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 Objections
Claims 23, 33, 37 and 40 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 23 recited the limitation “the second direction”, such limitation should be changed to --the
Claim 33 recited the limitation “the second direction”, such limitation should be changed to --the different direction--, for proper antecedent basis with claim 31.
Claim 37 should be amended to be depending on claim 32, proper antecedent basis for the limitation “the brush holder”
Claim 40 recited: “the brush adapter” in line 3, such limitation should be changed to –the static brush assembly--, in the same manner as claim 30, for proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21 and 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,068,658 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 21 and 22 are being anticipated by claim 14 of the US. Patent No. 12,068,658 B2.
Instant Application
US. Patent No. 12,068,658 B2
21. A generator assembly comprising:
a stator;
a rotor;
a support structure that is stationary with respect to the stator;
a rotating slip ring in electrical communication with the rotor; and
a static brush assembly configured to conduct electrical current from the rotating slipring, the static brush assembly configured to attach to an exterior surface of the support structure in a different direction than an axial direction of the rotating slip ring,
wherein the static brush assembly comprises a tongue and the support structure comprises a groove, the tongue configured to slide along the groove during installation.
22. The generator assembly as defined in claim 21, wherein the static brush assembly comprises:
a brush holder having a first attachment point oriented in an axial direction with respect to the rotating slip ring; and
a brush adapter configured to attach to the brush holder at the first attachment point.
1. A generator assembly, comprising:
a stator;
a rotor;
a support structure that is stationary with respect to the stator;
a rotating slip ring in electrical communication with the rotor; and
a static brush assembly configured to conduct electrical current from the rotating slip ring, the static brush assembly configured to attach to an exterior surface of the support structure in a different direction than an axial direction of the rotating slip ring,
wherein the static brush assembly comprises:
a brush holder having a first attachment point oriented in an axial direction with respect to the rotating slip ring; and
a brush adapter configured to attach to the brush holder at the first attachment point, and having a second attachment point configured to attach to the support structure in a second direction different than the axial direction.
11. The generator assembly as defined in claim 1, wherein the support structure and the brush adapter are configured to limit installation of the brush adapter to the support structure to a single degree of freedom.
14. The generator assembly as defined in claim 11, wherein the brush adapter comprises a tongue and the support structure comprises a groove, the tongue and groove configured to limit the installation of the brush adapter to the support structure to the single degree of freedom.
See claim 1 section (g) & (h).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remark, filed 06/24/2026, with respect to 35 USC 102(a)(1) and 35 USC 103 to the pending claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous grounds of rejection have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remark, filed 06/24/2026, with respect to 35 USC 102(a)(1) and 35 USC 103 to the pending claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous grounds of rejection have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 06/24/2026 with regard to the nonstatutory double patenting rejection of claims 21 and 22 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, because Applicant provide no substantive argument and/or identified any error to address the merit of the rejection, therefore the rejection being maintained as noted above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-30 and 41 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.
Claims 31-40 and 42 are allowed.
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 THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM EST.
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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270-5112. 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.
/THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights