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 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.
Claims 6-7 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.
Claim 6 recites “all parts” and “all the sensors” without specifying what constitutes the relevant set of parts. Since the open-ended transitional phrase “comprising” was used in the claim (see MPEP §2111.03), the scope is obscured since additional, unrecited parts which may be present but not claimed, making it ambiguous and indefinite which parts must be included to satisfy “all parts.” Appropriate action is required.
Claim 7 recites “all the sensors” without specifying what constitutes the relevant set of parts. Since the open-ended transitional phrase “comprising” was used in the claim (see MPEP §2111.03), the scope is obscured since additional, unrecited parts which may be present but not claimed, making it ambiguous and indefinite which parts must be included to satisfy “all the sensors.” In an additional layer of complication, claim 7 presents “sensors” which is written in a way to distinguish from previously presented torque and speed sensor from claim 1. Would “all the sensors” only include the sensors presented in claim 7 and exclude torque and speed sensor, would it include all claimed sensors, or will it include unclaimed sensors that are disclosed in the Specification but not included in the claim (such as the acceleration sensor) due to the open-ended transitional phrasing? Lack of clarity involving which set of sensors is covered within the bounds of the claim renders this claim indefinite. Appropriate action is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Non-Patent Literature titled, “Design and Analysis the Model of Reliability Testing Equipment of High-Speed Train Transmission System” (herein Niu) in view of CN 209170837U (herein Yang).
Regarding claim 1, Niu teaches An experimental system for simulating a gear transmission of an electric multiple unit under wheel-rail excitation, comprising
a platform base plate (see to plate of vibration beam assembly found in Fig. 3.4),
a gear transmission experimental table and an excitation device (specimen mounting and fixing assembly, p. 26, Fig. 3.4),
wherein the gear transmission experimental table comprises a load motor (load motor, Fig. 3.4) and a drive motor (drive motor, Fig. 3.4) which are arranged on both sides of a gear transmission system (8);
a
a plum coupling (13) (flexible floating gear coupling, p. 23),
a torque and speed sensor (12) (torque-speed measurement system, p. 23),
a
the gear transmission experimental table is arranged on an upper surface of the platform base plate (Fig. 3.4 teaches platform and torque flexible assembly on the upper surface);
the excitation device is arranged below the platform base plate (1) (Fig. 3.4 teaches vibration beam assembly below torque flexible assembly);
during operation, power is transmitted to the gear transmission system (8) by the drive motor (14) through the plum coupling (13) and the double-cross splined universal coupling II (11) (gearbox is connected to the drive motor via the flexible coupling. The power transmission system provides driving force for the entire vehicle and smoothly outputs driving torque, p. 1; Fig. 3.4 teaches arrangement of this operation);
vibration signals input and output during operation of the drive motor (14) are acquired by the torque and speed sensor (12) through the plum coupling (13) (p. 28 teaches simulation of vibration signals; p. 3 teaches obtaining vibration detection signals, using bench found in Fig. 3.4);
a load torque is applied to the gear transmission system (8) by the load motor (4) through the double-cross splined universal coupling I (6) (gearbox is connected to the drive motor via the flexible coupling. The power transmission system provides driving force for the entire vehicle and smoothly outputs driving torque, p. 1; Fig. 3.4 teaches arrangement of this operation);
sinusoidal excitation is output by the excitation device according to a frequency required by an experiment along a vertical direction to knock the platform base plate (1), and the wheel-rail excitation received by the gear transmission system (8) during operation of the electric multiple unit is simulated (p. 40 teaches corresponding sinusoidal excitation frequency and amplitude sufficient to facilitate hydraulic cylinder motion); and
a dynamic response and a dynamic stress of the gear transmission system (8) are acquired (p. 38-49 teach response curves from vibration; p. 51-52 teach stress results).
Regarding claim 2, Niu teaches a motor support I (5) and a motor support II (15), wherein the motor support I (5) and the motor support II (15) are both mounted on the upper surface of the platform base plate (1); the load motor (4) is mounted on the motor support I (5); and the drive motor (14) is mounted on the motor support II (15) (Fig. 3.4 teaches platforms under load motor and drive motor, with corresponding motors mounted on platforms).
Additionally regarding claims 1 and 2, Niu does not teach the couplings being double-cross splined universal couplings. However, Yang teaches spline and double-cross axis universal joints 7 are known in the art (p. 4, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to simply substitute the couplings of Niu with the couplings of Yang because both perform the same function of transmitting power between a motor and a transmission system. The above findings satisfies the Graham factual inquiries stated in MPEP 2143 B regarding simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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.
Regarding claim 3, Niu teaches that equivalent frame- or body-suspended transmission systems are known in the art, with one configured on a bogie crossbeam hanging via a hanger rod (p. 23; see also p. 5-6), but none teach the particular arrangement presented in the instant claim.
Regarding claims 4-5, Niu teaches corresponding bearing seats for axles (p. 23, see schematics in Fig. 3.4), and though not explicitly described, sleeves support plates, springs are known in the art are shown in schematic in Fig. 3.4. Additionally, acceleration is taught to be derived on p. 37. But the particular specificity of the present inventions are not taught by the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP FADUL whose telephone number is (571)272-5411. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8pm-6pm.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/PHILIP T FADUL/Examiner, Art Unit 2852