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 § 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)(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.
Claims 1-3 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Severinsson (US 2004/0055838).
Regarding independent claim 1, Severinsson discloses a brake device for a railway vehicle (see Abstract, FIGS. 1-5), comprising: a regular electric motor (3) including a regular-side rotor capable of rotating (see ¶ 0024); a transmission shaft member (3’, 11) extending from the regular electric motor in a direction of a rotation axis of the regular-side rotor and configured to be rotated by a rotational force output from the regular-side rotor (see ¶ 0024; FIG. 1); a conversion mechanism attached to the transmission shaft member and configured to convert rotational motion of the transmission shaft member into linear motion (see ¶ 0024, “[m]eans, which are not further described here, are provided in the caliper 1 for transforming the rotative movement of the drive shaft 3' into a linear, brake applying movement of a first brake lining 4 for braking engagement with the brake disc 2”); a friction member (4) configured to receive the linear motion to be pressed against a brake-applied member of a railway vehicle, so as to brake the railway vehicle (see ¶ 0024); and a security power unit (6) attached to the transmission shaft member and configured to output a rotational force to the transmission shaft member (see ¶ 0045).
Regarding claim 2, Severinsson discloses that the transmission shaft member (3’, 11) extends from the regular electric motor in two coaxial directions (see FIGS. 1, 2; see also ¶ 0028, shaft portions (3’ and 11) are coupled and rotate together), and wherein the conversion mechanism and the security power unit are arranged coaxially with the transmission shaft member (see FIGS. 1, 3) and located on opposite sides across the regular electric motor (see FIGS. 1, 3; see also ¶ 0024, conversion mechanism is ”provided in the caliper 1 for transforming the rotative movement of the drive shaft 3’ into a linear”).
Regarding claim 3, Severinsson discloses that a clutch (30) (see FIGS. 4, 5) configured to switch between a transmission state (see FIG. 5) in which a rotational force of the security power unit is transmitted to the transmission shaft member (see FIG. 5; ¶ 0057) and a non-transmission state (see FIG. 4) in which a rotational force of the security power unit is not transmitted to the transmission shaft member (see ¶ 0056), wherein the clutch is provided between the regular electric motor and the security power unit (see ¶¶ 0056, 0057; clutch is located between the motor and the security power unit in the force flow path).
Regarding claim 9, Severinsson discloses a clutch (30) (see FIGS. 4, 5) configured to switch between a transmission state (see FIG. 5) in which a rotational force of the security power unit is transmitted to the transmission shaft member (see FIG. 5; ¶ 0057) and a non-transmission state (see FIG. 4) in which a rotational force of the security power unit is not transmitted to the transmission shaft member (see ¶ 0056), wherein the clutch is an electromagnetic clutch (see ¶¶ 0030, 0031) including a clutch-side rotor (11A’) and an armature (18A) capable of moving relative to the clutch-side rotor (see FIGS. 4, 5), the clutch being configured to switch between a contact state (see FIG. 5) in which the armature is in contact with the clutch-side rotor (see ¶ 0057) and a non-contact state (see FIG. 4) in which the armature is not in contact with the clutch-side rotor (see ¶ 0056), and wherein the transmission shaft member (11A) extending from the regular electric motor is fixed to the clutch-side rotor (11A’) (see FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Severinsson discloses a clutch (30) configured to switch between a transmission state (see FIG. 5) in which a rotational force of the security power unit is transmitted to the transmission shaft member (see ¶ 0057) and a non-transmission state (see FIG. 4) in which a rotational force of the security power unit is not transmitted to the transmission shaft member (see ¶ 0056), wherein the clutch is an electromagnetic clutch (see ¶¶ 0030, 0031) including a clutch-side rotor (11A’) and an armature (18A) capable of moving relative to the clutch-side rotor (see FIGS. 4, 5), the clutch being configured to switch between a contact state (see FIG. 5) in which the armature is in contact with the clutch-side rotor (see ¶ 0057) and a non-contact state (see FIG. 4) in which the armature is not in contact with the clutch-side rotor (see ¶ 0056), and wherein the security power unit is fixed to the armature (via 19A) (see FIG. 4).
Claims 1, 7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tione (WO 2021/124092).
Regarding independent claim 1, Tione discloses a brake device for a railway vehicle (see Abstract, FIGS. 1-6), comprising: a regular electric motor (112) including a regular-side rotor (611) capable of rotating (see FIG. 6, page 17, “allowing the secondary transmission shaft 109 to rotate freely, under energy transfer by the second electric motor 112”); a transmission shaft member (109) extending from the regular electric motor in a direction of a rotation axis of the regular-side rotor (see FIG. 6) and configured to be rotated by a rotational force output from the regular-side rotor (see FIG. 6, page 17, “allowing the secondary transmission shaft 109 to rotate freely, under energy transfer by the second electric motor 112”); a conversion mechanism (131) attached to the transmission shaft member and configured to convert rotational motion of the transmission shaft member into linear motion (see page 17); a friction member (204, 205) configured to receive the linear motion to be pressed against a brake-applied member of a railway vehicle, so as to brake the railway vehicle (see page 20, “the braking means 204, 205, i.e. the brake pads, have reached the surface of the brake disc 206, the force F(L) begins to increase”); and a security power unit (107) attached to the transmission shaft member (via clutch (108)) and configured to output a rotational force to the transmission shaft member (see page 16, last paragraph, continuing to page 17).
Regarding claim 7, Tione discloses that the regular-side rotor has a hollow structure (see e.g. FIG. 6, shaft (109) passes through rotor (611)), and wherein the transmission shaft member extends through the regular-side rotor having a hollow structure (see FIG. 6), and the transmission shaft member is coupled with the regular-side rotor to be driven (see page 16, “[t]he secondary transmission shaft 109 connects . . . [to] a rotor 611 of the second electric motor 112”).
Regarding claim 11, Tione discloses an input gear (608) configured to receive an output of the regular electric motor (see FIG. 6); and a speed reducer (617) configured to receive rotation of the input gear and output a decelerated rotational force to the conversion mechanism (see FIG. 6), wherein the transmission shaft member extending from the regular electric motor is fixed to the input gear (see FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 12, Tione discloses that the transmission shaft member is a shaft fixed to the regular-side rotor (see page 16, “[t]he secondary transmission shaft 109 connects . . . [to] a rotor 611 of the second electric motor 112”), wherein the brake device further comprises: an input gear (608) fixed to the shaft extending from the regular electric motor (see FIG. 6), the input gear being configured to receive an output of the regular electric motor (see FIG. 6); and a speed reducer (617) including an output rotator (619) configured to receive rotation of the input gear and output a decelerated rotational force (see FIG. 6), and wherein the conversion mechanism includes: a male screw (618) serving as an input rotator configured to receive a rotational force output from the output rotator (see FIG. 6); a female screw (618’) meshing with the male screw (see FIG. 6), the female screw serving as a linear motion member configured to convert rotational motion of the male screw into the linear motion (see FIG. 6); and an arm (201, 203) configured to transmit to the friction member the linear motion output from the female screw (see FIGS. 2, 6).
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 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Severinsson (US 2004/0055838), as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Tione (WO 2021/124092).
Regarding claim 4, Severinsson discloses a security-side rotor (12A) having a hollow structure (see FIGS. 4, 5) and configured to output a rotational force (see ¶¶ 0056, 0057), and wherein the clutch is coupled to the security-side rotor (via (18A)) and the transmission shaft member (via (11A’)).
Severinsson does not disclose that the security power unit is a motor.
Tione teaches a brake device for a railway vehicle (see Abstract, FIGS. 1-6), comprising: a security power unit (107), wherein the security power unit is a motor (107).
It would have been obvious to replace the spring (14A) of the security power unit of Severinsson with a motor to provide a security power unit that can generate a rotational force for actuating the brakes as desired, without a need for pre-coiling the spring, thereby allowing for successive applications of the brake using the security power unit.
Regarding claim 5, Severinsson discloses that the clutch is an electromagnetic clutch (see ¶¶ 0030, 0031) including a clutch-side rotor (11A’) and an armature (18A) capable of moving relative to the clutch-side rotor (see FIGS. 4, 5), the clutch being configured to switch between a contact state (see FIG. 5) in which the armature is in contact with the clutch-side rotor (see ¶ 0057) and a non-contact state (see FIG. 4) in which the armature is not in contact with the clutch-side rotor (see ¶ 0056), and wherein the security-side rotor (12A) is fixed to the armature (18A) (see FIG. 4).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Severinsson (US 2004/0055838) and Tione (WO 2021/124092), as applied to claim 5, above, and further in view of York et al. (US 5,598,908).
Regarding claim 6, Severinsson does not disclose that the clutch-side rotor has a smaller weight than the security-side rotor.
York teaches a clutch (see Abstract, FIGS. 4, 5), wherein a clutch-side rotor has a reduced weight (see col. 7, lines 30-39). It would have been obvious to reduce the weight of the clutch side rotor of Severinsson to be less than the security side rotor to reduce the moment of inertia acting on the regular motor during operation of the regular motor (see e.g. York, col. 7, lines 30-39).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tione (WO 2021/124092), as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Isizuka (US 2013/0221777).
Regarding claim 8, Tione discloses an electromagnetic brake (111) for retaining a braking force (see page 16, “the locking means 111, i.e. the electromechanical brake, may for example but not exclusively be of the electromagnetic type”).
Tione does not disclose that the electromagnetic brake is provided between the regular electric motor and the security power unit.
Isizuka teaches a brake device (see Abstract, FIGS. 1, 3) comprising a motor (60) and a brake (78A, 78B) (see FIGS. 1, 3), wherein the bake can be located on the distal (see FIG. 1) or proximal (see FIG. 3) of the motor.
It would have been obvious to locate the electromagnetic brake of Tione between the electric motor and the security motor as a simple substitution of one known element for another that would only yield predictable results (see e.g. Isizuka, FIGS. 1, 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is 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.
The prior art of record does not disclose that transmission shaft member is a coupling unit having a tubular shape, a speed reducer including an output rotator, and wherein the conversion mechanism includes: a female screw serving as an input rotator configured to receive a rotational force output from the output rotator; a male screw meshing with the female screw, the male screw serving as a linear motion member configured to convert rotational motion of the female screw into the linear motion; and an arm configured to transmit to the friction member the linear motion output from the male screw.
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
March 11, 2026