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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-15 are pending.
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 1-15 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 1 recites the indefinite pronoun “its”. It is unclear which particular previously recited structure the pronoun “its” is referring to, e.g. is the pronoun referring to the recited structure of the first arm, the first propulsion pod, the first rail etc. Claims 2-10 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of rejected independent claim 1.
In regards to claim 6, the claim limitations “a control coil” and “a permanent magnet” are recited in line 8. It is unclear if the control coil and permanent magnet is the same control coil and permanent magnet as previously recited in claim 1, or if it is a second control coil and a second permanent magnet. Claims 7-10 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of rejected claim 6.
Claim 6 recites the indefinite pronoun “its”. It is unclear which particular previously recited structure the pronoun “its” is referring to, e.g. is the pronoun referring to the recited structure of the first arm, the second propulsion pod, the second rail etc.
Claim 9 recites the indefinite pronoun “its”. It is unclear which particular previously recited structure the pronoun “its” is referring to, e.g. is the pronoun referring to the recited structure of the second arm, the first propulsion pod, the third rail etc.
Claim 10 recites the indefinite pronoun “its”. It is unclear which particular previously recited structure the pronoun “its” is referring to, e.g. is the pronoun referring to the recited structure of the second arm, the second propulsion pod, the fourth rail etc.
Claim 11 recites the limitations "the arms" and “the rail” in line 32, “that arm” in line 34, and “that rail” in lines 34-35. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 12-15 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of rejected independent claim 11.
Claim 11 recites the indefinite pronoun “its”. It is unclear which particular previously recited structure the pronoun “its” is referring to, e.g. is the pronoun referring to the recited structure of the first arm, the propulsion pod, the rails, etc.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "those pods" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwarzler (US 3851594 A) in view of Heidelberg (US 4217829 A).
In regards to claim 1, Schwarzler teaches a magnetic levitation transport system comprising:
A. a guideway (13, 14, 25) (Fig. 1) having at least a first rail (10) (Fig. 1) extending therealong and defining at least in part a first path (as seen in Fig. 5), the first rail (10) having propulsion windings (29) (Fig. 8a) extending therealong,
B. a vehicle (1) (Fig. 1) disposed on the guideway (13, 14, 25),
C. at least a first propulsion pod (2) extending from a base (as seen in Fig. 1) of the vehicle (1) toward to the guideway (13, 14, 25), the first propulsion pod (2) being T-shaped and having at least a first arm that (i) extends laterally from a stem (as seen in Fig. 1) of that T-shaped propulsion pod (2), and (ii) has disposed thereon a
D. where the its propulsion windings (29), (ii) separated (as seen in Fig. 1) from the first rail (10) and its propulsion windings (29) by a gap sized to permit the
Schwarzler does not teach utilizing a permanent magnet.
Heidelberg teaches utilizing a permanent magnet (col. 3, lines 62-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the propulsion pod of Schwarzler to include a permanent magnet as taught by Heidelberg with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of reducing the cost of construction (col. 3, lines 62-68).
In regards to claim 2, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first propulsion pod (2) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) wraps around (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1, the propulsion pods are disposed in a similar configuration as depicted in Fig. 3A of the instant application) a lateral end of any of an inboard portion and an outboard portion of the guideway (13, 14, 25) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) on which the first rail (10) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) is disposed.
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the gap is an air gap (Schwarzler, col. 9, lines 58-61).
In regards to claim 4, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the vehicle (1) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) is disposed above the guideway (13, 14, 25) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) and is suspended through attraction (Schwarzler, col. 9, lines 58-61) of the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the first arm of the first propulsion pod (2) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) with the first rail (10) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1).
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the first arm of the first propulsion pod 2) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) guides (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) the vehicle (1) along the guideway (13, 14, 25) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1).
In regards to claim 6, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 1, wherein
A. the guideway (13, 14, 25) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) comprises a second rail (11) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) extending therealong defining at least in part a second path that diverges from the first path (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 5), the second rail (11) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) having propulsion windings (29) (Schwarzler, Fig. 8) extending therealong,
B. a second propulsion pod (3) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) extending from the base of the vehicle (1) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) toward to the guideway (13, 14, 25) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1), the second propulsion pod (3) being T-shaped (as seen in Fig. 1) and having at least a first arm that (i) extends from a stem (as seen in Fig. 1) of that T-shaped propulsion pod (3), and (ii) has disposed thereon a permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and a control coil (5),
C. where the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coil (5) of the first arm of the second propulsion pod (3) are disposed (i) adjacent to (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) the second rail (11) and its propulsion windings (29), (ii) separated from (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) the second rail (11) and its propulsion windings (29) by a gap (Schwarzler, col. 7, lines 61-63) sized to permit the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coils (5) of the first arm of the second propulsion pod (3) to exert electromagnetic force (Schwarzler, col. 7, lines 61-63) on the second rail (11) and its propulsion windings (29), and vice versa,
D. the vehicle (1) is suspended through attraction (Schwarzler, col. 9, lines 58-61) of the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the first arms of the first (2) and second (3) propulsion pods with the first (10) and second rails (11), respectively,
E. the permanent magnets (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the first arms of the first (2) and second (3) propulsion pods guide (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) the vehicle (1) along the guideway (13, 14, 25), and
F. the second propulsion pod (3) wraps around (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1, the propulsion pods are disposed in a similar configuration as depicted in Fig. 3A of the instant application) a lateral end of any of an inboard portion and an outboard portion of the guideway (13, 14, 25) on which the second rail (11) is disposed.
In regards to claim 7, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 6, wherein
A. the second path diverges from the first path at a switching point (E) (Schwarzler, Fig. 5) of the guideway (13, 14, 25), the first rail (10) and second rail (11) defining a left branch and right branch (as seen in Fig. 5), respectively, of the guideway (13, 14, 25) after the switching point (E), and
B. switching of the vehicle (1) as between the first path and the second path is effected by activation and deactivation (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) of the control coils (4, 5) on the propulsion pods (2, 3) of the vehicle (1).
In regards to claim 8, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 7, wherein the second rail (11) parallels (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 5) the first rail (10) in a region of the guideway (13, 14, 25) prior to the switching point (E).
In regards to claim 9, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 7, wherein
A. the guideway (13, 14, 25) comprises a third rail (11’) extending therealong paralleling the first rail (10) and also defining at least in part the first path (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 5), the third rail having propulsion windings (29) (Schwarzler, Fig. 8) extending therealong,
B. the first propulsion pod (2) having at least a second arm (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) that (i) extends from a stem of that T-shaped propulsion pod (2), and (ii) has disposed thereon a permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and a control coil (4) (Schwarzler, Fig. 4),
C. where the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coil (4) (Schwarzler, Fig. 4) of the second arm of the first propulsion pod are disposed (i) adjacent to (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) the third rail (11’) and its propulsion windings (29), (ii) separated from (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) the third rail (11’) and its propulsion windings (29) by a gap (Schwarzler, col. 7, lines 61-63) sized to permit the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coils (4) of the second arm of the first propulsion pod (2) to exert electromagnetic force (Schwarzler, col. 7, lines 61-63) on the third rail (11’) and its propulsion windings (29), and vice versa,
D. the vehicle (1) is suspended through attraction (Schwarzler, col. 9, lines 58-61) of the permanent magnets (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the arms of the first (2) and second (3) propulsion pods with at least two of the first (10), second (11) and third rails (11’), and
E. the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the second arm of the first propulsion pod (2) guides (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) the vehicle (1) along the first path of the guideway (13, 14, 25).
In regards to claim 10, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg above teaches the system of claim 9, wherein
A. the guideway (13, 14, 25) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) comprises a fourth rail (10’) extending therealong paralleling (as seen in Fig. 5) the second rail (11) and also defining at least in part the second path (as seen in Fig. 5), the fourth rail (10’) having propulsion windings (29) (Fig. 8) extending therealong,
B. the second propulsion pod (3) having at least a second arm that (i) extends from a stem (as seen in Fig. 1) of that T-shaped propulsion pod (3), and (ii) has disposed thereon a permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and a control coil (5),
C. where the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coil (5) of the second arm of the second propulsion pod (3) are disposed (i) adjacent to (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) the fourth rail (10’) and its propulsion windings (29), (ii) separated from (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1) the fourth rail (10’) and its propulsion windings (29) by a gap (Schwarzler, col. 7, lines 61-63) sized to permit the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coils (5) of the second arm of the second propulsion pod (3) to exert electromagnetic force (Schwarzler, col. 7, lines 61-63) on the fourth rail (10’) and its propulsion windings (29), and vice versa,
D. the vehicle (1) is suspended through attraction (Schwarzler, col. 9, lines 58-61) of the permanent magnets (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the arms of the first (2) and second (3) propulsion pods with at least two of the first (10), second (11), third (11’) and fourth (10’) rails, and
E. the permanent magnet (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) of the second arm of the second propulsion pod (3) guide (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) the vehicle (1) along the second path of the guideway (13, 14, 25).
In regards to claim 11, Schwarzler teaches a magnetic levitation transport system comprising:
A. a guideway (13, 14, 25) (Fig. 1) having a first rail (10) (Fig. 1), a second rail (11), a third rail (11’) (Fig. 5), and a fourth rail (10’), each extending along the guideway (13, 14, 25) and each propulsion windings (29) (Fig. 8) extending therealong, the first (10) and second (11) rails paralleling (as seen in Fig. 5) one another in a region before a switching point (E) and diverging (as seen in Fig. 5) from one another in a region of the guideway (13, 14, 25) after a switching point (E), the third rail (11’) paralleling (as seen in Fig. 5) the first rail (10) in the region after the switching point (E), the fourth rail (10’) paralleling (as seen in Fig. 5) the second rail (11) in the region after the switching point (E),
B. the guideway having a cross-section of any of an open polygon and a letter T (as seen in Fig. 1), the first (10) and second (11) rails being disposed at or near termini (as seen in Fig. 1) of the guideway (13, 14, 25) in lateral cross-section,
C. the guideway (13, 14, 25) cross-section including near the switching point a medial structure (25-27) that has arms that extend from a central support (as seen in Fig. 1), the third (11’) and fourth (10’) rails being disposed at or near (as seen in Fig. 5) termini of that medial structure (25-27) in lateral cross-section,
D. a vehicle (1) (Fig. 1) that that travels over (as seen in Fig. 1), under or beside the guideway (13, 14, 25),
E. first (2) and second (3) propulsion pods extending from (as seen in Fig. 1) the vehicle (1) toward to the guideway, each of the first (2) and second (3) propulsion pods being T-shaped (as seen in Fig. 1) and having first and second arms that (i) extend laterally (as seen in Fig. 1) from a stem of that respective T-shaped propulsion pod (2, 3), and (ii) each have disposed thereon
F. in a region of the guideway (13, 14, 25) remote from the switching point (E), (i)
G. in a region of the guideway (13, 14, 25) near from the switching point (E), (i) (2) is disposed (as seen in Fig. 1) adjacent to the first rail (10) and its propulsion windings (29), (ii)
H.
Schwarzler does not teach utilizing a permanent magnet.
Heidelberg teaches utilizing a permanent magnet (col. 3, lines 62-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the propulsion pod of Schwarzler to include a permanent magnet as taught by Heidelberg with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of reducing the cost of construction (col. 3, lines 62-68).
In regards to claim 12, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the propulsion pods (2, 3) (Schwarzler, Fig. 1) wrap around (Schwarzler, as seen in Fig. 1, the propulsion pods are disposed in a similar configuration as depicted in Fig. 3A of the instant application) respective lateral ends of any of an inboard portion and an outboard portion of the guideway (13, 14, 25) on which the rails (10, 11, 11’, 10’) disposed adjacent (as seen in Fig. 1) to magnets (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and control coils (4, 5) of those pods are disposed.
In regards to claim 13, the combination of Schwarzler as modified by Heidelberg teaches the system of claim 11, wherein switching of the vehicle (1) as between the first path and the second path is effected by activation and deactivation (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) of the control coils (4, 5) on the propulsion pods (2, 3) of the vehicle (1).
In regards to claim 14, The system of claim 11, wherein the vehicle (1) is disposed above the guideway (13, 14, 25) (as seen in Fig. 1) and is (Schwarzler, col. 9, lines 58-61) of the permanent magnets (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) and the rails (10, 11, 11’, 10’) adjacent to which they are disposed.
In regards to claim 15, The system of claim 11, wherein the permanent magnets (Heidelberg, col. 3, lines 62-68) guide (Schwarzler, col. 1, lines 32-38) the vehicle (1) along the guideway (13, 14, 25).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tamutus (US 20230278434 A1) discloses a capture arm system for a magnetic levitation vehicle.
Qian (CN 108482391 B) discloses a magnetic suspension rail train.
Chen (CN 109050344 A) discloses a magnetic suspension train with a wide T-shaped extension.
Clark (US 20150083018 A1) discloses a linear motor transport for packaging and other uses.
King (US 8967051 B2) discloses a transport system powered by short block linear synchronous motors and switching mechanisms.
Chen (US 20080083346 A1) discloses a track switching for a magnetically levitated transportation system and method.
Clark (WO 2007013991 A2) discloses a guideway activated magnetic switching of vehicles.
Winkle (US 3971537 A) discloses an adjustable track mounting device in rail system for magnetic-suspension vehicles.
Breitling (US 3968753 A) discloses a circuit arrangement for magnetic suspension vehicle systems.
Winkle (US 3937149 A) discloses a rail system for magnetic suspension vehicles.
Schwarzler (US 3842747 A) discloses an electromagnetic suspension and guide system for vehicles adapted to switch tracks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WILLIAM JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11am-7pm.
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 Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/JAMES WILLIAM JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615