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 (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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyashita et al. (US 4,721,441) hereinafter Miyashita.
Regarding claim 1, Miyashita teaches a bearing structure, comprising:
a shaft (6) (Figs. 1-2; Col. 1, line 13-Col. 2, line 5)
a bearing, which includes an inner ring an outer ring, and rolling elements provided between the inner ring and the outer ring, and axially supports the shaft (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below);
a bearing housing (3, 5) that accommodates the bearing (Figs. 1-2; Col. 1, line 13-Col. 2, line 5);
an impeller (7) provided at an end portion of the shaft (Figs. 1-2; Col. 1, line 13-Col. 2, line 5);
an impeller housing (1) that accommodates the impeller (Figs. 1-2; Col. 1, line 13-Col. 2, line 5);
a partition wall that separates an internal space of the bearing housing and a space in the impeller housing in which the impeller is allowed to be accommodated from each other (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below);
a side wall portion, which is formed in the bearing housing, and is opposed to the rolling elements in an axial direction of the shaft over an entire area in a circumferential direction of the shaft, and is spaced apart from the partition wall in the axial direction (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below);
an annular groove, which is spaced between the side wall portion and the bearing in the axial direction, and extends in the circumferential direction (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below);
an oil discharge port formed in the bearing housing (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below); and
a communication passage, which allows the annular groove and the oil discharge port to be in communication with each other and passes through the bearing housing in a direction intersecting with the axial direction (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below);
wherein the partition wall is fitted onto the shaft via a sealing ring (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below); and the side wall portion is not fitted onto the shaft (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
676
873
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, a bearing hole (spacing accommodating the shaft) formed in the bearing housing (Fig. 2); and a fitting member, which is provided integrally with or separately from the outer ring, and has an outer peripheral surface that is allowed to be fitted onto an inner peripheral surface of the bearing hole, wherein the side wall portion is opposed to an outer peripheral edge of a side surface of the fitting member in the axial direction over the entire area in the circumferential direction (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 above).
Regarding claim 3, Miyashita teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Miyashita further teaches the annular groove has an inner diameter corresponding to an inner diameter of the outer ring (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 above).
Regarding claim 4, Miyashita teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Miyashita further teaches a guide portion, which is provided in the communication passage, and guides lubricating oil discharged through the communication passage, in a direction toward the oil discharge port (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2).
Regarding claims 5-8, Miyashita teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claims 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively. Miyashita further teaches a turbocharger (Figs. 1-2; Col. 1, line 13-Col. 2, line 5).
Regarding claim 9, Miyashita teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Miyashita further teaches a bearing hole (space accommodating the shaft; Figs. 1-2)) formed in the bearing housing, wherein the side wall portion protrudes from an inner peripheral surface of the bearing hole to a position on a radially inner side of the shaft and beyond an inner peripheral surface of the outer ring over an entire area in the circumferential direction (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 above).
Regarding claim 10, Miyashita teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Miyashita further teaches the side wall portion has an annular shape and covers an outer peripheral surface of the shaft over an entire periphery in the circumferential direction (Miyashita, annotated FIG. 2 above).
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 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 MAXIME M ADJAGBE whose telephone number is (571)272-4920. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-6.
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, NATHANIEL E WIEHE can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/MAXIME M ADJAGBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
