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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the appear to be a black and white photocopy of a color photo, and thus no structure can be determined from the Figures. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. It is noted that App No. 18753890 which appears to be a CON of the instant application has acceptable drawings. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-10, and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 208774769 to Liaoning.
Regarding claim 1, Liaoning discloses a system comprising a frame (structure defining perimeter of 100 and 300) having a longitudinal axis (consistent with Fig. 1 of the instant application drawings) and, on each of two opposite sides of the longitudinal axis, a plurality of support structures (as evident from Fig. 1, support structures largely defined by 11) each comprising:
a support element 52 configured to engage an upper surface of a railway rail (as evident from Fig. 9),
a connection element (largely defined by 50) connecting the support element to the frame (see Fig. 1-3),
the connection element allowing the support element to move, relative to the frame, from an operative position to an inoperative position (operative position as shown in Fig. 9; inoperative position as disclosed as “the working state” in first full paragraph of page 3 of translation provided by Applicant), the connection element comprising a drive element for driving the support element from the operative position to the inoperative position and/or from the inoperative position to the operative position (see first full paragraph of page 3 translation describing the inward retraction of 52), where:
at least part of each support element of each support structure on one of the sides (i.e. the right side as viewed in Fig. 1) of the longitudinal axis extends, when in the operative position and when the system is projected onto a horizontal plane, farther than a predetermined distance from the longitudinal axis (as evident from Fig. 9, such that contact is made with the rail),
at least part of each support element of each support structure on the other of the sides (i.e. the left side as viewed in Fig. 1) of the longitudinal axis, the other side being opposite to the first side (as evident from Fig. 1), extends, when in the operative position and when the system is projected onto the horizontal plane, farther than the predetermined distance from the longitudinal axis (such that contact is made with the rail as evident from Fig. 9),
no part of the support elements extends, when in the inoperative position and when the system is projected onto the horizontal plane, farther than the predetermined distance from the longitudinal axis (such that the train wheel effectuates inward retraction of support elements wherein the inward retraction extends inward of the horizontal plane; see first full paragraph of page 3 translation).
Regarding claim 2, Liaoning discloses the system according to claim 1, further comprising a drive for moving the system along the rails (e.g. see 3rd full paragraph in page 3).
Regarding claim 3, Liaoning discloses the system according to claim 2, wherein the support elements are support rollers, the system further comprising a drive connected to at least two of the support rollers so as to rotate these (e.g. see 3rd full paragraph in page 3).
Regarding claim 4, Liaoning discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein at least one connection element comprises: a first portion (e.g. housing 50) fixed in relation to the frame,
a second portion comprising the support element, the second portion being movable, by the pertaining drive element (e.g. spring as shown in Fig. 3), in relation to the first portion to bring the support element from the operative position to the inoperative position (see first full paragraph of page 3 translation).
Regarding claim 9, Liaoning discloses a method of operating the system according to claim 1, the method comprising: providing the system on the first and second rails of a railway track with the support elements in the operative position and engaging the first and second rails (e.g. as evident from Fig. 1, 9),
the system passing a pair of wheels of a railway car standing on or moving along the first and second rails (last full paragraph, page 2 of translation provided by Applicant, namely “passing the train wheel”), by, for each support element: when the support element approaches a wheel, the pertaining drive element drives the pertaining support element to the inoperative position and/or when the support element has passed the wheel, the pertaining drive element drives the pertaining support element to the operative position (e.g. as discussed in last paragraph of pg 2 and first full paragraph of pg 3 of applicant provided translation).
Regarding claim 10, Liaoning discloses the method according to claim 9, further comprising the step of moving the system along the rails (as evident from Fig. 1, 9).
Regarding claim 12, Liaoning discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the drive element of at least one connection element drives the support element to the inoperative position by moving a second portion, comprising the support element, in relation to a first portion fixed in relation to the frame (see, for example, first full paragraph of page 3 translation).
Regarding claim 13, Liaoning discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein a pushing element of the drive element of at the least one connection element engages one of the wheels, is pushed by a relative velocity between the wheel and the pushing element and drives the pertaining support element from the operative position to the inoperative position (e.g. as discussed in last paragraph of pg 2 and first full paragraph of pg 3 of applicant provided translation).
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.
Claim(s) 7, 8, 11, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liaoning in view of CN 208888146 to Liaoning-2.
Regarding claim 7, Liaoning discloses the according to claim 1,but does not disclose comprising a sensor for sensing an obstruction in the predetermined distance from the longitudinal axis and in the vicinity of a predetermined support element, the pertaining drive element being configured to, based on an output of the sensor, drive the predetermined support element from the operative position to the inoperative position. Nevertheless, in a related invention Liaoning-2 discloses such (see, for example, page 3 first full paragraph of Applicant provided translation beginning with “An intelligent detection system…”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the features of Liaoning-2 with the motivation of automating the process of retraction and extension of the wheels.
Regarding claim 8, Liaoning discloses the according to claim 1,but does not disclose the system further comprising a controller, the controller being configured to, based on a received signal, control the drive elements of all connection elements to drive all support elements to the inoperative position. Nevertheless, in a related invention Liaoning-2 discloses such (see, for example, page 3 first full paragraph of Applicant provided translation beginning with “An intelligent detection system…”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the features of Liaoning-2 with the motivation of automating the process of retraction and extension of the wheels.
Regarding claim 11, Liaoning discloses the method according to claim 10, wherein the support elements are support rollers (e.g. see Fig. 1, 2, 3), but does not clearly disclose that the system further comprising a drive connected to at least two of the support rollers, the method comprising the step of the drive rotating the at least two support rollers. Nevertheless, in a related invention Liaoning-2 discloses such (see, for example, page 3 second full paragraph of Applicant provided translation beginning with “Further as shown in Fig. 2, 3…”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the features of Liaoning-2 with the motivation of providing greater torque to effectuate the retraction and extension of the support components.
Regarding claim 14, Liaoning discloses the method according to claim 9, but does not disclose a sensor outputs a signal when a predetermined support element approaches the wheel, the pertaining drive element receiving the signal and driving the predetermined support element from the operative position to the inoperative position. Nevertheless, in a related invention Liaoning-2 discloses such (see, for example, page 3 first full paragraph of Applicant provided translation beginning with “An intelligent detection system…”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the features of Liaoning-2 with the motivation of automating the process of retraction and extension of the wheels.
Regarding claim 15, Liaoning discloses the method according to claim 9, but does not disclose a controller receives a signal and controls the drive elements of all connection elements to drive all support elements to the inoperative position. Nevertheless, in a related invention Liaoning-2 discloses such (see, for example, page 3 first full paragraph of Applicant provided translation beginning with “An intelligent detection system…”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to incorporate the features of Liaoning-2 with the motivation of automating the process of retraction and extension of the wheels.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the cited prior art does not disclose the recited relationship between the predetermined distance and the various driving / pushing elements that cause the support components to extend / retract.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT A BROWNE whose telephone number is (571)270-0151. The examiner can normally be reached on Variable Workweek/IFP.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s colleague, SPE Hitesh Patel can be reached on (571) 270-5442. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666