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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract includes “Disclosed herein are” in line 1 which is unnecessary. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/12/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshizu (WO 2020217788 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 2022/0373046 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 5, 6 and 17, Yoshizu discloses a brake actuator (figs. 1-7) comprising:
a casing (25, 27);
a first motor (40) installed in the casing;
a transmission gear (48-49) rotatably installed in the casing and connected to the first motor (40);
a first parking member (150) configured to rotate together with the transmission gear (48-49);
a linear parking actuator (155) spaced apart from the first motor;
a second parking member (152, 157A) rotatably installed in the casing and configured to selectively limit rotation of the first parking member (150) depending on a direction of rotation of the first parking member.
Yoshizu discloses all claimed limitations as set forth above including a linear actuator (155) having an output shaft (156) is misaligned with the first output shaft (40A) of the first motor (40) including a parking unit (157A) to be rotatably installed in the casing but fails to disclose a conversion member configured to convert rotational force of a second motor into a linear motion to rotate the second parking member as recited in the claim. However, Kang et al. discloses a parking actuator unit comprising a motor 150, a parking gear 110, a parking lever 120, a parking motor 150, a power conversion part 130, and a pressing part 140, wherein, the parking gear 110 is connected to a brake actuator 40 and rotates together with the brake actuator 40, wherein, the parking lever 120 has one side which is hinged and another side provided to be engaged with the parking gear 110, wherein, the parking motor 150 generates power and the power conversion part 130 converts a rotational motion of the parking motor 150 into a linear motion, wherein, the pressing part 140 is installed on a nut member 132 and presses the parking lever 120 by forward and backward movement of the nut member 132 in [0044]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the parking actuator unit of Yoshizu with the linear actuator arrangement with an electric motor as taught by Kang et al. will allow more adjustable control of the parking operation in order to implement the parking brake function stably and accurately.
Re-claim 2, Yoshizu discloses the first parking member comprises:
a first parking body (150, 151) connected to a first output shaft (40a) of the first motor; and
a plurality of extension parts (151A) extending from the first parking body and arranged along a circumferential surface of the first parking body.
Re-claim 3, Yoshizu discloses each of the extension parts (151A) extends obliquely in relation to a radial direction of the first parking body.
Re-claim 4, Yoshizu discloses the second parking member comprises: a second parking body (170, 157A) installed to be rotatable about a rotary shaft (175) parallel to the first output shaft (40A);
a lever (169) extending from one side of the second parking body (157A) and configured to convert the linear motion of the conversion member into a rotational motion of the second parking body; and
a latching part (173) extending from another side of the second parking body (170, 157A) and selectively inserted between a pair of neighboring extension parts (151A) as the second parking body rotates in a first direction of rotation.
Re-claim 7, Yoshizu discloses the first conversion gear is a pinion gear (131, 133 of Kang), and the second conversion gear is a rack gear (132 of Kang).
Re-claim 8, Yoshizu discloses a return member (142 of Kang) connected to the lever and configured to press the lever in the second direction.
Re-claim 9, Yoshizu discloses the return member (142 of Kang) is disposed to face the second conversion gear (132) with the lever (120) interposed therebetween.
Re-claim 10, Yoshizu discloses the return member (142 of Kang) is configured to be elastically deformable in a direction parallel to the second direction.
Re-claim 11, Yoshizu discloses the return member (142 of Kang) is a compression spring.
Re-claim 12, Yoshizu discloses the second parking body (170, 157A of Kang) is installed to be movable in a longitudinal direction of the rotary shaft; and when a load acting between one of the extension parts and the latching part increases beyond a set magnitude, the second parking body is moved in a direction of departure parallel to the longitudinal direction of the rotary shaft such that the latching part is separated from the one of the extension parts (note figs. 3-5 and [0060]-[0062] of Kang).
Re-claim 13, Yoshizu discloses the latching part (173) has a side surface inclined in relation to the longitudinal direction of the rotary shaft (175).
Re-claim 14, Yoshizu discloses a restoration member configured to press the second parking body in a direction opposite to the direction of departure (note torsion spring has one end hinged to the housing 50 and another end supported by the parking lever 120 in [0049]).
Re-claim 15, Yoshizu discloses the restoration member comprises: a restoration body disposed to face the second parking body; and an elastic member configured to be elastically deformable in a direction parallel to the longitudinal direction of the rotary shaft, and having two ends that are in contact with the restoration body and the second parking body, respectively (note torsion spring has one end hinged to the housing 50 and another end supported by the parking lever 120 in [0049]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUR RASHID whose telephone number is (571)272-7218. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am to 10pm 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, ROBERT SICONOLFI can be reached at 5712727124. 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.
/MAHBUBUR RASHID/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights