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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 14-15, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 14-15, line 1, the period (.) after system should be replaced with a comma (,).
In claim 17, “in order to” should read ---configured to---
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 14-29 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.
Claim 14 and 15 recites the limitation "the motor" in line 4 of claim 14 and 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 16-29 are rejected because they are dependents of claim 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 14, 16-18, and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kazerooni (US6886812B2).
Regarding claim 14, Kazerooni discloses a method for counterbalancing a weight force of an object (25; Figure 1) in a system, the object (25) fastenable to a traction cable (13), the method comprising the steps of: a) fastening the object (25) to the traction cable (13); b) determining a rotational speed of the motor (12) or a derivation of the rotational speed of the motor (12; column 3, line 59 – column 4, line 18); c) determining a current setpoint value; and d) counterbalancing the weight force of the object (25) using the previously determined current setpoint value (column 17, line 62 – column 18, line 33, the controller the determines the current needed to support the load in stationary manner/position).
Regarding claim 16 and 29, Kazerooni discloses wherein the rotational speed of the motor (12) corresponds to a velocity of the traction cable (13) and the electronic module (electric system 10; Figure 1) comprising a transmission (column 22, lines 26-27, a transmission connects the motor 13 to the pulley to provide a linear speed of the cable and line effector).
Regarding claim 17, Kazerooni discloses a braking function (24; Figure 1; column 24, lines 38-48) in order to prevent an undesirable falling of the object (25).
Regarding claims 18 and 28, Kazerooni discloses the system comprising: an electronic module (electric system 10) having an energy source for supplying the system with electrical energy (power amplifier; column 6, lines 10-17); a winder (11) for winding up the traction cable (13); a motor (12) for driving the winder (11) for winding up the traction cable (13); and a controller (20).
Regarding claim 26, Kazerooni discloses at least one sensor (30; Figure 2) for detecting an acceleration (column 2, lines 42-45; column 9, line 52 – column 10, line 67; force/motion sensor 30 helps determine speed/acceleration/motion of the end-effector/load).
Regarding claim 27, Kazerooni discloses at least one sensor for detecting a position of the motor (12; column 9, lines 8-12, an encoder on the actuator) or a sensor (12; Figure 13) for determining the motor current.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 19-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazerooni.
Regarding claims 19-20, Kazerooni discloses the above method and system and further teaches the electronic module has a transmission (transmission and pulley 11, column 5, lines 50-51; column 22, lines 26-27). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the transmission of Kazerooni to include the transmission ratio between 2 and 15; and ratio between 4 and 12 in order to reduce output speed and increase torque for improved lifting force and speed. Since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the experimental, optimum, or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claims 21-23, Kazerooni discloses the above method and system and further teaches wherein the electronic module has a transmission with an output pulley (pulley 11), the output pulley (pulley 11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the output pulley of Kazerooni to include the pulley having a diameter in a range from 10 to 200 mm; diameter in a range from 20 to 150 mm; and diameter in a range from 40 to 120 mm in order to improve the line speed and tension of the system. Since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the experimental, optimum, or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazerooni in view of Coupart (US20070132324A1).
Regarding claim 24, Kazerooni discloses the above system, but fails to teach wherein the motor is an external rotor motor.
Coupart teaches a motor for a similar system and further teaches wherein the motor (2, 3; Figures 1-4) is an external rotor (3) motor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kazerooni to include the external rotor motor as taught by Coupart in order to provide higher torque and efficiency and provide a compact design.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazerooni in view of Somerville (US4272706A).
Regarding claim 25, Kazerooni discloses the above system, but fails to teach wherein the motor has a number of poles greater than 6.
Somerville teaches a motor for a similar system and further teaches wherein the motor (10; Figure 1) has a number of poles greater than 6 (column 3, line 63 – column 4, line 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kazerooni to include the motor as taught by Somerville in order to provide greater torque and improve efficiency at lower rotating speeds.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 15 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the entire combination of elements set forth including for disclosing c) storing the first position as a controlled variable in the system if the rotational speed of the motor or the derivation of the rotational speed of the motor exceeds a limit value.
Kazerooni, is the closest prior art, and further teaches a method for counterbalancing a weight force of an object (25) in a system, the object (25) fastenable to a traction cable (13), the method comprising the steps of: a) determining a first position of the object (25; column 9, lines 1-17, in the position control mode the encoder on the actuator provides feedback signal of actuator position); b) determining a rotational speed of the motor (12) or a derivation of the rotational speed of the motor (12; column 3, line 59 – column 4, line 18); d) controlling a present position of the object until a velocity of the object is zero for a period of time delta t (column 9, lines 1-17, in the position mode the controller keeps the actuator and end-effector at the position where the operator left the device); e1) storing a current value IX required for maintaining the first position in the system and f) counterbalancing the weight force using the current value IX stored in step e1 (column 17, line 62 – column 18, line 33, the controller the determines the current needed to support the load in stationary manner/position), but fails to teach c) storing the first position as a controlled variable in the system if the rotational speed of the motor or the derivation of the rotational speed of the motor exceeds a limit value.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references listed on form PTO-892 are cited for their relevance to the disclosed invention and demonstration of the state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3654 /Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights