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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “26” has been used to designate both a releasable fastening device and another component of the invention as illustrated in Figure 3. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over German Patent No. DE 19518893 to Schaefer et al in view of German Patent No. DE 202013103797 to Faiveley.
Regarding Claim 1, Schaefer et al disclose a magnetic track brake apparatus for a rail vehicle (see Figures 1, 2a, 3, and 4) having most all the features of the instant invention including: at least one pressure medium actuated actuation cylinder 14 which has a cylinder housing and an actuating piston 18 movable relative to the cylinder housing (see Figure 2a and fourth page of the examiner provided translation, 6th paragraph), at least one magnet device 8 which can be configured to be lowered into a low position on a rail by the actuation cylinder 14 to generate a magnetic attraction force between the rail and the magnet device 8 by a magnetic short-circuit with the rail, and which can be placed, by the actuation cylinder 14 into a high position raised from the rail and into any intermediate positions between the low position and the high position (see fourth page of the examiner provided translation, and the Figure 1 Description paragraphs), and at least one high-position detecting device 77 which generates a high-position signal when the magnet device 8 assumes the high position (see the sixth page of the examiner provided translation, sixth full paragraph and Claim 14 of the translation), wherein the high-position detecting device 77 comprises at least one electrical limit switch 77 has at least two switch states and changes the switch state when the magnet device 8 assumes the high position (see the sixth page of the examiner provided translation, sixth full paragraph and Claim 14 of the translation).
However, Schaefer et al do not disclose that the high-position detecting device is arranged inside the actuation cylinder.
Faiveley is relied upon merely for their teachings of a magnetic track brake apparatus (see Figure 1) having a device 15 which forms part of a high-position detecting device and is arranged inside an actuation cylinder 100 (see Figure 1, the abstract, and the fifth page of the examiner provided translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the high-position detecting device of Schaefer et al to be arranged inside the actuation cylinder as taught by Faiveley in order to protect the device from the outside elements and any damage that could occur due to exposure to the outside elements.
Regarding Claim 2, Schaefer et al., as modified, further disclose that, in the high-position, the electrical limit switch 77 is actuated directly or indirectly by the actuating piston 18 (see sixth page of the Schaefer et al translation, sixth full paragraph).
Regarding Claim 3, Schaefer et al., as modified, further disclose that the high-position detecting device 15 comprises a structural unit 20 which contains the device 15, is releasably attached to or in a cover of the cylinder housing of the actuation cylinder 100 (see Figure 1 of Faiveley) and is arranged such that the device 15 protrudes into a working chamber 28 of the actuation cylinder (see Figure 1 of Faiveley).
Regarding Claim 4, Schaefer et al., as modified, further discloses that the structural unit 20 is arranged tightly on or in the cover of the actuation cylinder 100 (see Figure 1 of Faiveley).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 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.
Claims 7-12, 15, and 16 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding independent Claim 7 (and its respective dependent claims 8-12, 15, and 16), while Schaefer et al and Faiveley disclose most all the features of the instant invention as outlined with respect to the rejection of Claim 1 above, neither of these references taken either alone or in combination disclose that the high-position detecting device has a structural unit which is separate from the actuation cylinder and is releasably attached to the cylinder housing of the actuation cylinder by a fastening device and wherein the structural unit has at least one actuator element which is movable on or in the housing such that the actuator element changes its position relative to the housing depending on the vertical position of the magnet device and hence exerts an influence on the position of the actuating element of the limit switch.
In other words, neither Schaefer et al and/or Faiveley disclose that the high position detecting device essentially comprises a separate component with respect to the actuating cylinder, which is releasably attached to the cylinder housing of the actuating cylinder by means of a fastening device in combination with the structural unit having at least one actuator element which is movable on or in the housing such that the actuator element changes its position relative to the housing depending on the vertical position of the magnet device to then change the position of the actuating element of the limit switch.
It is for these reasons that Claims 7-12, 15, and 16 define over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 5,018,605 to Hooghiem et al disclose a magnetic track brake apparatus similar to applicant’s.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 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.
PAMELA RODRIGUEZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/PAMELA RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 01/28/26