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 .
Election/Restrictions
The applicant elected Species III directed to claims 1-20 with traverse.
In response to applicant argument that action fails to independent and distinct analysis and unity of invention is only relevant to national stage applications.
The examiner agreed with the applicant, the unity of invention analysis is irrelevant to this application. It was erroneous and the improper paragraph was used, and the corrected election of species paragraph /analysis is provided below. However, the restriction still stands, the restriction requires to elect one species, even though the Current claims language is generic, it is still required to elect one species and make sure future amendment are directed to the elected species stay generic. the species shown in the different embodiments have different structure and features, for example the device Fig 6D has rollers and Figure 3 alternative design does not require rollers.
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species:
Species I – FIGs. 3-4
Species II – FIG. 5A-5C
Species III – FIG. 6A-6I
Species IV – FIG.7
The species are independent or distinct because the claims to the different species recite the mutually exclusive characteristics of such species. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record, they are different alternative structures.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, claim 1-20 appears to be generic.
There is a search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply: searching each of the above listed species may require different class and/or subclass searching, and would require employing different keyword search strategies.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species or a grouping of patentably indistinct species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be amended in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(b) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. Any amendment of inventorship must be accompanied by a request under 37 CFR 1.48(b) and by the fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is 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.
Claims recites in line 2 “ a shat, the shaft couple to the base…” and in line 5 it recites “…a first lever coupled to a shaft ...”. It is not clear whether is it referring to the same shaft or it is a another different shaft.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Buonauro [US Pub # 2002/0100340].
Regarding claim 1: Buonauro shows a device comprising: a base (shifter housing); a shaft (40), the shaft couple to the base; a sled coupled to the base , the sled configured to translate along a sled axis; a first guide plate coupled to the sled (64), the first guide plate (58) including a first channel (see fig 10); and a first lever (30) coupled to a shaft (40) and having a first end and a second end, the first end including a first guide pin (104) that is positioned within the first channel such that as the sled translates along the sled axis, the first guide pin (32) moves along the first channel to cause the second end of the first lever to rotate about the shaft (40).
Regarding claim 2: Buonauro shows wherein, due to the first guide pin (32) of the first end of the lever (30) being configured to move through a path of the channel as the sled (64) translates along the sled axis, the amount of rotation of the second end is a function of the path of the first channel and length of the first lever.
Regarding claim 3: Buonauro shows wherein, due to the first guide pin (32) of the first end of the lever (30) being configured to move through a path of the channel (see fig 10) as the sled translates along the sled axis, the direction of rotation of the second end about the shaft (40) is a function of the path of the first channel.
Regarding claim 4: Buonauro shows wherein the second end rotates about the shaft (40) toward the direction the sled (64) translates.
Regarding claim 5: Buonauro shows wherein the second end rotates about the shaft (40) away from the direction the sled (64) translates.
Regarding claim 6: Buonauro shows wherein the first lever further comprises: a first segment ( S1, segment of the first lever 30, see markup fig 10) coupled to the shaft (40) and extending away from the sled in a first direction; a second segment (S2, see markup fig 10) coupled to the first segment and extending in second direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction; and a third segment (S3, see markup fig 10) coupled to the second segment and extending in a third direction substantially perpendicular to the second direction.
Regarding claim 7: Buonauro shows wherein at least one of: the third direction is substantially parallel to the first direction; or the second segment (S2) is curved such that the first, second, and third portions of the first lever form a U-shape (see markup fig 10).
Regarding claim 8: Buonauro shows wherein the device further includes: a second guide plate (58) coupled to the sled (64), the second guide plate (58) including a second channel (see fig 10).
Regarding claim 9: Buonauro shows wherein the first channel and the second channel have different paths.
Regarding claim 10: Buonauro shows wherein the device further includes: a second lever (30) coupled to the shaft and including a second guide pin (32) that is positioned within the second channel (see fig 10) such that as the sled translates along the sled axis: the first guide pin (32) moves along the first channel to cause the first lever (30) to rotate about the shaft (40), and the second guide pin moves along the second channel to cause the second lever (30) to rotated about the shaft.
Regarding claim 11: Buonauro shows wherein as the sled (64) translates from a first end on the sled axis to a second end on the sled axis: due to the first channel and the second channel, the first lever (30) rotates from a first position to a second position while the second lever remains stationary.
Regarding claim 13: Buonauro shows wherein as the sled translates along the sled axis, the first guide pin and the second guide pin simultaneously move along their respective channels (59).
Regarding claim 14: Buonauro shows wherein the base is mounted such that gravity applies a force to the sled along the sled axis (gravity is applies force on any object)).
Regarding claim 15: Buonauro shows further comprising a mechanism configured to, after the sled (64) has moved past a threshold point while translating in a first direction, prevent the sled from mast past the threshold point while translating in a second direction opposite the first direction (at the end pint of element 62).
Regarding claim 16: Buonauro shows wherein the second end includes an output coupling (72) location that is coupled to an engine input.
Regarding claim 17: Buonauro shows wherein causing the second end of the first lever (30) to rotate about the shaft controls the engine input.
Regarding claim 18: Buonauro shows wherein the engine input is an input to an engine of a rotorcraft (intended of use).
Regarding claim 19: Buonauro shows wherein the sled (64) is configured to translate along the sled axis in accordance with displacement of an electromechanical actuator (60) that is coupled to the sled.
Regarding claim 20: Buonauro shows wherein the sled (64) translates along the sled axis on a rail of the base (housing).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 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.
The prior art failed to show wherein as the sled translates from the first end on the sled axis to the second end on the sled axis: due to the first channel and the second channel, after the first lever is in the second position, the second lever rotates from a third position to a fourth position while the first lever remains stationary.
PNG
media_image1.png
484
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKARIA ELAHMADI whose telephone number is (571)270-5324. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10-6 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minnah Seoh can be reached on 571-270-7778. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZAKARIA ELAHMADI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights