DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 05 November 2025.
Claims 1-6 are currently pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted was/were considered by the examiner.
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.
Examiner note: no 112(f) invocations have been identified by the Office.
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.
(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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Burmeister et al (US 20110236197), hereafter referred to as Burmeister.
Regarding Claim 1, Burmeister discloses the following:
A turbine (10), comprising:
a turbine impeller (13);
a plurality of nozzle vanes (19), which are placed on a radially outer side with respect to the turbine impeller (13) so as to be spaced apart from each other in a circumferential direction of the turbine impeller (13), and are each provided so as to be pivotable about a pivot axis (axis of 29) extending along an axial direction of the turbine impeller (13);
a blade shaft (29), which protrudes from each of the plurality of nozzle vanes (19) in the axial direction, and is provided so as to be turnable integrally with each of the plurality of nozzle vanes (19);
an annular member (18), which extends in the circumferential direction, and is opposed to the plurality of nozzle vanes (19) in the axial direction;
a plurality of blade shaft holes (portions of 18 holding 29) that open in a first surface of the annular member (18) that is opposed to the plurality of nozzle vanes (19), the plurality of blade shaft holes (portions of 18 holding 29) being formed apart from each other in the circumferential direction, the plurality of blade shaft holes (portions of 18 holding 29) each allowing the blade shaft (29) to be inserted into the blade shaft hole (portions of 18 holding 29) and each having a bottom surface; and
an annular protruding portion (protruding portion of 18 above 29; FIG. 1) that is provided on an inner peripheral side of a second surface of the annular member (18) on a side opposite to the first surface, the annular protruding portion (protruding portion of 18 above 29; FIG. 1) extending in the circumferential direction and protruding in the axial direction (also see [0016-17]).
Regarding Claim 2, Burmeister discloses the following:
The turbine (10) according to claim 1,
wherein an entire area of the bottom surface of each of the plurality of blade shaft holes (portions of 18 holding 29) is opposed to the annular protruding portion (protruding portion of 18 above 29; FIG. 1) in the axial direction (as seen in FIG. 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Burmeister discloses the following:
The turbine (10) according to claim 1,
wherein a thickness of a part of the annular member (18) on the radially outer side with respect to the annular protruding portion (protruding portion of 18 above 29; FIG. 1) is equal to (as seen in FIG. 1) or less than a depth of each of the plurality of blade shaft holes (portions of 18 holding 29).
Regarding Claim 4, Burmeister discloses the following:
A turbocharger (see [0016]), comprising the turbine (10) of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 5, Burmeister discloses the following:
A turbocharger (see [0016]), comprising the turbine (10) of claim 2.
Regarding Claim 6, Burmeister discloses the following:
A turbocharger (see [0016]), comprising the turbine (10) of claim 3.
Conclusion
See form No. 892 for other references pertinent to the application that may not have been cited within the Office Action.
For references which show turbocharger arrangements see Page 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN C DELRUE whose telephone number is (313)446-6567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday; 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM (Eastern).
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.
/BRIAN CHRISTOPHER DELRUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights