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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/1/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: ACTUATOR HAVING A REDUCED LOGITUDINAL DIMENSION.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satoshi et al. (JP 2019187028; IDS; 028’) in view of Tamura et al. (US 2015/0038277; 277’), and further in view of Hiroshi et al. (JP 2004166481; IDS; 481’).
In claim 1, 028’ teaches (Fig. 1-2) an actuator (1) comprising: an electric motor (2); a first gear (51) disposed on an output shaft (14) of the electric motor (2); a second gear (52) magnetically interacting with the first gear (31) to cooperate with the first gear (51) and transmit a rotation of the output shaft (14) as a decelerated rotation; a worm (32) extending in a direction parallel to the output shaft (14), the second gear (51) being disposed on one end side of the worm (32) in a direction of extension of the worm (32); a worm wheel (54) meshed with the worm (32) and situated on a same side as the output shaft (14) relative to the worm (32); and a control board (40) for controlling the electric motor (22), the control board (40) being situated between the electric motor (2) and the worm wheel (54).
028’ does not teach wherein the first gear is meshed with the second gear, and the control board including a connector for an external connection.
However, 277’ teaches (Fig. 1-3) an actuator (A) having a first gear (31B) meshed with the second gear (33B).
Therefore in view of 277’, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to transmit rotation from the output shaft to the worm (277’; [0061]).
481’ further teaches (Fig. 1-2) an actuator (1) having a control board (13) including a connector (19) for an external connection.
Therefore in view of 481’, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide a structure such that the actuator can be connected to electrical circuit components (481’; Page 10; NPL English Translation).
In claim 2, 028’ as modified teaches the actuator of claim 1; furthermore 028’ teaches wherein the control board (33) is situated such that a board surface of the control board (33) faces the output shaft (14), and wherein a power supplier (39; as taught by 481’) configured to supply a brush with an electric power and a sensor (44) configured to sense a rotation of the electric motor (2) are mounted on a part of the control board facing the output shaft (14).
In claim 3, 028’ as modified teaches the actuator of claim 2; furthermore 028’ teaches wherein the control board (33) is situated on a side opposite to the worm (32) across the output shaft (14).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tanaka et al. (US 2018/0248448) teaches a motor having a speed reduction mechanism with paired surface parts.
Ozaki et al. (US 2013/0285492) teaches an axial direction of a worm wheel defined as a motor short-transverse direction, and a plane orthogonal to the motor short-transverse direction defined as a motor flat plane.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAD H JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-5pm.
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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
RASHAD H. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/RASHAD H JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights