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 . 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.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geisshüsler et al. (US 2022/0356044 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0300693 A1) (hereinafter “Lee ‘693”).
Referring to Claim 1: Geisshüsler teaches a tower lift comprising:
a rail module (6) extending in a vertical direction (Fig. 1a);
a carriage module (202) configured to be movable along the rail (Fig. 6)
a brake device (1) configured to move along the rail module integrally with the carriage module (Fig. 6) (Para. [0069]),
wherein the brake device includes a first brake body (11a) and a second brake body (11b), which are configured to selectively come into contact with the rail module to prevent the carriage module from falling, and a link unit (17-19) configured to connect the first brake body to the second brake body (Para. [0059]), and
the link unit transfers force from one of the first brake body and the second brake body to the other of the first brake body and the second brake body (Para. [0017] and [0059]).
As noted by strikethrough above, Geisshüsler does not specifically teach that the carriage moves along the rail by magnetic levitation. However, Lee ‘693 teaches a tower lift comprising: a rail module (140) extending in a vertical direction (Fig. 1); and a carriage module (160) provided to be movable along the rail module by magnetic levitation (Para. [0064]) (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for Geisshüsler to use its braking device on a semiconductor tower lift system with carriages moveable by magnetic levitation, as taught by Lee ‘693, in order to provide sufficient emergency braking to magnetically levitated carriages with a reasonable expectation of success.
Referring to Claim 2: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein the first brake body (11a) is apart from the second brake body (11b) with the rail module (6) therebetween and faces the second brake body (Fig. 1).
Referring to Claim 3: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein the link unit (17-19) includes a link member (18) apart in the vertical direction from the first brake body (11a) and the second brake body (11b); and a fixing member (see annotated Fig. 1a below) arranged on a central axis of the link unit (Fig. 1a) (Para. [0059]).
PNG
media_image1.png
352
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Referring to Claim 4: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein the fixing member (see annotated Fig. 1a above) is configured to fix part of the link member (18), and the link member is configured to rotate around the fixing member (Fig. 1a) (Para. [0059]).
The actuating slide 18 of Geisshüsler may be broadly, but reasonably, interpreted as “configured to rotate around the fixing member” because the fixing member is a pin/pivot which connects parallelogram arms 17 to the actuating slide 18, and the pin/pivot is configured for rotation relative to actuating slide 18.
Referring to Claim 5: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein the brake device further includes a first base body (12a) adjacent to an inclined surface of the first brake body (11a) and providing a movement path for the first brake body, and a second base body (12b) adjacent to an inclined surface of the second brake body (11b) and providing a movement path for the second brake body (Figs. 1a-1c) (Para. [0060]).
Referring to Claim 6: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein each of the first brake body (11a) and the second brake body (11b) is configured to be movable in an inclined direction with respect to the vertical direction, the first brake body includes a first brake pad on a surface facing the rail module (6), and the second brake body includes a second brake pad on a surface facing the rail module (Figs. 1a-1c) (Para. [0060]).
Referring to Claim 7: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein the brake device (1) includes an electromagnet (101) that is behind the first brake body (11a) and configured to provide magnetic force to the first brake body (Fig. 4) (Para. [0067]).
Geisshüsler teaches the claimed invention except for the electromagnet being behind, or to the side of, the first brake body, instead of being under, as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Geisshüsler to move the electromagnet to a lower position under the first brake body in order to optimize the movement and force angles relative to the available space, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C).
Referring to Claim 8: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein an electromagnet (101) providing magnetic force to the second brake body (12b) is not arranged under the second brake body (Fig. 1a) (Para. [0067]).
Referring to Claim 9: Geisshüsler further teaches a tower lift, wherein when power is applied to the electromagnet (101) from a power supply, the electromagnet pulls the first brake body (11a) (Fig. 4) (Para. [0067]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
Claim 10 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 10, Geisshüsler fails to teach that “the brake device includes a tension member configured to move the second brake body in an inclined direction with respect to the vertical direction and cause the second brake body to come into contact with the rail module when the power applied to the electromagnet from the power supply is not applied to the tension member.” While Geisshüsler teaches a spring 103 that acts as a tension member in an inclined direction (Fig. 4) (Para. [0067]), that spring 103 is configured to move the first brake body (11a) instead of the second brake body (11b). Since claim 8 requires that there is no electromagnet under the second brake body, Examiner sees no obvious reason to modify the second brake body with a tension spring to counteract a non-existent electromagnet on the second side. Thus, claim 10 is nonobvious.
Regarding claim 11 and depending claims 12-17, Geisshüsler fails to teach the combination of limitations, specifically that “the first brake body and the second brake body move in opposite directions from each other,” as recited at the end of claim 11, where the movement is “in an inclined direction with respect to a vertical direction.” Examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Geisshüsler such that the first and second brake bodies move in opposite inclined vertical directions (see Fig. 5 of the instant invention). Claim 11 is nonobvious since such a modification would require a substantial reconstruction and redesign of the elements shown in Geisshüsler (see MPEP 2143.01(VI)).
Regarding claim 18 and depending claims 19 and 20, Geisshüsler fails to teach the combination of limitations, specifically that “the first brake body and the second brake body move in opposite directions from each other,” as recited at the end of claim 18, and “a link unit configured to connect the first brake body to the second brake body and transfer tension from the first brake body to the second brake body,” as recited in lines 10-12 of claim 18. Examiner finds no obvious reason to modify Geisshüsler such that the first and second brake bodies move in opposite directions (see Fig. 5 of the instant invention) and the link unit connects the brake bodies and transfers tension from the first to the second. Claim 18 is nonobvious since such a modification would require a substantial reconstruction and redesign of the elements shown in Geisshüsler (see MPEP 2143.01(VI)).
Conclusion
The references made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references relate to the state of the art in elevator/tower lift braking: US-20190144240-A1, US-20240158205-A1,
US-20230286778-A1, US-12570502-B2, and US-11840425-B2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY L KUHFUSS whose telephone number is (571)270-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00am to 6:00 pm CDT.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached on (571)272-6682. 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.
/ZACHARY L KUHFUSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615A
Prosecution Insights