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 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) 1-8, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pattok et al (20170028976).
In reference to claim 1, Pattok et al teaches an actuator assembly (figure 13) comprising: a motor (32) having a motor shaft (46); and a motor housing (30, 52) comprising a housing body (30) accommodating at least a part of the motor and a housing cover (52) coupled to the housing body, wherein an idler (24) configured to tension a drive belt (16) rotatably coupled to the motor shaft is fixed to the housing cover having a hole for passing through the motor shaft (see figure 13).
In reference to claim 2, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 1, further comprising one or more couplers (53 and 51) configured to allow the housing cover to be movable or rotatable relative to the housing body such that the idler fixed to the housing cover is movable or rotatable according to movement or rotation of the housing cover (paragraph 35).
In reference to claim 3, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 2, wherein the one or more couplers comprise one or more fasteners (53) configured to lock the movement or rotation of the housing cover relative to the housing body in a lock state in which the one or more fasteners tighten the housing cover to the housing body and to allow the movement or rotation of the housing cover relative to the housing body in an unlock state in which the one or more fasteners do not tighten the housing cover to the housing body.
In reference to claim 4, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 1, further comprising one or more slots (51) configured to allow the housing cover to be movable or rotatable relative to the housing body such that the idler fixed to the housing cover is movable or rotatable according to the movement or rotation of the housing cover allowed by the one or more slots of the housing cover to adjust tension of the drive belt (para 35).
In reference to claim 5, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 4, further comprising one or more fasteners (53) inserted in the one or more slots (51) of the housing cover and fixedly coupled to the housing body.
In reference to claim 6, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 4, wherein the one or more slots (51) of the housing cover have a circumferentially elongated shape (see figure 6).
In reference to claim 7, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 4, wherein a length of the one or more slots of the housing cover is larger than a width of the one or more slots of the housing cover. Thought the drawings are not treated as being drawn to scale, the relative dimensions are clearly evident in figure 6.
In reference to claim 8, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 4, further comprising one or more fasteners (53) inserted in the one or more slots of the housing cover and fixedly coupled to the housing body, each of the one or more fasteners comprising: one end portion fixedly coupled to the housing body (threaded portion); a middle portion disposed in a respective one of the one or more slots, wherein a width of the middle portion is equal to or shorter than a width of the respective one of the one or more slots (this is inherent in order to get the adjustability of recited in paragraph 35); and a projecting portion (fastener head) having a larger width than the width of the respective one of the one or more slots to limit movement of the housing cover between the projecting portion and the housing body.
In reference to claim 12, Pattok et al teaches the actuator assembly of claim 4, wherein the one or more slots formed at the housing cover comprise a pair of slots (there are more than two slots) arranged at opposite sides of the housing cover with respect to the motor shaft. See the slot in the cover in figure 13 in front of 16 and the slot adjacent to the left of 18)
In reference to claim 13, Pattok teaches the actuator assembly of claim 1, wherein the idler comprises an idler pulley (24) rotatably in contact with the drive belt and an idler fastener (28) rotatably securing the idler pulley to the housing cover such that the idler pully is rotatable around the idler fastener. (paragraph 25)
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) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pattok et al (20170028976) in view of Cantwell (6090001).
In reference to claims 10-11, Pattok et al lacks a teaching of a tooling structure.
Tooling structures are notoriously known in the art to provide a mechanical advantage when tensioning a belt or chain.
On example is Cantwell. In Cantwell a tensioner arm (analogous to the cover of Pattok) has a tooling structure recess (9) in order to tension the belt (6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have provided the cover of Pattok et al with some tooling structure as that taught by Cantwell in order to gain mechanical advantage to provide proper tension on a belt as is notoriously known in the art.
Claim(s) 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drennen (6390247) in view of Pattok et al (20170028976).
In reference to claim 14, Drennen teaches an electromechanical brake system comprising: a screw-nut mechanism (14, 16) comprising a rotatable body (14) configured to be rotatable and a translatable body (16)operably coupled with the rotatable body, the translatable body configured to be axially translatable relative to the rotatable body to move a brake pad assembly (38) according to rotation of the rotatable body; and an actuator assembly (12) configured to rotate the rotatable body of the screw-nut mechanism, the actuator assembly comprising: a motor (12) having a motor shaft (70); and a motor housing (32, 132) comprising a housing body accommodating at least a part of the motor and a housing cover coupled to the housing body.
Drennen fails to teach an idler.
Pattok et al teaches an actuator assembly (figure 13) comprising: a motor (32) having a motor shaft (46); and a motor housing (30, 52) comprising a housing body (30) accommodating at least a part of the motor and a housing cover (52) coupled to the housing body, wherein an idler (24) configured to tension a drive belt (16) rotatably coupled to the motor shaft is fixed to the housing cover having a hole for passing through the motor shaft (see figure 13).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have provided the motor assembly of Drennen with an idler tensioner assembly as taught by Pattok in order to ensure enough tension is provided on the belt for safe brake actuation.
In reference to claim 15, See rejection of claim 2 above.
In reference to claim 16, see rejection of claim 3 above.
In reference to claim 17, see the rejection of claim 4 above.
In reference to claim 18, see the rejection of claim 5 above.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drennen (6390247) in view of Pattok et al (20170028976) in view of Cantwell (6090001).
In reference to claims 20, Drennen as modified by Pattok et al lacks a teaching of a tooling structure.
Tooling structures are notoriously known in the art to provide a mechanical advantage when tensioning a belt or chain.
On example is Cantwell. In Cantwell a tensioner arm (analogous to the cover of Pattok) has a tooling structure recess (9) in order to tension the belt (6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have provided the cover of Drennen as modified by Pattok et al with some tooling structure as that taught by Cantwell in order to gain mechanical advantage to provide proper tension on a belt as is notoriously known in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 19 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.
In reference claims 9 and 19, none of the references cited teach protruded portions of the housing cover located in one or more recesses formed on the surface of the housing body.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON C KRAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-7118. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Thursday 7AM-4PM; Friday Mornings.
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.
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.
DEVON C. KRAMER
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3746
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741