DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement has been received and considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “intermediate rolling contact component”, as claimed in claim 7 must be shown and numerically identified or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. 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 § 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.
Claim 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention..
Regarding claim 7 it is unclear what the “intermediate rolling contact component” is.
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.
Claim 14 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.
Regarding claim 14 it is unclear if the drive shaft claimed here is the same one claimed in claim 1.
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)(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) 1-11,13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Barger 9,616,990.
Regarding claim 1 Barger shows in figures 4,9,10:
A braking device for a flight control system (figs 1,2), the flight control system comprising a drive /input shaft 7 for applying a drive torque to a flight control surface 3, the braking device comprising: a housing component 12,14 comprising a first braking surface 211,212; and a “trolley” 16,19 comprising a second braking surface 19,190 configured to contact the first braking surface to provide a braking torque, wherein the trolley 16 is configured to receive an input torque from the drive shaft 7, and wherein the trolley is configured to apply a contact force between the first 19,190 and second braking surfaces 211,212 in response to the input torque. Regarding claim 2 Barger shows that the trolley is configured (capable of) increasing a contact force between the first and second braking surfaces in response to an increase in the input torque.
Regarding claim 3 Barger shows that the trolley is configured to axially displace in response to the input torque to apply the contact force between the first and second braking surface.
Regarding claim 4 Barger shows that the trolley is configured to (i.e. capable of) applying the contact force in response to the input torque being received in a first direction and in a second direction, wherein the second direction is opposite to the first direction (see figure 8).
Regarding claim 5 Barger shows that the trolley comprises a torque receiver 161,162 (see fig 8), wherein the torque receiver comprises a first inclined surface 162 configured to receive the input torque from a second inclined surface 17,151 “arranged on” the drive shaft 7. Note element 15 is “arranged on” the drive shaft 7, as broadly claimed.
Regarding claim 6 Barger shows that the trolley 16,19 is ‘configured to’ axially displace in response to relative angular displacement of the second inclined surface with respect to the first inclined surface.
Regarding claim 7, subject to the drawing and 112 1st rejections above (and as best understood) Barger shows an “intermediate rolling contact component” 17, located as claimed.
Regarding claim 8, as broadly claimed, Barger shows that the torque receiver 161,162 comprises an opposing first inclined surface 161,162, the opposing first inclined surface configured to receive the input torque from an opposing second inclined surface 17,151 “arranged on” the drive shaft 7.
Regarding claim 9 Barger shows that the trolley 16,19 is axially displaceable between a first and second position, wherein, in the first position, the second braking surface contacts the first braking surface and, in the second position, the first braking surface is spaced from the second braking surface (see figures 9,10).
Regarding claim 10 Barger shows that a bias element 18, configured to apply a force to the trolley to axially displace the trolley towards the first position.
Regarding claim 11 Barger shows that the trolley 16,19 is configured to maintain itself in the first position in response to the input torque.
Regarding claim 13 Barger shows that the first and second braking surfaces are conical.
Regarding claim 14, as best understood, Barger shows that a drive shaft 8 for applying a drive torque to a flight control surface 40,41, the drive shaft comprising a second inclined surface 161,162 of the torque receiver.
Regarding claim 15 these limitations are met.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7123. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 A.M.-7:00P.M..
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, Rob 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
1/30/26