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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okamoto et al. (US 2019/0085762).
Regarding claim 1,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
A device (Fig. 2A all elements) for controlling a motor (31) which drives, under speed feedback control (¶0076), rotation of a rotary body (32a) with a stopper (37a) that regulates a rotation angle (¶0054) and is configured to limit a current supplied (Fig. 5A, CL0) to the motor when an absolute value of a deviation between a target rotation speed of the motor and an actual rotation speed of the motor remains within a predetermined range for a predetermined time (¶0127).
Regarding claim 2,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
wherein when the absolute value of the deviation between the target rotation speed of the motor and the actual rotation speed of the motor remains within the predetermined range for the predetermined time (¶0127), it is determined that the rotation angle of the rotary body is regulated by the stopper (¶0128).
Regarding claim 3,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
wherein the current supplied to the motor is limited to a predetermined current limit value (CL1, CL2, CL3, CL4, ¶0127).
Regarding claim 8,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
wherein when the current supplied to the motor is limited (CL2) and the rotation of the motor is consequently stopped, the current limit value is gradually increased (increased from CL2 to CL3, ¶0119, ¶0123).
Regarding claim 9,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
wherein when the current supplied to the motor is limited, if the absolute value of a speed deviation between the target rotation speed of the motor and the actual rotation speed of the motor remains within the predetermined range for the predetermined time (¶0127), it is determined whether the rotation angle of the rotary body is regulated by the stopper based on a previous value of the speed deviation and a current value of the speed deviation (¶0093, ¶0127), and wherein when it is determined that the rotation angle of the rotary body is not regulated by the stopper, the current limit value is gradually increased (¶0119, ¶0123).
Regarding claim 10,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
A method for controlling a motor (Fig. 2A all elements), the method comprising causing a device for controlling a motor (31) which drives, under speed feedback control, rotation of a rotary body (32a) with a stopper (37a) that regulates a rotation angle (¶0054) to limit a current supplied to the motor (Fig. 5A, CL0) when an absolute value of a deviation between a target rotation speed of the motor and an actual rotation speed of the motor remains within a predetermined range for a predetermined time (¶0127).
Regarding claim 11,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
wherein when the absolute value of the deviation between the target rotation speed of the motor and the actual rotation speed of the motor remains within the predetermined range for the predetermined time (¶0127), it is determined that the rotation angle of the rotary body is regulated by the stopper (¶0128).
Regarding claim 12,
Okamoto discloses (Fig. 2A):
wherein the current supplied to the motor is limited to a predetermined current limit value (CL1, CL2, CL3, CL4, ¶0127).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 and 13-15 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/4/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments pertaining to claims 1-3 and 8-12,
Applicant argues that Okamoto does not disclose the device being configured to limit the current supplied to the motor when a particular speed-feedback condition is satisfied, namely when an absolute value of a deviation between a target rotation speed of the motor and an actual rotation speed of the motor remains within a predetermined range for a predetermined time.
However, Fig. 7 and ¶0127 show how a current limit is applied based on the rotation velocity or the difference between the actual rotation speed and the target are within a range. Furthermore, in ¶0127, Okamoto explicitly discloses how “During a period in which the absolute value of the rotation speed is equal to or greater than that of the predetermined rotation velocity RSL3, the electric current limit value CL is maintained at the electric current limit value CL2.”. As such, examiner believes this sentence and Fig. 7 to read upon the above claim limitation.
Applicant also argues that Okamoto does not teach a velocity but a position of a stopper, however, this is shown in Fig.7 as well as ¶0127 where a rotation velocity is explicitly disclosed.
Furthermore, applicant argues that Okamoto teaches an amount of change in the output of an angle sensor measured relative to the output value of the sensor related to the contact state of the stopper, this, as known in the art, is a velocity because it is a rate of change of a position, this is also taught in ¶0122-¶0127, where the control shaft reaches a contact position, with a stopper, and a velocity is calculated and the current is limited.
As such, examiner is maintaining the rejections of claims 1-3 and 8-12.
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 CHARLES S LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7244. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/C.S.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2837 /KAWING CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights