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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Welfonder (US Patent 6,155,328).
Regarding Claim 1, Welfonder shows a speed regulation mechanism (40) suitable for use with a bi-directional actuator (42,48), the mechanism comprising an actuation element (42) and a regulator (48) in which: the actuation element is configured to reversibly move between a first position ( the shade is open; clockwise rotation; column 5 lines 54-56) and a second position (the shade is down; counter clockwise rotation; column 6 lines 35-37); the regulator (48) is configured to rotate around a regulator axis (24); the actuation element (42) is coupled to the regulator (48; through regulator axis 24); movement of the actuation element in a first direction (clockwise rotation; column 4 lines 30-35) towards the second position causes rotation of the regulator around the regulator axis (A) in a first rotational direction (clockwise; column 4 lines 30-35); movement of the actuation element in a second direction (counter clockwise; column 4 lines 32-40) towards the first position causes rotation of the regulator around the regulator axis (A) in a second rotational direction column 4 lines 30-35); the regulator (48) is so configured that the regulator has a first resistance to rotation when rotating in the first rotational direction (column 6 lines 16-18) and a second resistance to rotation when rotating in the second rotational direction (column 6 lines 16-18); and the second resistance to rotation is greater than the first resistance to rotation (column 6 lines 16-18).
Regarding Claim 2, Welfonder The mechanism of claim 1, further comprising a biasing element (39) coupled to the actuation element (42), the biasing element being configured so as to bias the actuation element in the second direction towards the first position (column 4 lines 53-60).
Regarding Claim 5, Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 1, wherein the regulator comprises a hub (47) and one or more blades (48), at least one of the blades is attached to the hub (Fig.2A), and the first and second resistances to rotation result from the configuration of at least one of the blades (column 6 lines 5-8).
Regarding Claim 6, Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 5, wherein at least one of the blades (48) is at least partially flexible or semi-flexible (column 6 lines 6), and at least one blade is configured to elastically bend in the second rotational direction when the hub is rotating in the first rotational direction (column 6 lines 15-20).
Regarding Claim 7, Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 5, wherein at least one of the blades (48) is at least partially reversibly deformable, and rotation of the hub in the first rotational direction causes at least one of the blades to deform to or retain a first configuration (column 6 lines 1-5) where at least one of the blades generates the first degree of resistance to the rotation of the hub in the first rotational direction (column 6 lines 40-62), and rotation of the hub in the second rotational direction causes the at least one of the blades to deform (or flex) to or retain a second configuration where at least one of the blades generates the second degree of resistance to the rotation of the hub in the second rotational direction (column 6 lines 40-62).
Regarding Claim 8, Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 5, wherein at least one of the blades is hingedly connected to the hub by a hinge (Fig.12; column 1 line 1-3), and one or both of the hinge and the blade connected to the hinge is so configured that the blade can rotate around the hinge between a first orientation (unextended position; Figs 13-14) relative to the hub and a second orientation (extended position; Figs. 14-16) relative to the hub (column 10 lines 13-20).
Regarding Claim 9, Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 8 wherein at least one of the blades hingedly connected to the hub is biased towards the first orientation (unextended; Figs 13-14, (column 10 lines 13-20), rotation of the hub in one of the first and second rotation directions impels the at least one blade hingedly connected to the hub against the bias and towards the second orientation (extended; Figs. 15-16; column 10 lines 13-15), and rotation of the hub in the other of the first and second rotation directions impels the at least one blade hingedly connected to the hub with the bias and towards the first orientation (column 10 lines 13-20).
Regarding Claim 10, Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 1, in which the mechanism comprises two or more regulators (48; Fig. 2A), and all the regulators are coupled to the actuation element (42; through axis 24).
Regarding Claim 11, Welfonder shows the speed regulated bi-directional actuator comprising the speed regulation mechanism of claim 1, and a chamber (42; column 6 line 26) suitable for containing a liquid (column 5 lines 25-30), wherein at least one regulator is at least partially located in the chamber (Figs 2 & 3), the chamber is defined by one or more walls (located at the end of the rod and therefore has walls; Fig.5); and the chamber is so configured that the regulator may rotate around the regulator axis (A) without interfering with any wall of the chamber (column 5 lines 58-67).
Regarding Claim 12, Welfonder shows the speed regulated bi-directional actuator of claim 11, wherein the chamber (42) is at least partially filled with liquid when the speed regulated bi-directional actuator is in use (column 5 lines 27-33), and the chamber and at least one regulator (48) are so configured that in use the at least one regulator is fully submerged in the liquid (column 5 lines 27-33).
Regarding Claim 13, Welfonder shows the speed regulated bi-directional actuator of claim 11 in which the first and second resistances to rotation of the at least one regulator (48) are, when the speed regulated bi-directional actuator (42) is in use, the result of interference between the at least one regulator and the liquid within the chamber (column 6 lines 26-32).
Regarding Claim 14, Welfonder shows the speed regulated bi-directional actuator of claim 11 in which the configuration of the at least one regulator (48) is such that the second resistance to rotation causes the actuation element to take a predetermined length of time to travel from the second position to the first position (column 6 lines 16-20).
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Welfonder (US Patent 6,155,328) in view of Stephan, et al (US Patent 5,355,979). Welfonder shows the mechanism of claim 1, but fails to show the regulator is coupled to the actuation element via a coupling. Stephan teaches a dampening device wherein the regulator is coupled to the actuation element via a coupling (6a,7a). The movement of the actuation element in the first and second directions is linear movement (Fig.6). The coupling comprises a rack (6a) and a pinion (7a). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a rack and pinion order to allow for linear motion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 16 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Millman et al (US Patent 5,226,629) is directed to the state of the art as a teaching of a remote-control faucet that includes a bidirectional actuator (30).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN ASHLEY CRANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5198. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays & Tuesdays 8 am - 4pm.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/LAUREN A CRANE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights