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 .
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 “a lash adjuster” in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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:
“lash adjuster”, “a control member” in claims 1, 20; “a plunger biasing member” in claim 2, “a lost motion biasing member” in claim 13
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, and 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2018/0371961 to Bogdanski.
Regarding claim 1, Bogdanski discloses a rocker arm assembly, the rocker arm assembly rotatable about a rocker shaft and comprising:
a first portion (roller on the right side connected to cam 74, fig. 10) configured to receive a valve lift profile; and
a second portion (device 18, fig. 10; [55]) configured to operatively engage with one or more valves based on the valve lift profile (via 12, fig. 10), the second portion comprising:
an actuator assembly (fig. 5; [63]-[73]) switchable between a first state and a second state, the actuator assembly comprising a valve mechanism (68, fig. 5) actuated by a control member ([63]-[73]); and
a plunger assembly (figs. 1-10) comprising:
an elongated member (20, fig. 1) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end;
a plunger pad (28A, fig. 1; [66]) slidably disposed at the first end of the elongated member; and
a lash adjuster (26, fig. 1; [66]) associated with the second end of the elongated member,
wherein the control member of the actuator assembly is hydraulically actuated to act on the valve mechanism ([62]), and
wherein, based on an actuation of the actuator assembly, the plunger pad is selectively extendable relative to the elongated member along the plunger axis between a retracted position and an extended position (figs. 7-8; extended and retracted position; [83]-[87]).
Regarding claim 2, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, wherein the plunger assembly further comprises: a collar (28B, figs. 1, 7 and 8) secured to the plunger pad; and a plunger biasing member (spring shown in fig. 1) disposed between the first end of the elongated member and the collar, wherein the plunger biasing member is configured to bias the plunger pad toward the retracted position ([73], [83]-[87]).
Regarding claim 3, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 2, wherein, corresponding to the second state of the actuator assembly, an extending force based on hydraulic pressure acts to overcome a force associated with the plunger biasing member such that the plunger pad extends to the extended position (function of hydraulically actuated system).
Regarding claim 4, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 2, wherein the plunger biasing member comprises a spring ([58]).
Regarding claim 9, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, wherein the lash adjuster is accessible via an upper surface of the rocker arm assembly to facilitate lash adjustment of the plunger assembly ([85]; lash adjustment mechanism 26 is in contact with axial stop 47 at an upper surface of the rocker arm and hence can be considered to be accessible to 47 which uses it for adjustment).
Regarding claim 10, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 9, wherein the lash adjuster extends above the upper surface of the rocker arm assembly (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, wherein the longitudinal axis of the actuator assembly is oriented perpendicular to the plunger axis (fig. 5; 68 is perpendicular to 18).
Regarding claim 12, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, the second portion further comprising a lost motion assembly configured to absorb at least a portion of the valve lift profile ([87]; free stroke of actuating piston 20).
Regarding claim 13, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 12, wherein the lost motion assembly comprises: a lost motion shaft movable within a bore provided along a longitudinal axis of the lost motion assembly ([87]); and a lost motion biasing member configured to bias the lost motion shaft toward the one or more valves ([87]).
Regarding claim 14, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 13, wherein the longitudinal axis of the lost motion assembly is disposed parallel to the plunger axis of the plunger assembly (figs. 7-8).
Regarding claim 15, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, wherein the first portion of the rocker arm assembly comprises a roller ([70]) configured to engage with a cam to receive at least a portion of the valve lift profile.
Regarding claim 16, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, wherein, corresponding to the first state of the actuator assembly, the valve mechanism is held open by the control member so that the plunger pad retracts to the retracted position (fig. 7 to fig. 8).
Regarding claim 17, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 1, wherein the valve mechanism comprises a check valve biased against a hydraulic channel opening by a check valve biasing member (via check ball 50, fig. 1; [66]).
Regarding claim 18, Bogdanski discloses the rocker arm assembly of claim 17, wherein the control member comprises a control pin (part right above the ball and holding the ball in place, fig. 1) biased against the check valve by a control biasing member, the control member movable along the longitudinal axis of the actuator assembly (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 19, Bogdanski discloses a method of assembling a rocker arm assembly, comprising:
providing a plunger assembly (figs. 1-10; [55]-[57]) proximal to a valve-engaging portion (as shown in figs. 1-10) of the rocker arm assembly, the plunger assembly comprising an elongated member (20, fig. 1), a plunger pad (28A, fig. 1; [66]) slidably disposed at a first end of the elongated member, and a lash adjuster (26, fig. 1; [66]) associated with a second end of the elongated member disposed opposite the first end;
providing a hydraulic actuator assembly (fig. 5; [63]-[73]) connected in fluid communication with the plunger assembly (figs. 7-8); and
configuring the second end of the elongated member to be accessible via an upper surface of the rocker arm assembly to facilitate lash adjustment of the plunger assembly ([85]; lash adjustment mechanism 26 is in contact with axial stop 47 at an upper surface of the rocker arm and hence can be considered to be accessible to 47 which uses it for adjustment).
Regarding claim 20, Bogdanski discloses a valvetrain system comprising:
a cam (Fig. 10) provided with a valve lift profile; one or more valves (figs. 1-10);
a rocker shaft (camshaft; [53]); and
a rocker arm assembly ([52]-[53]) rotatable about the rocker shaft, the rocker arm assembly comprising:
a first portion (roller on the right side connected to cam 74, fig. 10) configured to receive a valve lift profile; and
a second portion (device 18, fig. 10; [55]) configured to operatively engage with one or more valves based on the valve lift profile (via 12, fig. 10), the second portion comprising:
an actuator assembly (fig. 5; [63]-[73]) switchable between a first state and a second state, the actuator assembly comprising a valve mechanism (68, fig. 5) actuated by a control member ([63]-[73]); and
a plunger assembly (figs. 1-10) comprising:
an elongated member (20, fig. 1) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end;
a plunger pad (28A, fig. 1; [66]) slidably disposed at the first end of the elongated member; and
a lash adjuster (26, fig. 1; [66]) associated with the second end of the elongated member,
wherein the control member of the actuator assembly is hydraulically actuated to act on the valve mechanism ([62]), and
wherein, based on an actuation of the actuator assembly, the plunger pad is selectively extendable relative to the elongated member along the plunger axis between a retracted position and an extended position (figs. 7-8; extended and retracted position; [83]-[87]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 7/6/2026, with respect to 112(f) invocation of the limitation “elongated member” in claims 1, 19, and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(f) invocation of claims 1, 19, and 20 for limitation “elongated member” has been withdrawn.
However, applicant seems to agree on page 10 of 13 of the Remarks that other limitations of claims 1, 19 and 20 that were previously indicated as invoking 112(f) are indeed means plus function limitations or equivalents. The limitations describe a structure in terms of what it does. The specification provides details of the structure. This meets the standard for 112(f) invocation. Therefore, the 112(f) invocation for these limitations stands.
Applicant's arguments filed 7/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Bogdanski does not disclose the “elongated member” as required by claims 1, 19 and 20. However, the office respectfully disagrees. Bogdanski clearly discloses in figure 1, elongated piston 20 that is connected to plunger pad 28A on one side and lash adjuster 26 on the other. As such, the claim limitation is met.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAPINDER SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/DAPINDER SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights