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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 27 improperly depends from itself. For the purposes of examination, claim 27 will be interpreted as depending from claim 26. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 14-18 and 23-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sprave (US 2005/0121404 A1).
Referring to Claim 14: Sprave discloses a device for deflection of a coupler of a train vehicle, comprising:
a deflection arm (16) adapted to be connected to a coupler pivot anchor (9) (Para. [0040]) (Figs. 2A-3C); and
a drive (34) connected to the deflection arm, wherein the drive is operative to rotate the deflection arm about the coupler pivot anchor (Para. [0049]).
Referring to Claim 15: Sprave discloses the device according to claim 14 wherein the drive is a pneumatic and/or hydraulic drive (Para. [0013], last sentence).
Referring to Claim 16: Sprave discloses the device according to claim 14, wherein the drive (34) comprises a deflection arm end (at pin 22 near “Working Point of Adjuster 34”) connected to the deflection arm (16), and a train vehicle side end adapted to be connected to a part of the train vehicle (Fig. 4).
Referring to Claim 17: Sprave discloses the device according to claim 14, wherein the deflection arm comprises:
a drive end (at hole 28 near “Working Point of Adjuster 34”) connected to the drive (34); and
a pivot anchor end (circular end of 16) adapted for connection to a coupler pivot anchor (9) (Fig. 1).
Referring to Claim 18: Sprave discloses the device according to claim 17, wherein the pivot anchor end (circular end of 16) attaches to a pivot pin (29) of the coupler pivot anchor (9) (Para. [0040]) (Fig. 1).
Referring to Claim 23: Sprave discloses a coupler for a train vehicle comprising:
a coupler pivot anchor (9); and
a device comprising:
a deflection arm (16) connected to the coupler pivot anchor (Fig. 1) (Para. [0040]); and
a drive (34) connected (via 22 at “Working Point of Adjuster 34”) to the deflection arm (Figs. 3A-3C);
wherein the drive is operative to rotate the deflection arm about the coupler pivot anchor (Para. [0049]).
Referring to Claim 24: Sprave discloses the coupler according to claim 23, wherein said coupler further comprises:
a coupler rod (2);
wherein the coupler pivot anchor (9) includes a pivot pin (14 or 29) that extends along a pivot axis (Figs. 1 and 5), the coupler rod being connected to the pivot pin such that a rotation of the pivot pin around the pivot axis leads to the coupler rod swiveling about the pivot axis (Para. [0050-0051]) (Fig. 5).
Referring to Claim 25: Sprave discloses the coupler according to claim 24, wherein the coupler pivot anchor (9) further comprises a cage having an opening (Fig. 6A);
wherein the pivot pin (14) is fixedly attached to the cage (Fig. 5);
wherein the coupler rod (2) extends through the opening of the cage, and wherein elastic elements (“elastomer spring joint”) are arranged inside the cage, the elastic elements resting against an inside wall of the cage and resting against an outer circumferential surface of the coupler rod (Fig. 6A) (Para. [0049]).
Referring to Claim 26: Sprave discloses a car of a multi-car vehicle, the car comprising: a coupler comprising:
a coupler pivot anchor (9);
a coupler rod (2); and
a device comprising:
a deflection arm (16) connected to the coupler pivot anchor (Figs. 2A-2C) (Para. [0040]); and
a drive (34) connected (via 22 at “Working Point of Adjuster 34”) to the deflection arm, wherein the drive is operative to rotate the deflection arm about the coupler pivot anchor (Para. [0049]); and
wherein the coupler pivot anchor includes a pivot pin (14 or 29) that extends along a pivot axis (Figs. 1 and 5), the coupler rod being connected to the pivot pin such that a rotation of the pivot pin around the pivot axis leads to the coupler rod swiveling about the pivot axis (Para. [0050-0051]) (Fig. 5).
Referring to Claim 27: Sprave discloses the car of claim 27, wherein the coupler further comprises a coupler head (37) (Figs. 5, 6A and 6B), said coupler head attached to the coupler rod (2), wherein said coupler head is deflectable by said device for aligning with a coupler head of another car (Para. [0050] and [0056]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 28 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sprave in view of Peckham et al. (US 2014/0284297 A1).
Referring to Claim 28: Sprave teaches a method for coupling a first car of a multi-car vehicle with a second car of a multi-car vehicle (Para. [0003]), wherein:
the first car includes a first car coupler having a first car coupler head (37); and
connecting a deflection arm (16) of a device to a coupler pivot anchor (9) of the first car coupler (Para. [0040]);
connecting a drive (34) to the deflection arm (Para. [0049]);
driving the drive to rotate the deflection arm about the coupler pivot anchor to bring the first car coupler head into alignment
Sprave does not specifically teach a second car having a second coupler and coupler head that is misaligned with the first coupler in a first position. However, Peckham teaches an automated coupler positioning device, wherein a drive is used to perform automatic adjustment/alignment of adjacent couplers on straight or curved tracks (Para. [0008]) to pivot adjacent couplers between an on-center position (Fig. 10) and an off-center position (Fig. 11) to facilitate automatic alignment and coupling without any manual adjustment of the angular orientation of the coupler (Para. [0042-0045]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Sprave to provide a second coupler and perform automatic alignment between the couplers when they are in a misaligned position, as taught by Peckham, in order to facilitate automatic alignment and coupling on straight or curved tracks without any manual adjustment of the angular orientation of the coupler (see Peckham, Para. [0045]).
Referring to Claim 28: Sprave teaches a method, further comprising:
providing the coupler pivot anchor (9) with a pivot pin (14 or 29) that extends along a pivot axis (Figs. 1 and 5);
attaching a pivot anchor end (circular end) of the deflection arm (16) to the pivot pin (29) of the coupler pivot anchor (Fig. 1);
fixedly attaching the pivot pin to a cage of the coupler pivot anchor (Fig. 6A);
disposing a coupler rod (2) within the cage;
wherein driving the drive to rotate the deflection arm about the coupler pivot anchor turns the pivot pin and the cage about the pivot axis, thereby causing the coupler rod to swivel about the pivot axis (Para. [0049]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-22 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 19 and depending claims 20-22, Sprave fails to teach the combination of limitations recited in claim 19. Sprave does teach the first portion of claim 19, including: a mechanical interface (“hexagon socket”) adapted for engagement with a tool (“hand crank”), wherein the mechanical interface is rotatable by the tool (Para. [0049], last two sentences). However, Sprave fails to teach the remainder of claim 19 regarding the steering arm limitations. Examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Sprave in this manner since Sprave does not rely on a series of rotating arm linkages. Such a modification would require an improper degree of hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
The references made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references relate to coupler adjustment:
US-20170021844-A1 and US-20160090110-A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY L KUHFUSS whose telephone number is (571)270-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00am to 6:00 pm CDT.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached on (571)272-6682. 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.
/ZACHARY L KUHFUSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617