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 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 and 8 recite the limitation “the Y-axis direction.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
(the examiner suggests changing “the Y-axis direction” to “the second direction” since this limitation/direction is already defined in the claims)
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, 4-5, 7-8, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272, cited on Applicant’s IDS as “Nejilaw Inc” – translation provided by Applicant) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272) in view of Stone (U.S. Patent 2,600,029).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 8, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) an installing system (see par. [0001]) comprising:
a U-shaped U-bolt [0074],
wherein the U-shaped U-bolt includes a pair of shaft parts and a bridge part (inherent), the pair of shaft parts are aligned in a first direction and placed in a second direction (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt – see, for example the art cited in the Conclusion section), the second direction is orthogonal to the first direction (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt), and the bridge part connects one end of each of the pair of shaft parts (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt); and
a measurement device 32 (sensor pattern: [0044]),
wherein the measurement device includes a strain gauge (see pars. [0062] and [0065]), the strain gauge outputs a signal corresponding to a strain of the shaft part in the second direction (i.e. axial: [0059]), the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts (i.e. “embedded” can mean: to make something an integral part of, and sensor 32 is an integral part of recess portion 24: see Fig. 1), in line symmetry with respect to a straight line (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt), the straight line includes an apex of the U-shape and extends in the second direction (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt), and
the measurement device measures the strain of each of the pair of shaft parts in the second direction (see pars. [0062] and [0075]), from an output signal of the strain gauge embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts (see pars. [0062] and [0075]).
The apparatus of Michiwaki, as applied above in the rejection of claim 1, would perform the method and meet the limitations of claim 7.
Regarding claim 4, Michiwaki discloses (Figs. 1-5) the measurement device acquires the output signal of the strain gauge wirelessly [0054], wherein the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075].
Regarding claim 5, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) the transmission unit includes a power reception coil (implicit: [0056]), a transmission antenna 41, and a radio transmitter, the radio transmitter is driven by power supplied via the power reception coil [0056], the radio transmitter transmits the output signal of the strain gauge via the transmission antenna 41 [0054]/[0056],
the measurement device includes a high-frequency power source [0056] and a receiver [0054]/[0056], the high-frequency power source outputs high-frequency power [0056], and the receiver receives a signal transmitted via the transmission antenna 41 [0054] in response to an output of the high-frequency power by the high-frequency power source [0054]/[0056].
Regarding claim 13, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) wirelessly transmitting, by a transmission unit 41 [0054], the output signal of the strain gauge 32 [0054], wherein the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075], and acquiring, by the measurement device, the output signal of the strain gauge 32 wirelessly [0054], wherein the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075].
Regarding claim 14, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) the measurement device includes a high-frequency power source [0056] and a receiver [0054]/[0056], the high-frequency power source outputs high-frequency power [0056], and the receiver receives a signal transmitted via the transmission antenna 41 in response to an output of the high-frequency power by the high-frequency power source [0054]/[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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Additionally, and in the alternative (see above), claims 1, 3-5, 7-9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272) in view of Stone (U.S. Patent 2,600,029).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 8, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) an installing system (see par. [0001]) comprising:
a U-shaped U-bolt [0074],
wherein the U-shaped U-bolt includes a pair of shaft parts and a bridge part (inherent), the pair of shaft parts are aligned in a first direction and placed in a second direction (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt – see, for example the art cited in the Conclusion section), the second direction is orthogonal to the first direction (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt), and the bridge part connects one end of each of the pair of shaft parts (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt); and
a measurement device 32 (sensor pattern: [0044]),
wherein the measurement device includes a strain gauge (see pars. [0062] and [0065]), the strain gauge outputs a signal corresponding to a strain of the shaft part in the second direction (i.e. axial: [0059]), the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075] (i.e. “embedded” can mean: to make something an integral part of, and sensor 32 is an integral part of recess portion 24: see Fig. 1), in line symmetry with respect to a straight line (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt), the straight line includes an apex of the U-shape and extends in the second direction (inherent, due to the U-shape of the bolt), and
the measurement device measures the strain of each of the pair of shaft parts in the second direction (see pars. [0062] and [0075]), from an output signal of the strain gauge embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts (see pars. [0062] and [0075]).
The apparatus of Michiwaki, as applied above in the rejection of claim 1, would perform the method and meet the limitations of claim 7.
Michiwaki does not disclose the strain gauge is embedded in the bolt.
Stone discloses (Figs. 1-2) the strain gauge is embedded in the bolt (see Figs. 1-2 and col. 3, lines 39-56; col. 3, lines 53-71).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Michiwaki’s device/method so that the strain gauge is embedded in the bolt, as taught by Stone.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP2143(I)(D).
Regarding claims 3, 9, and 12, Michiwaki’s modified device/method is applied as above, but does not disclose the measurement device is connected to the strain gauge, and the measurement device acquires an output signal of the strain gauge via a wiring drawn out from the shaft part or the bridge part.
Stone discloses (Figs. 1-2) the measurement device is connected to the strain gauge (as shown in Figs. 1-2), and the measurement device acquires an output signal of the strain gauge via a wiring 20 drawn out from the shaft part or the bridge part (col. 3, lines 53-71).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Michiwaki’s device/method so that the strain gauge is embedded in the bolt, as taught by Stone.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – see MPEP2143(I)(D).
Regarding claim 4, Michiwaki discloses (Figs. 1-5) the measurement device acquires the output signal of the strain gauge wirelessly [0054], wherein the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075].
Regarding claim 5, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) the transmission unit includes a power reception coil (implicit: [0056]), a transmission antenna 41, and a radio transmitter, the radio transmitter is driven by power supplied via the power reception coil [0056], the radio transmitter transmits the output signal of the strain gauge via the transmission antenna 41 [0054]/[0056],
the measurement device includes a high-frequency power source [0056] and a receiver [0054]/[0056], the high-frequency power source outputs high-frequency power [0056], and the receiver receives a signal transmitted via the transmission antenna 41 [0054] in response to an output of the high-frequency power by the high-frequency power source [0054]/[0056].
Regarding claim 13, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) wirelessly transmitting, by a transmission unit 41 [0054], the output signal of the strain gauge 32 [0054], wherein the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075], and acquiring, by the measurement device, the output signal of the strain gauge 32 wirelessly [0054], wherein the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0075].
Regarding claim 14, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) the measurement device includes a high-frequency power source [0056] and a receiver [0054]/[0056], the high-frequency power source outputs high-frequency power [0056], and the receiver receives a signal transmitted via the transmission antenna 41 in response to an output of the high-frequency power by the high-frequency power source [0054]/[0056].
Claims 2, 10-11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272) in view of Miyazaki (JP 2004-190815, listed on Applicant’s IDS, translation provided by Applicant); or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272) in view of Stone (U.S. Patent 2,600,029), and further in view of Miyazaki (JP 2004-190815).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 15, Michiwaki’s modified device/method is applied as above, and discloses the strain gauge 32 is embedded between a contact point between the fastening object and the U-bolt from a fastening position between the nut and the shaft part (i.e. the strain gauge 32 extends along the shaft of the bolt: see Figs. 1 and 9c).
Michiwaki does not disclose the U-bolt is fixed by inserting the pair of shaft parts into a pair of through-holes provided in a fastening object, the U-bolt is further fixed by fastening a nut from the other ends of each of the pair of shaft parts, the fastening object is sandwiched between the U-bolt and the fastened object.
Miyazaki discloses (Figs. 1-2) the U-bolt is fixed by inserting the pair of shaft parts 6 into a pair of through-holes provided in a fastening object 2 (as shown in Figs. 1-2), the U-bolt is further fixed by fastening a nut 7 from the other ends of each of the pair of shaft parts 6 (as shown in Figs. 1-2), the fastening object 2 is sandwiched between the U-bolt and the fastened object (as shown in Figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Michiwaki’s device/method so that the U-bolt is fixed by inserting the pair of shaft parts into a pair of through-holes provided in a fastening object, the U-bolt is further fixed by fastening a nut from the other ends of each of the pair of shaft parts, the fastening object is sandwiched between the U-bolt and the fastened object, as taught by Miyazaki.
Such a modification would be a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 10, Michiwaki discloses (Fig. 1) a transmission unit 41 which wirelessly transmits the output signal of the strain gauge 32 is embedded in each of the pair of shaft parts [0054], wherein the measurement device acquires the output signal of the strain gauge 32 wirelessly transmitted from the transmission unit 41 [0054].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272) in view of Terasawa (JP 2010-216804, listed on Applicant’s IDS, translation provided by Applicant); or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Michiwaki (JP 2019-215272) in view of Stone (U.S. Patent 2,600,029), and further in view of Terasawa (JP 2010-216804).
Regarding claim 6, Michiwaki’s modified device/method is applied as above, and discloses the transmission unit 41 embedded in one shaft part of the pair of shaft parts [0075] and the transmission unit 41 embedded in the other shaft part of the pair of shaft parts [0074]-[0075] wirelessly transmit the output signal of the strain gauge 32 [0054].
Michiwaki does not disclose transmitting at different frequencies.
Terasawa discloses (Figs. 1-2) transmitting at different frequencies [0069].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Michiwaki’s device/method to include transmitting at different frequencies, as taught by Terasawa.
Such a modification would help the receiver distinguish between the different signals from each shaft (Terasawa: [0069]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Madden (U.S. Patent 5,492,019) discloses determining torque for securing a U-bolt.
Johnson et al. (U.S. Patent 5,804,737) discloses a U-bolt testing apparatus with a pair of strain sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin Schmitt, whose telephone number is (571) 270-7930. The examiner can normally be reached M-F | 8:30-5:00.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/BENJAMIN R SCHMITT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852