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 .
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for stroller brake mechanisms, does not reasonably provide enablement for other forms of brake mechanisms such as car brake mechanisms. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Regarding Claims 1-14 the limitation “brake mechanism” has a scope that is larger than what is enabled by the specification. The specification sufficiently discloses use of the invention in baby carrier and analogous applications, but fails to enable the complete breadth of the claims. The limitation “brake mechanism” applies to a large field of endeavors including, but not limited to, motor vehicles, air vehicles, toys, and utility tools. Thus, it is difficult for one of ordinary skill in the art, in light of the amount of direction provided by the inventor, to envisage the full scope of the corresponding claims without undue experimentation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 9, 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US 20120031714 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Chen discloses a brake mechanism (101), comprising a brake driving member (114) and a brake pedal (110), wherein the brake pedal (110) is detachably connected to the brake driving member (114) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 2, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the brake driving member (114) is configured to engage with the brake pedal (110) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 3, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 2, wherein one of the brake driving member (114) and the brake pedal (110) l has a male plug-in part (1124), and another of the brake driving member (114) and the brake pedal (110) has a female plug-in part (1142); and the male plug-in part (1124) is configured to engage with the female plug-in part (1142) (see Fig. 3, Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 4, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 2, wherein the brake driving member has a rotation axis (see Fig. 2A, Fig. 8A); the brake driving member (114) is configured to, when being driven by the brake pedal (110), rotate around the rotation axis; the brake pedal (110) comprises a pedal part (111) and an annular part (112); and the annular part (112) is configured to fit over the brake driving member (114) and move along the rotation axis (A) to be detached from the brake driving member (114) (see Fig. 2A, Fig. 2B, Fig. 8A).
Regarding Claim 5, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 4, wherein the annular part (112) and the brake driving member (114) engages with each other by a rotation restricting mechanism (113) arranged between the annular part (112) and the brake driving member (114) (see Fig. 3, Fig. 8A).
Regarding Claim 6, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 5, wherein the rotation restricting mechanism (113) comprises: a positioning rib (1133) extending along the rotation axis, and a positioning groove (A) (see Annotated Fig. 4 below) configured to engage with the positioning rib (1133); wherein the positioning rib (1133) is arranged on on the inner wall of the annular part (112), and the positioning groove (A) is arranged on the outer periphery of the brake driving member (114) (see Fig. 5, Fig. 6, Annotated Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
394
475
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4
Regarding Claim 9, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 4, wherein an axial positioning mechanism (1124) is arranged between the annular part (112) and the brake driving member (114) (see Fig. 3, Fig. 8A).
Regarding Claim 14, Chen discloses the brake mechanism according to claim 4, wherein the annular part (112) has a first circumferential position and a second circumferential position with respect to the brake driving member (114); the brake pedal (111) is configured to drive the brake driving member (114) to rotate when the annular part (112) is in the first circumferential position, and configured to rotate to a state of not protruding outwards when the annular part (112) is in the second circumferential position (see Fig. 8A, Fig. 8B, Fig. 15).
Regarding Claim 15, Chen discloses a movable frame, having the brake mechanism according to claim 1 (see Fig. 15).
Regarding Claim 16, Chen discloses the movable frame according to claim 15, comprising a transverse tube (11) and wheels (12), wherein: the transverse tube (14) is arranged between two wheels (14), and two ends of the transverse tube (14) are rotatably connected to the two wheels (14) respectively; the brake driving member (114) is configured to fit over the transverse tube (14); and the brake mechanism further comprises a fixing seat (100), a brake rod (1132) and a locking pin (1133), and the brake driving member (114) is operatively connected to the locking pin (1133) through the brake rod (1132) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 6, Fig. 8A, Fig. 8C).
Regarding Claim 17, Chen discloses the movable frame according to claim 16, wherein the brake pedal (111) is configured to, after being detached from the brake driving member (114), be rotatably arranged on the transverse tube (14) (see Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 18, Chen discloses a baby carrier, comprising the brake mechanism according to claim 1 (see Fig. 15).
Regarding Claim 19, Chen discloses a baby carrier, comprising the movable frame according to claim 15 (see Fig. 15).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 20120031714 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, in view of Zhang (US 20130320641 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Chen discloses the brake mechanism of claim 9.
Chen does not explicitly disclose the axial positioning mechanism comprising an elastic arm and a recess configured to engage with a protrusion arranged on the elastic arm.
Zhang teaches an axial positioning mechanism (71) comprises: an elastic arm extending (72) along the rotation axis, and a recess configured (52) to engage with a protrusion (71) arranged on the elastic arm (72); the protrusion (71) is arranged on an end of the elastic arm (72); wherein the elastic arm (72) is arranged on the brake driving member (4), and the recess is arranged on the annular part (5) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 5, Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to combine the axial positioning mechanism of Zhang with the brake mechanism of Chen in order to provide a biasing force that pushes the protrusion into the recess, further securing the driving member and annular part (see US 20130320641 A1 [Zhang]; [0025-0026]).
Regarding Claim 13, Zhang teaches wherein the elastic arm (72) is arranged on the brake driving member (4), and the recess (52) is a through hole formed in the annular part (5) (see Fig. 5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shea Irvin whose telephone number is (571)272-9952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 - 17:00.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at (571) 272-7124. 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.
/S.W.I./Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616