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 Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the last sentence of claim 7 recites “wire wound about the perimeter of a ferrite core.” Applicant is advised that claim 7 would be clearer if amended to recite, for example, “wherein the first drive coil and the second drive coil each comprise wire wound about the perimeter of a ferrite core,” or something similar, to expressly tie the phrase to the recited drive coils. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: the last sentence of claim 12 recites “the first focusing element and the second focusing in a second direction opposite the first direction” and likely should read “the first focusing element and the second focusing [element] in a second direction opposite the first direction” to provide proper antecedent basis for the second focusing element disclosed earlier in claim 12. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the first sentence of claim 13 recites “A micro actuator of claim 12” and should likely read “[The] micro actuator of claim 12” to provide proper antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the last sentence of claim 13 recites “each drive coil of the second pair of drive coils in alignment to enable rotation of the force transfer element” and should likely read “each drive coil of the second pair of drive coils in alignment to enable rotation of the force transfer [assembly]” to provide proper antecedent basis for the force transfer assembly disclosed in claim 12. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ray (US Patent No. 3,694,782, hereinafter, Ray) in view of Dowe (US Patent No. 5,337,110, hereinafter, Dowe).
Regarding claim 1, Ray discloses a micro actuator (Ray; rotary actuator in figs. 1-2) for a wearable drug delivery device comprising a second focusing element that includes a yoke (Ray, torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57).
Ray further discloses a drive coil (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5), wherein the drive coil is operable to attract or repel (Ray; drive coils 43 and 45 energize the stator sections 21 and 23 to form an electromagnet in fig. 5 and cause each of the stator sections 21 and 23 to attract one pole of permanent magnet 67 while repelling the other pole; col. 5, Lines 29 - 47); and
Ray does not, however, disclose a force transfer assembly including a first focusing element and a second focusing element.
Neither does Ray disclose a main structure configured to hold the force transfer assembly and the drive coils that are in alignment with one another.
Dowe teaches a force transfer assembly (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 together with upper shoe 30 and lower shoe 40 all connected to common shaft 50 and pins 36 (upper) and 46 (lower) coupled to slots in shutter/aperture blades 80, 90, 100, 120 in figs. 4-10; these elements form an assembly for the transfer of electromagnetic forces into mechanical motion) including a first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and a second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10), wherein the second focusing element includes a yoke (Ray, torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57);
Dowe further teaches a main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10) configured to hold the force transfer assembly (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 together with upper shoe 30 and lower shoe 40 all connected to common shaft 50 and pins 36 (upper) and 46 (lower) coupled to slots in shutter/aperture blades 80, 90, 100, 120 in figs. 4-10; these elements form an assembly for the transfer of electromagnetic forces into mechanical motion) and the drive coil in alignment with one another (Dowe; col. 8, line 55 – col. 9, line 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary actuator of Ray by implementing a force-transfer assembly and supporting main structure, as taught by Dowe’s base structure, with aligned coil arrangement in order to provide reversible actuation depending on current polarity and to reliably transfer electromagnetic rotation force generated by the magnet and energized coils to the yoke arm so as to interact with an external device.
Regarding claim 2, Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, further comprising: a spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4).
Ray does not, however, disclose that the first focusing element includes a first spindle opening and that the second focusing element includes a second spindle opening, and that the spindle is configured to protrude through the first spindle opening and the second spindle opening and couple to the main structure.
Dowe teaches that the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) includes a first spindle opening (Dowe; bore 32 in fig. 8 ) and that the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10) includes a second spindle opening (Dowe; bore 42 in fig. 7), and the spindle is configured to protrude through the first spindle opening and the second spindle opening and couple to the main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10; col. 8, lines 55-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the combined actuator of Ray and Dowe to have a spindle that extends through spindle openings in the first and second focusing elements and couples them to the main structure in order to reliably transmit torque from the rotor through both focusing elements to the main structure while maintaining alignment in a compact rotary actuator.
Regarding claim 3, Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, but fails to disclose a magnet disposed between the first focusing element and the second focusing element .
Dowe teaches the micro actuator of claim 1, further comprising: a magnet (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 in figs. 4-8 ) disposed between the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the force transfer assembly of modified Ray to dispose a magnet between the first and second focusing elements as taught by Dowe in order to form a concentrated magnetic circuit between opposed flux-focusing elements and thereby increase actuator force and efficiency.
Regarding claim 4, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein the main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10) further comprises: snap features (Ray, counterbores 55 and 63 in fig. 3) configured to receive the spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4) and operable to provide axial and radial bearing-like (Ray; col. 4, Lines 30-46) features for the spindle.
Regarding claim 5, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein the main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10) further comprises: a pocket (Ray, flanges 33 and 35 in fig. 4 form spaces with countersinks to receive flared portion 41 of cores 37 and 39; col. 4, Lines 19-26) to receive and hold the drive coil (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5).
Regarding claim 6, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein the pocket (Ray, flanges 33 and 35 in fig. 4 form spaces with countersinks to receive flared portion 41 of cores 37 and 39) is further operable to: maintain alignment of the drive coil (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5) within a gap (Ray; gap 87 in fig. 4; col. 5, Lines 58-65) between the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10).
Regarding claim 8, Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, but fails to disclose that the first focusing element comprises: a first upper magnetic directing element and a second upper magnetic directing element disposed across from one another on opposite sides of the first focusing element.
Dowe teaches that the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) comprises: a first upper magnetic directing element (Dowe; region of shoe 30 closest to coil 43 of modified Ray in figs. 4-5) and a second upper magnetic directing element (Dowe; region of shoe 30 closest to coil 45 of modified Ray in figs. 4-5) disposed across from one another on opposite sides (Dowe; respective, oppositely located regions of shoe 30 that direct magnetic flux) of the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator of Ray to include the additional structural features including upper and lower magnetic directing element regions (on both the upper and lower focusing elements) disposed across from one another on opposite sides such that a gap is formed between the upper and lower magnetic directing elements, as taught by Dowe, in order to provide a compact mechanical support arrangement that constrains the actuator elements relative to the housing in a manner that yields predictable alignment and force transfer.
Regarding claim 9, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein: the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) includes: an upper magnetic field directing element (Dowe; region of shoe 30 closest to coil 43 of modified Ray in figs. 4-5) disposed on a side of the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10); and
the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10) includes: a lower magnetic directing element (Dowe; region of shoe 40 closest to coil 43 of modified Ray in figs. 4-5) disposed on a side of the second focusing element beneath the upper magnetic field directing element (Dowe; region of shoe 30 closest to coil 43 of modified Ray in figs. 4-5),
wherein the upper magnetic directing element and the lower magnetic directing element are configured to form a gap that separates the upper magnetic directing element from the lower magnetic directing element (Dowe; the facing pole regions of shoe 30 and shoe 40 are spaced apart vertically along shaft 50 and laterally relative to the drive coils 43 and 45, defining a gap between the upper and lower pole regions through which magnetic field can be extended when the coils are energized).
Regarding claim 10, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein the yoke (Ray; torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57) comprises: yoke extensions (Ray; extended arm portion of torque arm 15 around slot 17 in figs. 4-6) operable to interact with a drive mechanism (Ray; slot 17 interacting with driven member 19 in figs. 4-6) of the wearable drug delivery device.
Regarding claim 11, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein the yoke (Ray, torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57) comprises: yoke extensions (Ray, extended arm portion of torque arm 15 around slot 17 in figs. 4-6) extending from either the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) or the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10), wherein the yoke extensions cause the yoke to have a T-shape, a U-shape, or a Y-shape (Ray; extended arm portion of torque arm 15 around slot 17 in figs. 4-6 form a U-shape).
Claims 12-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Ray, as applied to claims 1-11, in view of Ichihashi (US Publication No. 2019/0267880, hereinafter, Ichihashi).
Regarding claim 12, modified Ray discloses a micro actuator (Ray; rotary actuator in figs. 1-2) for a wearable drug delivery device, comprising: a force transfer assembly (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 together with upper shoe 30 and lower shoe 40 all connected to common shaft 50 and pins 36 (upper) and 46 (lower) coupled to slots in shutter/aperture blades 80, 90, 100, 120 in figs. 4-10; these elements form an assembly for the transfer of electromagnetic forces into mechanical motion) including a magnet (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 in figs. 4-8) between a first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and a second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10), wherein the second focusing element includes a yoke (Ray, torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57);
Modified Ray further discloses a first pair of drive coils (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5) and
wherein each drive coil of the first pair of drive coils (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5) is energized to a magnetic polarity that is opposite the other drive coil in order to attract or repel (para [0034], Lines 1-11) the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10) in a first direction (Dowe; col. 6, line 58 – col. 7, line 25).
Modified Ray does not, however, disclose a second pair of drive coils,
wherein each drive coil of the second pair of drive coils is energized to a magnetic polarity that is opposite the other drive coil in order to attract or repel the first focusing element and the second focusing element in a second direction opposite the first direction.
Ichihashi teaches a second pair of drive coils (Ichihashi; a pair of second drive coil units 53 in figs. 1A-1B, 3; each second coil unit includes drive coils 721 and 731 wound on a second magnetic yoke 711; para [0033-0036]; this second coil unit is additional to first coil unit 52 with drive coils 720 and 730 wound around first magnetic yoke 710 in fig. 3),
wherein each drive coil of the second pair of drive coils (Ichihashi; a pair of second drive coil units 53 in figs. 1A-1B, 3) is energized to a magnetic polarity that is opposite the other drive coil in order to attract or repel (Ray; drive coils 43 and 45 energize the stator sections 21 and 23 to form an electromagnet in fig. 5 and cause each of the stator sections 21 and 23 to attract one pole of permanent magnet 67 while repelling the other pole; col. 5, Lines 29 – 47) the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10) in a second direction opposite the first direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator of modified Ray to further include a second pair of drive coils, as taught by Ichihashi, in order to provide additional drive capability, controllability, and efficiency about the actuator’s rotation axis by employing multiple coil pairs arranged around the driven element.
Regarding claim 13, modified Ray discloses a micro actuator of claim 12, comprising: a main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10) configured to hold the force transfer assembly (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 together with upper shoe 30 and lower shoe 40 all connected to common shaft 50 and pins 36 (upper) and 46 (lower) coupled to slots in shutter/aperture blades 80, 90, 100, 120 in figs. 4-10; these elements form an assembly for the transfer of electromagnetic forces into mechanical motion), each drive coil of the first pair of drive coils (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5), and each drive coil of the second pair of drive coils (Ichihashi; a pair of second drive coil units 53 in figs. 1A-1B, 3) in alignment to enable rotation of the force transfer assembly (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 together with upper shoe 30 and lower shoe 40 all connected to common shaft 50 and pins 36 (upper) and 46 (lower) coupled to slots in shutter/aperture blades 80, 90, 100, 120 in figs. 4-10; these elements form an assembly for the transfer of electromagnetic forces into mechanical motion).
Regarding claim 14, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 13, wherein the main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10) further comprises: snap features (Ray, counterbores 55,63 in fig. 3) configured to receive the spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4) and operable to provide axial and radial bearing-like (Ray; col. 4, Lines 30-46) features for the spindle.
Regarding claim 15, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 13, wherein the main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10) further comprises: a pocket (Ray, flanges 33 and 35 in fig. 4 form spaces with countersinks to receive flared portion 41 of cores 37 and 39; col. 4, Lines 19-26) to receive and hold each respective drive coil of the first pair of drive coils (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5) and each respective drive coil of the second pair of drive coils (Ichihashi; a pair of second drive coil units 53 in figs. 1A-1B, 3), and
wherein the pocket is configured to maintain alignment (Ray, flanges 33 and 35 in fig. 4 form spaces with countersinks to receive flared portion 41 of cores 37 and 39; col. 4, Lines 19-26) of each respective drive coil of the first pair of drive coils (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5) and each respective drive coil of the second pair of drive coils (Ichihashi; a pair of second drive coil units 53 in figs. 1A-1B, 3) with a gap (Ray, gap 87, in fig. 4; col. 5, Lines 58-65) between the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) and the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10).
Regarding claim 17, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 12, wherein the yoke (Ray; torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57) comprises: yoke extensions (Ray; extended arm portion of torque arm 15 around slot 17 in figs. 4-6) operable to interact with a drive mechanism (Ray; slot 17 interacting with driven member 19 in figs. 4-6) of the wearable drug delivery device.
Regarding claim 18, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 12, wherein the yoke (Ray, torque arm 15 in fig. 4 attached to rotor 47; col. 5, Lines 52-57) comprises: yoke extensions (Ray, extended arm portion of torque arm 15 in figs. 4-6) extending from either the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) or the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10) in which the yoke has a T-shape, a U-shape, or a Y-shape (Ray; extended arm portion of torque arm 15 around slot 17 in figs. 4-6 form a U-shape).
Regarding claim 19, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 12, further comprising: a spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4)
wherein: the magnet (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 in figs. 4-8) has an opening (Dowe; figs. 7-8; col. 9, lines 14-23) through which the spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4) passes,
the first focusing element (Dowe; shoe 30 in figs. 4-6, 8, 10) includes a first spindle opening (Dowe; bore 32 in fig. 8) and the second focusing element (Dowe; shoe 40 in figs. 6-8, 10) includes a second spindle opening (Dowe; bore 42 in fig. 8), and
the spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4) is configured to protrude through the first spindle opening (Dowe; bore 32 in fig. 8) and the second spindle opening (Dowe; bore 42 in fig. 8).
Regarding claim 20, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 19, wherein: the spindle (Ray; shaft 49 in fig. 4) includes a keying structure (shaft 48 fits into upper stator 2, lower stator 3 and bearings 47 in figs. 9-10) configured to interlock with the first spindle opening (Dowe; bore 32 in fig. 8) and the second spindle opening (Dowe; bore 42 in fig. 8).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Ray in view of Meretsky (US Patent No. 4,210,859, hereinafter, Meretsky).
Regarding claim 7, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 1, wherein the drive coil comprises: a first drive coil (Ray; coil 43 in fig. 4-5) and a second drive coil (Ray; coil 45 in fig. 4-5),
wherein the first drive coil (Ray; coil 43 in fig. 4-5) and the second drive coil (Ray; coil 45 in fig. 4-5) are positioned on opposite sides (Ray; drive coils 43 and 45 are disposed at different locations around the actuator’s magnetic structure on opposite sides in fig. 4) of the force transfer assembly (Dowe; upper magnet 10 and lower magnet 12 together with upper shoe 30 and lower shoe 40 all connected to common shaft 50 and pins 36 (upper) and 46 (lower) coupled to slots in shutter/aperture blades 80, 90, 100, 120 in figs. 4-10; these elements form an assembly for the transfer of electromagnetic forces into mechanical motion) within the main structure (Dowe; base plate 60 with shaft 50, retainer blocks 66 and 68, slots 62 and 64 in figs. 4-10).
Modified Ray does not, however, disclose a wire wound about the perimeter of a ferrite core.
Meretsky teaches wire wound about the perimeter of a ferrite core (fig. 1; col. 3, Lines 51-54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drive coils of modified Ray to be formed as wire wound about the perimeter of a ferrite core as taught by Meretsky in order to implement a conventional, high-efficiency coil construction that improves magnetic coupling and is well suited for compact actuator designs.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Ray in view of Konotchick (US Patent No. 5,818,132, hereinafter, Konotchick).
Regarding claim 16, modified Ray discloses the micro actuator of claim 12, but fails to disclose that each drive coil of the first pair of drive coils is wound from the same piece of wire, wherein the wire is wound in a first direction for a first respective drive coil of the first pair of drive coils and in a second and opposite direction for a second respective drive coil of the first pair of drive coils.
Konotchick teaches that each drive coil of a pair of drive coils (Ray; coils 43 and 45 in fig. 4-5) is wound from the same piece of wire (Konotchick, col. 5, Lines 17-21), wherein the wire is wound in a first direction for a first respective drive coil of the first pair of drive coils and in a second and opposite direction for a second respective drive coil of the first pair of drive coils (Konotchick, col. 5, Lines 14-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first pair of drive coils of modified Ray to be formed from a single continuous piece of wire wound in opposite directions for the respective coils as taught by Konotchick in order to simplify wiring, ensure opposite polarities in the paired coils, and provide a compact, manufacturing-efficient coil configuration.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARIAH K WHITROCK whose telephone number is (571)272-3534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571) 270-5246. 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.
/ZACHARIAH K WHITROCK/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/MICHAEL J TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783