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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 3/22/2023 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because the publication date for US 20110315491 to Frailing et al is incorrect. The date listed appears to be that of patent US 8899385 to Frailing et al, listed and considered in the IDS of 7/31/2025. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “type of particular” appears in [0015]. It appears “particular” should be “particulate”.
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 7-8 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.
Claims 7-8 recite “a type of particular”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims and it is not clear what is intended by “particular”.
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.
Claims 1-2, 10-12, and 15- 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frailing et al (US# 8899385) in view of Vacca et al (US# 2022/0252088) or Wahler et al (US# 2022/0120297).
Frailing et al discloses a system for retarding a railcar, the system comprising: a brake 54; an actuator 44 that moves the brake between a closed position in which the brake slows the railcar and an open position in which the brake does not slow the railcar (col. 4, lines 44-51); a hydraulic circuit 32 through which a hydraulic fluid flows between the actuator 44, a pump 110, and a reservoir 108; a motor 112 that drives the pump to supply the hydraulic fluid from the reservoir to the actuator. Frailing et al further disclose a control system C and controlling a variable pump at different pressure limits (col. 8, lines 1-22) but lack a variable speed motor driving the pump, instead showing a variable pump 110. Vacca et al disclose an electro-hydraulic actuator system and further teach the use of a variable speed motor EM driving a pump HP for energy efficiency and cost considerations [0006]. Wahler et al disclose a hydraulic drive using a pump 110 driven by a variable speed motor 112. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a variable speed motor to drive the pump or pumps of Frailing et al, as taught by Vacca et al or Wahler et al, to decrease energy consumption and/or increase the controllability of the pump. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a speed such that the pressure is sufficient for operating the actuator, thereby ensuring that the brake is suitable for the given application.
Regarding claim 2, Frailing et al disclose a pressure sensor U/P fluidly coupled within the hydraulic circuit and configured to measure the pressure of the hydraulic fluid therein. Figure 9.
Regarding claim 10, an accumulator 158 is fluidly coupled to the pump 110, wherein the pump charges the accumulator, and wherein the accumulator is configured to provide powered movement of the brake to the closed position when the pump is de-energized.
Regarding claim 11, the control system and the hydraulic circuit are configured to provide a non-powered movement of the brake from the closed position to the open position without the hydraulic fluid being forced from the actuator and without the hydraulic fluid being supplied to the actuator such that the actuator is in a relaxed position in which the hydraulic fluid from the actuator is given a free path back to the reservoir 108. Col. 5, lines 35-40
Regarding claim 12, the pump 110 is configured to supply the hydraulic fluid to one end of the actuator to provide a powered movement of the brake to the closed position and to an opposite end of the actuator to provide a powered movement of the brake to the open position. Col. 9, lines 49-53.
Regarding claim 15, as modified, Frailing et al disclose that the control system C is further configured to control the motor so as to not exceed at least one of a maximum current, maximum voltage, maximum speed, and maximum rate of speed change. There are inherent limits to current, voltage, speed and rate of speed change in the system.
Regarding claim 16, Frailing et al disclose a method for slowing a railcar, the method comprising: configuring a brake 54 to slow the railcar when in a closed position and to not slow the railcar when in an open position; configuring an actuator 44 to move the brake into and between the closed position and the open position; fluidly coupling the actuator, a reservoir 108, and a pump 110 to form a hydraulic circuit, and operating the actuator to move the brake into the closed position to slow the railcar. Frailing et al further disclose a control system C and controlling a variable pump at different pressure limits (col. 8, lines 1-22) but lack a variable speed motor driving the pump, instead showing a variable pump 110. Vacca et al disclose an electro-hydraulic actuator system and further teach the use of a variable speed motor EM driving a pump HP for energy efficiency and cost considerations [0006]. Wahler et al disclose a hydraulic drive using a pump 110 driven by a variable speed motor 112. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a variable speed motor to drive the pump or pumps of Frailing et al, as taught by Vacca et al or Wahler et al, to decrease energy consumption and/or increase the controllability of the pump. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a speed such that the pressure is sufficient for operating the actuator, thereby ensuring that the brake is suitable for the given application.
Regarding claim 17, Frailing et al disclose a pressure sensor U/P fluidly coupled within the hydraulic circuit which determines a pressure of the hydraulic fluid (figure 9) or a pressure sensor in the form of a switch measuring P1 (figure 8).
Regarding claim 18, the pressure P1 measured by the pressure sensor is distinct from a braking pressure (cylinder high pressure) applied by the brake.
Regarding claim 19, an accumulator 158 is coupled within the hydraulic circuit such that the pump charges the accumulator and the accumulator is configured to provide a powered movement of the brake to the closed position when the pump is de-energized.
Regarding claim 20, Frailing discloses a system for controlling a railcar moving along a set of rails, the system comprising: a member 54 configured to selectively contact wheels of the railcar; an actuator 44 that moves the member between a closed position in which the member contacts the wheels of the railcar and an open position in which the member does not contact the wheels of the railcar; a hydraulic circuit 32 through which a hydraulic fluid flows between the actuator, a pump 110, and a reservoir 108; a motor 112 that drives the pump to supply the hydraulic fluid from the reservoir to the actuator, a pressure sensor (U/P figure 9 or a pressure sensor in the form of a switch measuring P1 figure 8) configured to measure a pressure of the hydraulic fluid in the hydraulic circuit; and a control system C . Frailing et al further disclose a control system C and controlling a variable pump at different pressure limits (col. 8, lines 1-22) but lack a variable speed motor driving the pump, instead showing a variable pump 110. Vacca et al disclose an electro-hydraulic actuator system and further teach the use of a variable speed motor EM driving a pump HP for energy efficiency and cost considerations [0006]. Wahler et al disclose a hydraulic drive using a pump 110 driven by a variable speed motor 112 according to pressure measured by pressure sensors [0008][0010]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a variable speed motor to drive the pump or pumps of Frailing et al, as taught by Vacca et al or Wahler et al, to decrease energy consumption and/or increase the controllability of the pump. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a speed such that the pressure is sufficient for operating the actuator, thereby ensuring that the brake is suitable for the given application.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frailing et al (US# 8899385), Vacca et al (US# 2022/0252088) or Wahler et al (US# 2022/0120297) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Kuzuya et al (US# 2020/0189539).
Regarding claim 3, Frailing et al further lack the control system comparing the pressure of the hydraulic fluid in the hydraulic circuit to a table stored in memory for determining the speed setting for operating the motor. Kuzuya et al disclose a brake system and further teach the use of a stored map or table to determine a speed setting of a motor of a pump for a brake pressure [0061]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a table stored in memory, as taught by Kuzuya et al, in the system of Frailing et al as an obvious simple means of determining motor speed without requiring significant calculation.
Claim(s) 6-7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frailing et al (US# 8899385), Vacca et al (US# 2022/0252088) or Wahler et al (US# 2022/0120297) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wilson et al (US# 2003/0101801).
Frailing et al, as modified, disclose all the limitations of the instant claims with exception to a fluid quality sensor operatively coupled within the hydraulic circuit and configured to compare a quality measurement of the hydraulic fluid as measured by the fluid quality sensor to a threshold, wherein the control system is configured to provide a notification when the quality measurement exceeds the threshold. Wilson et al disclose a method of monitoring fluid condition in a railway environment [0038] including a fluid quality sensor 102 operatively coupled within a hydraulic circuit and configured to compare a quality measurement of the hydraulic fluid as measured by the fluid quality sensor to a threshold (step 612), wherein the control system 108/110 is configured to provide a notification when the quality measurement exceeds the threshold (step 614). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fluid quality sensing taught by Wilson et al in the system of Frailing to facilitate maintenance and prevent damage to the system.
Regarding claim 7, Wilson et al teach the quality measurement comprises a type of particulate present within the hydraulic fluid [0018], and wherein the notification is based at least in part on the type of particular (XRF, NDIR, VISC) present within the hydraulic fluid.
Regarding claim 9, Wilson et al teaches the control system permits a user to manually change the notification (reset [0073], and wherein the control system records (continuous logging [0071]) when the notification is manually changed. [0073]
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frailing et al (US# 8899385), Vacca et al (US# 2022/0252088) or Wahler et al (US# 2022/0120297) and Wilson et al (US# 2003/0101801)as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Cannon (US# 7333922).
Frailing et al, as modified above, disclose all the limitations of the instant claim with exception to the notification includes a recommended action based on the type of particular present to bring the quality measurement below the threshold. Cannon disclose a system of monitoring machine performance and further teach notifications which provide recommended actions (col. 7, lines 56-59). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide notifications including recommended actions, as taught by Cannon et al, in the system of Frailing et al, to assist the operator in ensuring correct operation and prevent damage to the system.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frailing et al (US# 8899385), Vacca et al (US# 2022/0252088) or Wahler et al (US# 2022/0120297) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Johnson et al (US# 2022/0140763).
Frailing et al, as modified, disclose all the limitations of the instant claims with exception to the control system controlling the speed setting of the variable speed motor by adjusting a frequency of voltage delivered thereto (claim 13) or the variable speed motor being a brushless AC induction motor. Johnson et al disclose a variable speed motor 314 driving a hydraulic pump 318, where the motor is a brushless AC induction motor and the speed is adjusted by the frequency of the voltage [0017]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a frequency controlled AC induction motor, such as taught by Johnson et al as an obvious means of controllably powering the pump with minimal maintenance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY T KING whose telephone number is (571)272-7117. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-5:00 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.
/BRADLEY T KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
BTK