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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 24th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims received on December 24th, 2025 have been entered. Claims 1, 5, 12, 21 and 22 have been amended. The 35 USC § 112(b) rejections filed on November 6th, 2025 have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 24th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, regarding claims 1, 12, and 21, that Huang fails to disclose or teach “the rotor is partly disposed within the fixing element, and the fixing element and the rotor are coaxially disposed”. While the examiner agrees that Huang’s transmission shaft 122A (which was considered as a fixing element by the examiner in the previous Office Action) is not disposed outside the rotor, it should be noted that the previous set of claims, filed September 12th, 2025, merely required the rotor to disposed on the fixing element. With the proposed amendments, the examiner points to the housing 124 of Huang which now corresponds to a fixing element. It is understood that the fixing element is incorporated to support the rotor which is the intended purpose of the housing 124, see column 6, paragraph 22. The rejection has been updated below.
The applicant further argues that Han also fails to disclose or teach “the rotor is partly disposed within the fixing element, and the fixing element and the rotor are coaxially disposed”. The applicant states in page 13 of their argument that the examiner regarded the wedge-shaped connecting frame 14 has the rotor of claim 1. However, nowhere in the previous office action does it state that the wedge-shaped connecting frame 14 of Han is a rotor. Pages 8 and 9 of Han clearly teaches that “the output end of the rotating shaft of the re-feeding guide driving motor 76 is fixedly connected to one end of any re-feeding guide shaft 77”. In this instance, the motor 76 corresponds to the rotor of claim 1. It should also be noted that the prior art reference of Han is used to teach specific elements or limitations within the primary prior art apparatus of Huang. The examiner aims to focus on the assembly of the re-feeding mechanism of Han’s figure 9 as it provides the same, or similar, function to that of the claimed invention.
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) 1-9, 12-19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (EP 3839119 A1) in view of Han (CN 105415707 A).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Huang discloses a winding system (Pg. 3, braiding system 10), comprising a wire tension control mechanism (Pg. 3, ¶13, & Fig. 1, braiding machine 11), comprising a wire feeding device (Pg. 3, ¶12, tension control device 100), a connecting device (Fig. 2 depicting an adapter 130 and moment generator 120 acting as a connecting device) comprising a fixing element connected with the wire feeding device (Fig. 5, and Pg. 4, ¶22, housing 124 corresponding to a fixing element), and a rotor disposed on the fixing element and being movable relative to the fixing element (Pg. 4, ¶22, rotor 122), and a driving mechanism connected to the wire tension control mechanism and configured to drive a wire passing through the wire tension control mechanism to cover a carrier (Pg. 3, ¶14, driver 111), but fails to disclose a wire guide. However, Han teaches a wire guiding device connected to the rotor (Pg. 8-9, ¶28, guide shaft 77 connected to motor 76). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a wire guiding device to the connecting device to provide a means for ensuring desired wire laying.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Huang discloses wherein the connecting device further comprises a bearing disposed between the fixing element and the rotor (Pg. 4, ¶21, bearing 122b).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Huang discloses wherein the wire feeding device comprises a flange and a connection shaft, the connection shaft is connected to the flange, the fixing element is connected to the flange, and the rotor has a through hole, and the connection shaft passes through the through hole of the rotor (Fig. 5, Pg. 4, ¶¶21-22, shaft 122a).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Huang discloses wherein the fixing element is fixed to the flange, and the rotor is loosely matched with the connection shaft (Fig. 5, Pg. 4, ¶¶21-22, shaft 122a).
Regarding claim 5, Huang discloses wherein a tension of the wire is at its minimum (Pg. 4, ¶20 depicting a stable or consistent tension to the wire which corresponds to both a maximum and a minimum tension) but fails to disclose a wire guiding device in a vertical orientation. However, Han teaches a wire guiding device connected to the rotor (Pg. 8-9, ¶28, guide shaft 77) and more specifically, vertically attached to the assembly depicted in Fig. 1. With the understanding that stable tension corresponds to both minimum and maximum tension and the incorporation of a wire guiding device vertically assembled relative to the rotor, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a vertically attached wire guiding device to the connecting device to provide a means for orienting the guides to obtain a desired tension.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Huang discloses wherein the connecting device further comprises: an elastic element connecting the fixing element with the rotor (Pg. 6, ¶33, anti-loose element 450).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Huang discloses wherein the elastic element is in a free state (Pg. 6, ¶33, Ln. 40-55) but fails to disclose a wire guiding device in a vertical orientation. However, Han teaches a wire guiding device connected to the rotor (Pg. 8-9, ¶28, guide shaft 77) and more specifically, vertically attached to the assembly depicted in Fig. 1. Rationales to have modified/combined are above and are reincorporated.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Huang discloses wherein the connecting device further comprises a magnetic damping module connected to the rotor and configured to provide the rotor with a reverse torque according to a rotation amount of the rotor (Pg. 5, ¶28).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Huang discloses wherein the connecting device further comprises: a motor module connected to the rotor and configured to provide the rotor with a reverse torque according to a rotation amount of the rotor (Pg. 5, ¶28).
Regarding claim 21, Huang discloses a wire tension control method, comprising providing a wire tension control mechanism (Pg. 3, ¶13, & Fig. 1, braiding machine 11), wherein the wire tension control mechanism comprises a wire feeding device (Pg. 3, ¶12, tension control device 100), a connecting device (Fig. 2 depicting an adapter 130 and moment generator 120 acting as a connecting device) and the connecting device comprises a fixing element (Fig. 5, and Pg. 4, ¶22, housing 124 corresponding to a fixing element) and a rotor, the fixing element is connected with the wire feeding device, the rotor is disposed on the fixing element and is movable relative to the fixing element (Pg. 4, ¶22, rotor 122), and providing the wire with a resistance, by the wire tension control mechanism, based on a pulling of the wire (Pg. 5, ¶26), but fails to disclose a wire guiding device. However, Han teaches a wire guiding device and the wire guiding device is connected to the rotor (Pg. 8-9, ¶28, guide Shaft 77). Rationale to have incorporated/modified are provided above and are incorporated.
Claim(s) 10-11, 20, and 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (EP 3839119 A1) in view of Han (CN 105415707 A), and in further view of Uozumi (US 8403251 B2).
Regarding claims 10, 20, and 26, Huang discloses a driving module connected to the rotor (Pg. 3, ¶14, driver 111), but fails to disclose, a wire guiding element, a plurality of rollers, a strain gauge, and a controller. However, Han teaches wherein the wire guiding device comprises a wire guiding element (Pg. 8-9, ¶28, guide Shaft 77) wherein the wire guiding device comprises a plurality of rollers (the torque control assembly 16 having multiple rollers depicted in Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a wire guiding element an plurality of rollers to the wire tension control mechanism to provide a means of efficient and accurate weaving of the wire.
Uozumi further teaches the connecting device further comprises a strain gauge disposed on one of the rollers and configured to sense a measured tension value of one of the wires (Col. 11, Ln. 41-44, & Fig. 3, strain gauge 45 depicted as being connected to the rollers), and a controller electrically connected to the driving module and the strain gauge, and configured to (Col. 6, Ln. 42-52, & Fig. 3, Control Unit 14) a step of providing the wire with the resistance, by the wire tension control mechanism, based on the pulling of the wire comprises sensing a measured tension value of a wire by the strain gauge (Col. 8, Ln. 25-39), and control the driving module to apply a torque to the rotor according to the measured tension value (Col. 6, Ln. 42-52). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the strain gauge and controller to the wire tension control mechanism to provide the ability to adjust parameters such as torque to prevent failure or errors.
Regarding claim 11, Huang discloses wherein the driving module is a magnetic damping module or a motor module (Pg. 3, ¶12, magnetic moment generator 120).
Regarding claims 24 and 25, Huang discloses wherein the connecting device further comprises a magnetic damping module connected to the rotor (Pg. 3, ¶12, magnetic moment generator 120), and wherein the connecting device further comprises a motor module connected to the rotor (Pg. 4, ¶17), step of providing the wire with the resistance, by the wire tension control mechanism, based on the pulling of the wire comprises providing the rotor with a reverse torque, by the magnetic damping module or the motor module, based on a rotation amount of the rotor (Pg. 5, ¶28, wherein the direction can be controlled), but fails to disclose controlling tension based on the pulling. However, Uozumi teaches step of providing the wire with the resistance, by the wire tension control mechanism, based on the pulling of the wire (Col. 8, Ln. 25-39). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the step of providing the wire with the resistance based off a pull in the wire tension control mechanism to provide and means of signaling the need for tension control within the controller and the motors.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22 and 23 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:
Claim 22 distinguishes from the prior art because it includes the limitation of a winding system having a step of providing the wire with the resistance through a self-weight by the wire guiding device based on a swing of the wire guiding device, when considered in combination with the other elements recited in claim 22.
Claim 23 distinguishes from the prior art because it includes the limitation of a winding system having a step of providing the wire guiding device with an elastic restoring force by the elastic element based on a swing of the wire guiding device, when considered in combination with the other elements recited in claim 23. Other prior arts, such as in Huang, describe the elastic element, but fail to describe an elastic restoring force by the elastic element specifically based on a swing of the wire guiding device.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the device as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant’s specification, for modifying the device in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERMIA E MELIKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, Victoria P. Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
/ERMIA E. MELIKA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights