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 .
Claims 1-20 are 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.
As to claim 1, the actuator comprising “a fixed portion and a displaceable portion” (line 2) is new to the application. Element 102 (Figure 1) and element 202 (Figure 2) are “linear displacement actuator”.
As to claim 1, either “leg rigidly affixed to a mounting deck” 304 (italics added, lines 3-4) is new by itself, or in combination with remaining claim limitations.
As to claim , leg “affixed” (line 3) to a mounting deck 304 is new.
As to claim 1, “hinge is attached to the displaceable portion of the linear displacement actuator” (lines 8-9) is new to the application.
As to claim 1, “sandwiched between the monolithic biaxial load head and the displaceable portion of the linear displacement actuator” (italics added, lines 10-11) is new.
As to claims 1,14,15.16, “displaceable portion” (everywhere) is new.
As to claim 13,17, “legs rigidly affixed to the mounting deck” is new.
As to claim 16, “the displacement of the displaceable portion of the linear displacement actuator that causes the elastic hinge to flex causing the monolithic biaxial load hear to apply force between the sample and the countersample is a substantially vertical displacement” (italics added) is new.
As to claim 7, everything described above is similarly new in claim 7, as liens 4-23 (claim 7) are identical to lines 2-last of claim 1.
As to claim 7, “tribometers is mounted on a test bed” (lines 2-3 from last) is new.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
As to claims 1,7, there is nothing in the specification and drawings that expresses how the hinge 204 is both connected and oriented between the head 212 and the linear displacement actuator 202, such that the hinge 204 might deflect the head 212 due to movement of actuator 202, and provide amplification of displacement. Figure 2 shows components 212,204,202, but does not provide for what exactly the (U-shaped) hinge 204 is physically connected to, or even how the hinge acts as “a spring fulcrum” (Para 32) in such yet-to-be described/explained assembly. Presently, Figure 2 by itself appears to illustrate a (stagnant) collection of immovable components 212,204,202 (with exception of the flexible load cells 206,208); that is, it does not provide any indication as to what parts are connected to what parts, and what parts are moving with respect to what parts (again, with sole exception of head 212 that has 2 flexible portions). How the piezo element 202 serves to displace/move head 202 is not apparent. There is no working example, nothing in the prior art aides in providing a connection, and no manner of experimentation is apparent in this mechanical assembly.
Please look at Figure 2. By itself, it is not at all apparent where hinge 204 deflects as a hinge rotates. It’s not apparent if hinge 204 is entirely external to the body 202. It’s not apparent if the element 204 is behind the element 202. Such is the nature of 3-dimentional figures. It is unexplained how any movement by actuator 202 causes the hinge 204 to be displaced in any one particular direction to provide for “amplification”. As element 204 is labeled a hinge, it unexplained where any pivoting take place (line a hinge) during (unexplained/undisclosed) flexure. Is it possible that the (new matter) phrase (“hinge having at least one leg rigidly affixed to the mounting deck” (lines 3-4, claim 1) suggests that flexing is only do the length of the element 204 being flexed due to the bottom end of hinge 204 being fixed to the deck, and the top end of the hinge 204 being (somehow) pushed to the left in Figure 2? Besides from being new, in that event the so-called (new) displacement portion would appear to shear the flexible element 204, inducing damage and not flexing.
PNG
media_image1.png
226
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The state of the application is such that Undersigned speculated that the element 204 was fixed to element 202 along where the surfaces of 204 and 202 abut. Again, 3-dimention drawing provides an external/overall shape, which are often problematic.
One of ordinary skill has no where to turn; there is no suggestion as to any direction of experimenting. The amended (i.e. not originally disclosed) application does not provide for an enabling tribometer.
Claims 13,17 are 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.
As to claim 2, how is the hinge “U” shaped. Figure 2 provides for (maybe” a V-shape).
PNG
media_image2.png
350
582
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to REMARKS, consider:
As to the last paragraph of p.ge 9; even with the new matter, the application does not suggest how vertical upward movement of 202 causes downward movement of 210. When actuator 202 moves up, all moves up.
PNG
media_image3.png
374
706
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As to p. 11, the provisional does not employ either of the terms “hinge” or pivot, Figure 4.3 by itself neither overcomes the new matter designations nor satisfies how to make and use the claimed invention. Figure 3.3 (Provisional, line 13) does replicate Figure 2 of the filed application, but otherwise does not provide either support or overcome the enablement issue at hand.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Fri from 8am to 4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 303-297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ROBERT R RAEVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights