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
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Within claim 1, line 9: “rim parts of the cable tensioning rollers facing rim parts of the rollers” should be “rim parts of the cable tensioning rollers are facing rim parts of the rollers”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Specifically, the claim limitations “a first transmission means” (claims 1 and 10), “a cable adjustment means” (claim 6), “constant pressure means” (claim 7), “the second transmission means” (claim 10), and “the additional transmission means” (claim 10).
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 5, 8-10 and 13-14 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 5 recites the limitation "the one or more sets of additional rollers" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the axes of the one or more additional shafts" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the same plane" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the different planes" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the first torque transmission joint" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the second torque transmission joint" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the one or more additional torque transmission joints" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the group" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the second transmission means" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the additional transmission means" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the one or more first freely rotatable rollers" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the one or more second freely rotatable rollers" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the one or more additional freely rotatable rollers" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the one or more additional shafts" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shi et al. (CN 215248850 U).
Regarding claim 1: Shi discloses a cable feeding unit for a shore cable management system (5; Fig.1), wherein the cable feeding unit comprises a first motor (522; Fig.3), a first shaft (521; Fig.3), and a first set of rollers (524,523; Fig.3); a second motor, a second shaft, and a second set of rollers (see attached EPO translation; Para.[n0046], lines 1-3 and shown on 5; Fig.1), wherein an axis of the second shaft is in parallel with an axis of the first shaft (Fig.1); a cable feeding passage (passage of A between 533,523; Fig.3) formed of a set of cable tensioners (53; Fig.2) having cable tensioning rollers (533; Fig.3) placed opposite to the first set of rollers and the second set of rollers so that rim parts of the cable tensioning rollers facing rim parts of the rollers of the first set of rollers and the rollers of the second set of rollers (Para.[n0044]), wherein the first motor (522; Fig.3) is connected with the first shaft (521; Fig.3), the first set of rollers is arranged on the first shaft and the first motor is adapted to drive, by the first shaft, one or more rollers of the first set of rollers (Para.[n0043], lines 3-4); the second motor is connected with the second shaft, the second set of rollers is arranged on the second shaft and the second motor is adapted to drive one or more rollers of the second set of rollers (additional drive assemblies; Para.[n0046], lines 1-3); at least one roller of the first set of rollers is connected by a first transmission means with a roller of the at least second set of rollers (synchronizing rollers of adjacent shafts with friction of cable A).
Regarding claim 2: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the cable feeding unit further comprises one or more additional motors, one or more additional shafts, and one or more sets of additional rollers, wherein the one or more additional motors is connected with the one or more additional shafts, the one or more sets of additional rollers are arranged on the one or more additional shafts, wherein axes of the one or more additional shafts are in parallel with the axis of the first shaft and axis of the second shaft (Para.[n0046], lines 1-3 and Fig.2).
Regarding claim 3: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the first set of rollers comprises a first driving roller (523; Fig.3), or a first driving roller (523; Fig.3) and one or more first freely rotatable rollers (524; Fig.3), wherein the first driving roller is connected to the first shaft (521; Fig.3) by a first torque transmission joint (connection of 523 to 521; drive wheel 523 is fixedly disposed with the drive shaft 521, Para.[n0043], line 3).
Regarding claim 4: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the second set of rollers comprises one or more second driving rollers and one or more second freely rotatable rollers, wherein the second driving roller is connected to the second shaft by a second torque transmission joint (additional drive assemblies; Para.[n0046]).
Regarding claim 5: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the one or more sets of additional rollers comprises one or more additional driving rollers and one or more additional freely rotatable rollers, wherein the one or more additional driving rollers are connected to the one or more additional shafts by a one or more additional torque transmission joint (additional drive assemblies; Para.[n0046]).
Regarding claim 6: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the cable feeding unit comprises a cable adjustment means (32,33; Fig.2).
Regarding claim 7: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the cable tensioning rollers (533; Fig.3) comprise constant pressure means (532; Fig.3).
Regarding claim 8: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the axis of the first shaft, the axis of the second shaft and the axes of the one or more additional shafts are on the different planes (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 12: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the cable feeding unit is adapted to reel two or more cables (5 cables shown A; Fig.3).
Regarding claim 13: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the one or more first freely rotatable rollers (524; Fig.3), the one or more second freely rotatable rollers and the one or more additional freely rotatable rollers (additional 524 for additional drive assemblies; Para.[n0046], lines 1-3) are supported by bushing or bearing (Para.[n0043], line 5 and apparent from Fig.3).
Regarding claim 14: Shi further discloses the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the first shaft, the second shaft and the one or more additional shafts are supported from two or more points (apparent from Fig.3).
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi in view of Huang (CN 108792773 A).
Regarding claim 9: Shi further teaches the cable feeding unit according to claim 1, wherein the first torque transmission joint, the second torque transmission joint and the one or more additional torque transmission joints (connection of 523 to 521; Fig.3). Shi does not teach wherein the torque transmission joints are selected from the group comprising a key connection, a shaft collar connection, a locknut, a clamping bush, a shrink disc, a taper bush, and a tooth joint.
However, Huang teaches the connection of a torque transmission joint being a key connection (see attached EPO translation; Para.[0027], line 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable feeding unit of Shi with a key connection as taught within Huang since it is obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi in view of Qian et al. (CN 111776887 A).
Regarding claim 10: Shi does not teach wherein the first transmission means, the second transmission means, the additional transmission means is one of a circumferentially elongated element, a transmission by gears or a transmission by a shaft.
However, Qian teaches a transmission means of rollers of a cable feeding unit that is a transmission by gears (96; Fig.6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable feeding unit of Shi with a transmission means for rollers utilizing gears since it is obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi in view of Kim (KR 102107338 B1).
Regarding claim 11: Shi does not teach wherein the cable feeding unit comprises one or more end position switches.
However, Kim teaches wherein the cable feeding unit comprises one or more end position switches (67; Fig.11a). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable feeding unit of Shi to include an end position switch as in Kim to ensure the cable feeding unit stops operations at cable limited positions to prevent system damage with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEAVEN BUFFINGTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am to 5:00pm 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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571)272-8300. 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.
/HEAVEN R BUFFINGTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights