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 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 1-17 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 independent claim 1, the phrase “setting the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller so that a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller during braking is moved in a rotation direction of the drum when the vehicle moves backward thereof” is indefinite because it is unclear relative to what reference point that the direction is moved. Additionally or alternatively, this phrase is indefinite because while the specification discloses a device having a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller that is moved relative to a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller of the conventional device, the specification has not disclosed the conventional art with sufficient specificity to determine whether a direction has been “moved.” For example, the specification provides no measurable quantity that identifies the location of the contact position between the cam and the roller in either of the invention or the conventional art. As such, when looking at a subsequently created new device and trying to determine whether that new device would infringe on the present claims, it is not possible to make an objective determination of whether the contact position of the new cam is set such that the pressing direction is “moved” relative to the disclosed conventional device.
Regarding independent claim 1, the phrase “a roller . . . a first roller and a second roller” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the first recitation of “roller” is the same element as either of the “first roller” and/or “second roller.”
Regarding claim 3, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a connection line connecting a rotation center of the operating cam and the center portion of the second roller” is indefinite because it is unclear from which position that the “bringing” is performed. The specification discloses a device having an extension line that is different from an extension line of the disclosed conventional device, but does not disclose an extension line on a single device that is brought (i.e. moved) into an adjacent position.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a connection line connecting a rotation center of the operating cam and the center portion of the second roller” is indefinite because it is unclear how it is determined that two intersecting lines are “adjacent.” For example, it is unclear why the extension line (B2) is considered to be adjacent to the line (21-41a), but extension line (B1) is not considered to be adjacent to the line (21-41a).
Regarding claim 4, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a rotation center of the operating cam” is indefinite because it is unclear from which position that the “bringing” is performed. The specification discloses a device having an extension line that is different from an extension line of the disclosed conventional device, but does not disclose an extension line on a single device that is brought (i.e. moved) into an adjacent position.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a rotation center of the operating cam” is indefinite because it is unclear how it is determined whether a line is adjacent a point. For example, it is unclear why the extension line (B2) is considered to be adjacent to the rotation center (21), but extension line (B1) is not considered to be adjacent to the rotation center (21).
Regarding independent claim 5, the phrase “setting the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller so that a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller during the braking is moved in a direction of a rotation center of the trailing shoe” is indefinite because it is unclear relative to what reference point that the direction is moved. Additionally or alternatively, this phrase is indefinite because while the specification discloses a device having a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller that is moved relative to a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller of the conventional device, the specification has not disclosed the conventional art with sufficient specificity to determine whether a direction has been “moved.” For example, the specification provides no measurable quantity that identifies the location of the contact position between the cam and the roller in either of the invention or the conventional art. As such, when looking at a subsequently created new device and trying to determine whether that new device would infringe on the present claims, it is not possible to make an objective determination of whether the contact position of the new cam is set such that the pressing direction is “moved” relative to the disclosed conventional device.
Regarding independent claim 5, the phrase “a roller . . . a first roller and a second roller” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the first recitation of “roller” is the same element as either of the “first roller” and/or “second roller.”
Regarding claim 9, the phrase “the operating cam presses the second roller so that a direction of a reaction force generated toward the drum at an arbitrary point between the second lining and the drum during the braking is deflected in a rotation direction of the drum when the vehicle moves backward based on a normal line passing through the arbitrary point” is indefinite because it is unclear relative to what reference point that the reaction force is deflected. Additionally or alternatively, this phrase is indefinite because while the specification discloses a device having a reaction force that is deflected relative to a reaction force of the conventional device, the specification has not disclosed the conventional art with sufficient specificity to determine whether a reaction force has been “deflected.” For example, the specification provides no measurable quantity that identifies the location of the contact position between the cam and the roller in either of the invention or the conventional art. As such, when looking at a subsequently created new device and trying to determine whether that new device would infringe on the present claims, it is not possible to make an objective determination of whether the contact position of the new cam is set such that the reaction force is “deflected” relative to the disclosed conventional device.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase “An operating cam for an air brake which includes . . .” is indefinite because it is unclear whether claim 9 is only directed toward the operating cam, or alternatively, that claim 9 is directed toward the air brake that includes an operating cam. Subsequent limitations within the claim (e.g. “the operating cam presses the second roller”) require elements extraneous to the operating cam. For purposes of examination, claim 9 will be interpreted as being directed toward an air brake comprising an operating cam.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase “an initial contact point” is indefinite because it is unclear whether this is the same element as the previously recited “contact point (see claim 9).
Regarding independent claim 14, the phrase “wherein a contact position between the operating cam and the second roller is set so that a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller during the braking is moved in a direction of a rotation center of the trailing shoe” is indefinite because it is unclear relative to what reference point that the contact position is moved. Additionally or alternatively, this phrase is indefinite because while the specification discloses a device having a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller that is moved relative to a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller of the conventional device, the specification has not disclosed the conventional art with sufficient specificity to determine whether a direction has been “moved.” For example, the specification provides no measurable quantity that identifies the location of the contact position between the cam and the roller in either of the “invention” or the conventional art. As such, when looking at a subsequently created new device and trying to determine whether that new device would infringe on the present claims, it is not possible to make an objective determination of whether the contact position of the new cam is set such that the pressing direction is “moved” relative to the disclosed conventional device.
Regarding claim 16, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a connection line connecting a rotation center of the operating cam and the center portion of the second roller” is indefinite because it is unclear from which position that the “bringing” is performed. The specification discloses a device having an extension line that is different from an extension line of the disclosed conventional device, but does not disclose an extension line on a single device that is brought (i.e. moved) into an adjacent position.
Regarding claim 16, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a connection line connecting a rotation center of the operating cam and the center portion of the second roller” is indefinite because it is unclear how it is determined that two intersecting lines are “adjacent.” For example, it is unclear why the extension line (B2) is considered to be adjacent to the line (21-41a), but extension line (B1) is not considered to be adjacent to the line (21-41a).
Regarding claim 17, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a rotation center of the operating cam” is indefinite because it is unclear from which position that the “bringing” is performed. The specification discloses a device having an extension line that is different from an extension line of the disclosed conventional device, but does not disclose an extension line on a single device that is brought (i.e. moved) into an adjacent position.
Regarding claim 17, the phrase “bringing the extension line adjacent to a rotation center of the operating cam” is indefinite because it is unclear how it is determined whether a line is adjacent a point. For example, it is unclear why the extension line (B2) is considered to be adjacent to the rotation center (21), but extension line (B1) is not considered to be adjacent to the rotation center (21).
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.
Claims 1-11 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Berwanger (US 2016/0123414).
Regarding independent claim 1, Berwanger discloses a method of setting a contact position (see Abstract, FIGS. 1, 2) between an operating cam (56) and a roller (60) for an air brake (see e.g. ¶ 0029, “air chamber size for the brake actuator”) which includes a leading shoe (48) and a trailing shoe (50) respectively provided with a first roller (58) and a second roller (60) at first end portions thereof (see FIG. 2) and disposed to face each other on a back plate (44) fixed to an axle (see ¶ 0004) to rotate about second end portions thereof (see FIG. 2, end adjacent pivot (46)); a first lining (72) and a second lining (72) respectively provided on external surfaces of the leading shoe and the trailing shoe (see FIG. 2; ¶ 0021); a drum (42) disposed on a circumference of the back plate to rotate together with a wheel of a vehicle (see ¶ 0018); and the operating cam disposed to support the first roller and the second roller therebetween (see FIG. 2) to rotate in a direction of expanding a gap between the leading shoe and the trailing shoe so that the first and second linings press the drum during braking (see ¶ 0027), the method comprising: setting the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller so that a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller during braking is moved in a rotation direction of the drum when the vehicle moves backward thereof (see FIGS. 1, 2; direction is moved from arrow (30) (see FIG. 1) to arrow (120) (see FIG. 2)).
Regarding claim 2, Berwanger discloses that the direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller is a direction in which an extension line extends from a contact point between the second roller and the operating cam to a center portion of the second roller (see FIG. 2, direction (120) extends through contact point and center of the second roller).
Regarding claim 3, Berwanger discloses that the setting of the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller includes bringing the extension line (120) adjacent to a connection line (see FIG. 2; line connecting (106) to center of (60)) connecting a rotation center (106) of the operating cam and the center portion (see FIG. 2; center of (60)) of the second roller (see FIGS. 2, 3).
Regarding claim 4, Berwanger discloses that the setting of the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller includes bringing the extension line (120) adjacent to a rotation center (106) of the operating cam (see FIG. 2).
Regarding independent claim 5, Berwanger discloses a method of setting a contact position (see Abstract, FIGS. 1, 2) between an operating cam (56) and a roller (60) for an air brake (see e.g. ¶ 0029, “air chamber size for the brake actuator”) which includes a leading shoe (48) and a trailing shoe (50) respectively provided with a first roller (58) and a second roller (60) at first end portions thereof (see FIG. 2) and disposed to face each other on a back plate (44) fixed to an axle (see ¶ 0004) to rotate about second end portions thereof (see FIG. 2, end adjacent pivot (46)); a first lining (72) and a second lining (72) respectively provided on external surfaces of the leading shoe and the trailing shoe (see FIG. 2; ¶ 0021); a drum (42) disposed on a circumference of the back plate to rotate together with a wheel of a vehicle (see ¶ 0018); and the operating cam disposed to support the first roller and the second roller therebetween (see FIG. 2) to rotate in a direction of expanding a gap between the leading shoe and the trailing shoe so that the first and second linings press the drum during braking (see ¶ 0027), the method comprising: setting the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller so that a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller during braking is moved in a rotation direction of a rotation center (46) of the trailing shoe (see FIGS. 1-3; direction is moved from arrow (30) (see FIG. 1) to arrow (120) (see FIG. 3), which is closer to rotation center (46)).
Regarding claim 6, Berwanger discloses that the direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller is a direction in which an extension line extends from a contact point between the second roller and the operating cam to a center portion of the second roller (see FIG. 2, direction (120) extends through contact point and center of the second roller).
Regarding claim 7, Berwanger discloses that the setting of the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller includes bringing the extension line (120) adjacent to a connection line (see FIG. 2; line connecting (106) to center of (60)) connecting a rotation center (106) of the operating cam and the center portion (see FIG. 2; center of (60)) of the second roller (see FIGS. 2, 3).
Regarding claim 8, Berwanger discloses that the setting of the contact position between the operating cam and the second roller includes bringing the extension line (120) adjacent to a rotation center (106) of the operating cam (see FIG. 2).
Regarding independent claim 9, Berwanger discloses an operating cam (56) (see Abstract, FIGS. 1, 2) for an air brake (see e.g. ¶ 0029, “air chamber size for the brake actuator”) which includes a leading shoe (48) and a trailing shoe (50) respectively provided with a first roller (58) and a second roller (60) at first end portions thereof (see FIG. 2) and disposed to face each other on a back plate (44) fixed to an axle (see ¶ 0004) to rotate about second end portions thereof (see FIG. 2, end adjacent pivot (46)); a first lining (72) and a second lining (72) respectively provided on external surfaces of the leading shoe and the trailing shoe (see FIG. 2; ¶ 0021); a drum (42) disposed on a circumference of the back plate to rotate together with a wheel of a vehicle (see ¶ 0018); and the operating cam disposed to support the first roller and the second roller therebetween (see FIG. 2) to rotate in a direction of expanding a gap between the leading shoe and the trailing shoe so that the first and second linings press the drum during braking (see ¶ 0027), wherein the operating cam presses the second roller sot that a direction of a reaction force generated toward the drum at an arbitrary point between the second lining and the drum during braking is deflected in a rotation direction of the drum when the vehicle moves backward based on a normal line passing through the arbitrary point (see FIGS. 1, 2; pressing force line (120) is deflected downward relative to line (30), thereby causing the reaction forces at the interface between the shoe and drum to also be deflected downward).
Regarding claim 10, Berwanger discloses that the operating cam forms an origin symmetrical structure with respect to a rotation center (106) thereof and as a whole forms a tilde shape (see FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Berwanger discloses a pair of pressing portions forming outwardly convexly curved surfaces (A, B) (see Annotated FIG. 2, below) to press the first roller and the second roller during the braking and a pair of slimming grooves (C, D) (see Annotated FIG. 2, below) formed inwardly concavely on an opposite side of each of the pressing portions (see Annotated FIG. 2, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
575
547
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Berwanger discloses that a contact position between the operating cam and the second roller is set so that a direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller during the braking is moved in a direction of a rotation center (46) of the trailing shoe (see FIGS. 1-3; direction is moved from arrow (30) (see FIG. 1) to arrow (120) (see FIG. 3), which is closer to rotation center (46)).
Regarding claim 15, Berwanger discloses that the direction in which the operating cam presses the second roller is a direction in which an extension line extends from a contact point between the second roller and the operating cam to a center portion of the second roller (see FIG. 2, direction (120) extends through contact point and center of the second roller).
Regarding claim 16, Berwanger discloses that the contact position is set between the operating cam and the second roller includes bringing the extension line (120) adjacent to a connection line (see FIG. 2; line connecting (106) to center of (60)) connecting a rotation center (106) of the operating cam and the center portion (see FIG. 2; center of (60)) of the second roller (see FIGS. 2, 3).
Regarding claim 17, Berwanger discloses that the contact position is set between the operating cam and the second roller includes bringing the extension line (120) adjacent to a rotation center (106) of the operating cam (see FIG. 2).
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 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berwanger (US 2016/0123414) in view of Newstead et al. (US 3,677,374).
Regarding claim 12, Berwanger does not disclose that a rotation angle of the operating cam is directly proportional to a movement angle of the second roller.
Newstead teaches an operating cam (2) for a brake (see Abstract, FIG. 3), wherein that a rotation angle of the operating cam is directly proportional to a movement angle of the second roller (see col. 1, lines 44-45).
It would have been obvious to configure the operating cam of Berwanger such that the rotation angle is directly proportional to a movement angle of the second roller to utilize a known cam configuration in existing brake systems that would provide a readily ascertainable and predictable movement of the brake shoe for a given rotation of the cam.
Regarding claim 13, Newstead teaches that the rotation angle of the operating cam and a movement angle of the second roller are directly proportional while maintaining an initial contact point in a state of being inclined by a predetermined angle (see col. 1, lines 44-45; the “constant rise with respect to angular displacement” would maintain the contact position).
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
November 18, 2025
Prosecution Insights