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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “bedriven” includes a typographical error and should be amended to recite --be driven--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 4 and 6 are 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.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase “the main body-side guide surface being close to the rotor in the axial direction as the main body-side guide surface extends rearward in a reverse rotation direction” is indefinite because the term “close” is a subjective term and it is unclear what distance is considered to be “close.”
Regarding claim 6, the phrase “the cap-side guide surface being away from the rotor” is indefinite because the term “being away” does not have a reference point from which the cap-side guide surface is determined to be away.
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)(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.
Claims 1-8, 10-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Barbosa (US 2020/0332849).
Regarding claim 1, Barbosa discloses a disc brake device (see Abstract, FIGS. 6-26) comprising: a pad (118) (see e.g. FIG. 2); a caliper (104) (see e.g. FIG. 2) including a cylinder (126) having an opening on a pad side (see FIG. 2, opening through which piston (120) extends); a piston (120) fitted to the cylinder and configured to press the pad toward a rotor (106) (see FIG. 2); and a rotary-to-linear motion conversion mechanism (134, 128) configured to convert a rotary motion of a drive source (132) into a linear motion to push the piston toward the rotor (see ¶ 0062), wherein a braking force of a service brake is generated by feeding brake oil into the cylinder (see ¶ 0064), and a braking force of a parking brake is generated by operating the rotary-to-linear motion conversion mechanism (see ¶ 0065), the piston is divided into two parts that are a piston main body (320) and a piston cap (368) in an axial direction (see FIG. 18), and the rotary-to-linear motion conversion mechanism includes: a rotary member (134) configured to be driven to rotate by the drive source (see ¶ 0062); and a linear motion member (128) screwed to the rotary member (see ¶ 0062), disposed inside the piston main body (see FIG. 2), engaged with the piston main body so as not to be rotatable relative to the piston main body (see ¶ 0062), and configured to press the piston main body in the axial direction (see ¶ 0065); and the disc brake device includes a unidirectional rotation regulating portion (224A, 274) provided between the piston main body and the piston cap (see FIGS. 6A, 7), configured to regulate relative rotation of the piston main body in a forward rotation direction with respect to the piston cap when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the forward rotation direction to move the linear motion member to a rotor side (see ¶¶ 0077, 0078), and configured to allow relative rotation of the piston main body in a reverse rotation direction with respect to the piston cap when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the reverse rotation direction to move the linear motion member to a side opposite to the rotor (see ¶¶ 0077, 0079).
Regarding claim 2, Barbosa discloses that the unidirectional rotation regulating portion includes at least one convex or concave main body-side engagement portion (224A) provided in the piston main body (see FIG. 9), and at least one convex or concave cap-side engagement portion (274) provided in the piston cap and mechanically engaged with the main body-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the forward rotation direction (see ¶¶ 0077, 0078).
Regarding claim 3, Barbosa discloses at least one of a portion of the main body-side engagement portion configured to come into contact with the cap-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the forward rotation direction and a portion of the cap-side engagement portion configured to come into contact with the main body-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the forward rotation direction has a regulating surface (272) (see FIG. 6A) parallel to a central axis of the piston (see FIG. 6A; see also ¶ 0075, FIGS. 24-26).
Regarding claim 4, Barbosa discloses that the main body-side engagement portion has a main body-side guide surface (264) at a portion configured to come into contact with the cap-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the reverse rotation direction (see FIGS. 6, 6A), the main body-side guide surface being close to the rotor in the axial direction (see FIG. 12) as the main body-side guide surface extends rearward in a reverse rotation direction (see FIG. 12), and the cap-side engagement portion is configured to push up the main body-side guide surface when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the reverse rotation direction (see FIG. 12, ¶ 0079).
Regarding claim 5, Barbosa discloses that the main body-side guide surface is an inclined surface or a curved surface (see FIG. 12).
Regarding claim 6, Barbosa discloses that the cap-side engagement portion has a cap-side guide surface (274) at a portion configured to comes into contact with the main body-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the reverse rotation direction (see FIG. 12; ¶¶ 0077, 0079), the cap-side guide surface being away from the rotor in the axial direction as the cap-side guide surface extends forward in the reverse rotation direction (see FIG. 12), and the cap-side guide surface is configured to push up the main body-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the reverse rotation direction (see FIG. 12; ¶¶ 0077, 0079).
Regarding claim 7, Barbosa discloses that the cap-side guide surface is an inclined surface or a curved surface (see FIG. 12, ¶¶ 0077, 0079).
Regarding claim 8, Barbosa discloses that at least the cap-side engagement portion of the piston cap is made of metal (see ¶ 0074).
Regarding claim 11, Barbosa discloses that the piston cap is supported so as to be displaceable relative to the piston main body in the axial direction.
Regarding claim 12, Barbosa discloses that the piston cap is supported so as to be displaceable relative to the piston main body in the axial direction (see FIG. 12) at least as much as the main body-side engagement portion gets over the cap-side engagement portion when the rotary member is driven to rotate in the reverse rotation direction (see FIG. 12).
Regarding claim 13, Barbosa discloses an axial force transmitting portion (222) provided between the piston main body and the piston cap and configured to transmit an axial force between the piston main body and the piston cap (see FIG. 6), and the axial force transmitting portion is provided separately from the unidirectional rotation regulating portion (see FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 14, Barbosa discloses that the axial force transmitting portion includes a flat main body-side transmission surface (222) of the piston main body located on a virtual plane orthogonal to a central axis of the piston main body and a flat cap-side transmission surface (268) of the piston cap located on a virtual plane orthogonal to a central axis of the piston cap (see FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 15, Barbosa discloses that the unidirectional rotation regulating portion is configured to transmit an axial force between the piston main body and the piston cap (see e.g. FIG. 12).
Regarding claim 17, Barbosa discloses that the drive source is an electric motor (see ¶ 0061).
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.
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.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barbosa (US 2020/0332849), as applied to claims 1 and 2, above, and further in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 2017/0191540).
Regarding claim 9, Barbosa discloses that the main body-side engagement portion includes a plurality of main body-side engagement portions (224A, 224B, 224C) provided so as to be spaced apart from each other in a circumferential direction (see FIGS. 13, 14; ¶ 0083).
Barbosa does not disclose that the cap-side engagement portion includes a plurality of cap-side engagement portions provided so as to be spaced apart from each other in the circumferential direction.
Ishikawa teaches a disc brake device comprising a plurality of convex anti-rotation features (21) and a plurality of concave anti-rotation features (26) provided so as to be spaced apart from each other in the circumferential direction (see FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to configure Barbosa to have a plurality of convex cap-side engagement portions to evenly distribute the anti-rotation forces evenly around the piston and the cap.
Regarding claim 10, Barbosa teaches that the plurality of main body-side engagement portions are disposed at equal intervals in the circumferential direction (see FIG. 14). Ishikawa teaches that the plurality of cap-side engagement portions are disposed at equal intervals in the circumferential direction (see FIG. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J LANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5988. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at (571)272-7124. 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.
/NICHOLAS J LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
January 24, 2026