DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/27/2026 has been considered.
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 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.
Claims 1-2 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nogami (WO 2014/038621) (cited on the IDS of 9/28/2023).
Regarding claim 1, Nogami discloses (figs. 7a-7c) A brake disc for a railway vehicle (abstract), the brake disc comprising:
a disc body (2) having an annular plate shape (see fig. 1 at least); and
a plurality of fins (3) disposed on one surface of the disc body such that each of the fins extends from an inner peripheral side toward an outer peripheral side of the disc body (as shown), each of the fins including two side surfaces and a top surface, the two side surfaces being arranged in a circumferential direction of the disc body, the top surface connecting the two side surfaces with each other (as shown),
wherein among the plurality of fins, at least one fin includes a plurality of protruding ridge portions arranged in a radial direction of the disc body on at least one side surface of the two side surfaces, each of the protruding ridge portions extending between the disc body and the top surface (see annotated figure, next page), and
each of the protruding ridge portions has a protruding end portion (at the surface of the plate at least) which has a semi-circular shape, a semi-elliptical shape, or a semi-oval track shape in the transverse cross section (as shown).
Regarding claim 2, Nogami discloses (figs. 7a-7c) each of the plurality of fins further includes an inner peripheral surface coupled to inner end portions of the top surface and the two side surfaces in the radial direction, and the plurality of protruding ridge portions are disposed outward of the inner peripheral surface in the radial direction (as shown).
Regarding claim 13, Nogami discloses (figs. 7a-7c) among the plurality of fins, one or more fins include a groove that crosses through the fin (one of 5a, 5b)
Regarding claims 14-15, Nogami discloses (figs. 7a-7c) among the plurality of fins, one or more fins include a fastening hole (4) for inserting a fastening member, and the groove is disposed, in the one or more fins including the fastening hole, at each of a portion outward of the fastening hole in the radial direction and a portion inward of the fastening hole in the radial direction (both as shown).
PNG
media_image1.png
860
471
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 7a-7b of Nogami.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wiseman et al. (WO 2016/156838) (cited on the IDS of 9/28/2023).
Regarding claim 1, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) a brake disc (100) for a railway vehicle (the brake disc is capable of being used in this environment), the brake disc comprising:
a disc body having an annular plate shape (e.g. 106, as shown); and
a plurality of fins (112) disposed on one surface of the disc body such that each of the fins extends from an inner peripheral side toward an outer peripheral side of the disc body (as shown), each of the fins including two side surfaces (120 and 122) and a top surface (facing out of the page in fig. 4 at least), the two side surfaces being arranged in a circumferential direction of the disc body (as shown), the top surface connecting the two side surfaces with each other (as shown), wherein
among the plurality of fins, at least one fin includes a plurality of protruding ridge portions (128a-h, 130a-f) arranged in a radial direction of the disc body on at least one side surface of the two side surfaces (both, as shown), each of the protruding ridge portions extending between the disc body and the top surface (as shown), and
each of the protruding ridge portions has a protruding end portion (132 and 144) which has a semi- circular shape, a semi-elliptical shape, or a semi-oval track shape in transverse cross section (about geometric centers 133 and 145 respectively).
Regarding claim 2, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) each of the plurality of fins further includes an inner peripheral surface (leftmost tip of 112 in fig. 4) coupled to inner end portions of the top surface and the two side surfaces in the radial direction (as shown), and
the plurality of protruding ridge portions are disposed outward of the inner peripheral surface in the radial direction (as shown, the inner surface is radially inward of all ridges).
Regarding claim 3, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) in the at least one fin of the plurality of fins, the plurality of protruding ridge portions are provided to each of the two side surfaces (as shown, 6-8 ridges on each side).
Regarding claim 4, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) each of the plurality of fins includes the plurality of protruding ridge portions (as shown, each fin 112 has ridges 128,130).
Regarding claim 5, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) the plurality of protruding ridge portions include at least one first protruding ridge portion (e.g. one of 128b-h or 130a-f) and at least one second protruding ridge portion (128a) disposed at a position different from a position of the first protruding ridge portion in the radial direction (as shown, radially different), and a length of the first protruding ridge portion in the circumferential direction is greater than a length of the second protruding ridge portion in the circumferential direction (“Each protrusion has a height H1 above the circle segment Vr1, which is the same for all of the convex side protrusions 128b - 128h. Protrusion 128a is of slightly lower height”. Accordingly 128g, 128h and 130f are all taller than 128a).
Regarding claim 6, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) among the plurality of fins, each of fins adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction includes the first protruding ridge portion and the second protruding ridge portion (as shown, each fin 112 has ridges 128a, 128g-h and 130f), and
the first protruding ridge portion of one of the fins adjacent to each other faces, in the circumferential direction, the first protruding ridge portion of the other of the fins adjacent to each other (see fig. 5, ridge 130f faces (i.e. points toward) ridge 128g and 128h).
Regarding claim 7, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) the first protruding ridge portion is disposed close to the outer peripheral side of the disc body. (as shown)
Regarding claim 8, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) the first protruding ridge portion is disposed close to the inner peripheral side of the disc body (e.g. ridge 130a is disposed “close” to the inner peripheral side).
Regarding claim 9, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) the first protruding ridge portion is disposed at a center portion in the radial direction of the disc body (e.g. ridge 128d is disposed “at a center portion in the radial direction).
Regarding claim 10, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) among the plurality of fins, each of fins adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction includes the plurality of protruding ridge portions (as shown), the plurality of protruding ridge portions include at least one first protruding ridge portion (e.g. 128c or 130a), and
in order to bend an air passage formed between the fins adjacent to each other, the first protruding ridge portion of one of the fins adjacent to each other is disposed at a position displaced in the radial direction from a position of the first protruding ridge portion of the other of the fins adjacent to each other (as shown, e.g. ridge 130a is disposed at different radial positions than ridge 128c).
Regarding claim 11, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) the plurality of protruding ridge portions further include a second protruding ridge portion (e.g. 128a) disposed at a position different from a position of the first protruding ridge portion in the radial direction (as shown), and a length of the first protruding ridge portion in the circumferential direction is greater than a length of the second protruding ridge portion in the circumferential direction (as shown, 128c and 130a are larger than 128a).
Regarding claim 12, Wiseman discloses (figs. 3-6) the first protruding ridge portion of one of the fins adjacent to each other faces, in the circumferential direction, the second protruding ridge portion of the other of the fins adjacent to each other (as shown, 128a and 130a face one another circumferentially at least), with a gap formed between the first protruding ridge portion and the second protruding ridge portion (e.g. circumferential gap between 128a and 130a), and
the second protruding ridge portion of the one of the fins adjacent to each other faces, in the circumferential direction, the first protruding ridge portion of the other of the fins adjacent to each other (as shown, 128a and 130 face one another circumferentially at least), with a gap formed between the second protruding ridge portion and the first protruding ridge portion (e.g. circumferential gap between 128a and 130a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 3-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant contends beginning on page 6 of the remarks that the components on the outer side of grooves 5b do not have the claimed shape. The interpretation of Nogami has been modified above to alleviate this issue.
Applicant contends on page 8 that the portion of the fin 3 where the bolt hole 4 is made does not constitute a “protruding ridge portion”. According to figure 7b of Nogami, the identified protruding ridge portions extend circumferentially beyond the dimension t1, at least at the bottom of the fin along the surface of the plate 2, so accordingly these portions constitute a “protruding ridge portion” for at least this reason. Applicant further contends that the plurality of protruding ridge portions as specified in claim 1 does not include the portion of the fin where a fastening hole is made and therefore is widened. While this statement is true, this feature is not presently claimed.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID MORRIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, 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.
/DAVID MORRIS/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616