washer is clamped between the limiting flange and the limiting portion of the bolt (when the bolt is inserted in to the arrangement of FIG 6).
4. The fastening assembly according to claim 3, wherein the washer and the compensation element are connected to each other in a form-fit manner (they are shaped to fit together, the washer fits inside of and works with the compensation element).
6. The fastening assembly according to claim 4, wherein the compensation element comprises a first stop structure (352) and a second stop structure (355, 356) respectively arranged at first end (361) and second end (362), the first stop structure and the second stop structure being configured such that the compensation element is capable of being inserted into a mounting hole of the first component and preventing the compensation element from escaping from the mounting hole of the first component so as to pre-assemble the fastening assembly on the first component (para. 0009, claim 6).
7. The fastening assembly according to claim 6, wherein the compensation element is provided with a spiral groove (350) on outer surface, one of the first stop structure and the second stop structure (first stop structure 352) comprises a stop block (352) arranged at end of the spiral groove (FIG 3A), and the other of the first stop structure and the second stop structure comprises a deflectable stop arm (355), the deflectable stop arm protruding from the outer surface of the compensation element in a non-deflected state (e.g., FIG 3A).
11. A part in preassembly, comprising: a first component (130); and a fastening assembly according to any one of claim 1 (see the analysis of claim 1), wherein the compensation element of the fastening assembly is capable of rotating about an axis so as to be connected to the first component (para. 0031).
12. The part in preassembly according to claim 11, wherein the first component is provided with a mounting hole, the first component comprises a protrusion (720) arranged in the mounting hole (FIG 8, para. 0034), and an outer surface of the compensation element is provided with a spiral groove (350), and wherein the protrusion of the first component is engaged within the spiral groove of the compensation element and can be slid therein to connect the fastening assembly to the first component in a spiral manner (para. 0034-0035).
13. A fastening system, comprising: a first component; a second component (140); and a fastening assembly according to any one of claim 1 (see the analysis of claim 1 above), wherein the compensation element of the fastening assembly is capable of rotating about an axis so as to be connected to the first component (para. 0034-0035), and wherein the shank of the bolt of the fastening assembly is capable of passing through the second component so as to be securely connected to the second component (via threaded section 145, see FIG 8).
14. The fastening system according to claim 13, wherein the first component is provided with a mounting hole, the first component comprises a protrusion arranged in the mounting hole, and an the compensation element is provided with a spiral groove on outer surface, and wherein the protrusion of the first component is engaged within the spiral groove of the compensation element and can be slid therein to connect the fastening assembly to the first component in a spiral manner (see the analysis of claim 12 above).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu.
Liu discloses the invention as claimed with exception to the notch on the washer which receives a tab on the compensation element as claimed. However such notch and tab elements as claimed were well-known in the art before the effective filing date (official notice), and it would have been obvious to use the same in Liu’s device in order to prevent any rotation between the washer and compensation element.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Yu (US 2024/0344551).
Regarding claim 8, Liu does not disclose the retaining element as claimed. However Yu teaches that it was known in the art before the effective filing date to use a fastening assembly that comprises a comprises a retaining element (150), the retaining element being located in a similar receiving channel and (functionally) connected to an inner wall of the compensation element, and the retaining element being configured to elastically abut against a similar bolt so as to limit a position of the bolt in the axial direction and allow displacement of the bolt in a radial direction (e.g., see para. 0062 describing the elasticity and operation of 150). To elastically retain Liu’s bolt, it would have been obvious to use a retaining element therein as claimed by Applicant and taught by Yu.
Regarding claim 9, Liu does not disclose wherein the compensation element comprises a first compensation section and a second compensation section as claimed. However Yu teaches that it was known in the art before the effective filing date to form a compensation element to have a first compensation section (147) and a second compensation section (148), the first compensation section and the second compensation section being arranged in the axial direction and removably connected together (para. 0046, 0047), and a similar limiting flange (1414) being arranged on the first compensation section, and wherein the retaining element is (functionally) connected to an inner wall (160) of the second compensation section. To assembly the bolt and retaining element into Liu’s compensation element, it would have been obvious to form Liu’s compensation element of first and second compensation sections, as claimed by Applicant and taught by Yu.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0175458 discloses a similar fastening assembly where the bolt directly engages the compensation element.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM M MCCALISTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1869. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 7am to 6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CRAIG SCHNEIDER, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/WILLIAM M MCCALISTER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
9/16/26
