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 . 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1270363 A1 in view of EP 0374697 A1.
Referring to Claim 1: EP 1270363 teaches a sensor arrangement (3) for a railway system, the sensor arrangement comprising:
a sensor (4) that is configured to measure a spatial position of at least a segment of a movable railway element (2) of the railway system by a contactless measurement and to differentiate between at least two different spatial positions of the segment (34) of the movable railway element (Fig. 1) (see attached EPO translation, Para. [0012]),
As noted by strikethrough above, EP 1270363 does not specifically teach a rail claw that is connectable to a rail of the railway system and mechanically connected to the sensor. However, EP 0374697 teaches a device for attaching switching and measuring devices, wherein a rail claw (4) is connectable to a rail (1, 2, 3) of the railway system and mechanically connected (via 21) to the sensor (20) (Fig. 2) (see attached EPO translation, Para. [0014]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for EP 1270363 to use a rail claw that is connectable to a rail of the railway system and mechanically connected to the sensor, as taught by EP 0374697, in order to reliably secure the sensor to the rail with a reasonable expectation of success.
Referring to Claim 2: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the movable railway element (2) comprises a tongue rail (26) (Fig. 1) (Para. [0012]).
Referring to Claim 3: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the sensor (4) comprises at least one contactless position sensor (Fig. 1) (Para. [0012]).
Referring to Claim 4: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the sensor (4) comprises at least one metal sensor (“inductive sensors”) (Para. [0012]).
Referring to Claim 5: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the sensor (24) comprises at least one inductive sensor (24).
Referring to Claim 8: EP 1270363 does not specifically teach a further rail claw and further sensor being mechanically connected with one another. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a duplicate, mechanically connected, rail claw and sensor, in order to provide additional sensing along different points in the rail with a reasonable expectation of success. Further, has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B).
Referring to Claim 9: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the sensor (4) is configured to differentiate between at least three different spatial positions of the segment of the movable railway element (2) (Fig. 1) (Para. [0008]).
Referring to Claim 10: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the sensor (4) is configured to differentiate between a plurality of different spatial positions of the segment of the movable railway element (2) (Fig. 1) (Para. [0008]).
Referring to Claim 11: EP 1270363 further teaches the sensor arrangement (3), wherein the sensor (4) comprises an output and the sensor is configured to provide the measured spatial position at the output (Figs. 1-4) (Para. [0014]).
Referring to Claim 12: EP 1270363 teaches a method for monitoring a railway system, the method comprising:
measuring a spatial position of at least a segment of a movable railway element (2) of the railway system by a contactless measurement by a sensor (4) (Fig. 1) (Para. [0012]),
wherein
the sensor (4) is configured to differentiate between at least two different spatial positions of the segment of the movable railway element (2) (Fig. 1) (Para. [0008]), and
As noted by strikethrough above, EP 1270363 does not specifically teach a rail claw that is connectable to a rail of the railway system and mechanically connected to the sensor. However, EP 0374697 teaches a device for attaching switching and measuring devices, wherein a rail claw (4) is connectable to a rail (1, 2, 3) of the railway system and mechanically connected (via 21) to the sensor (20) (Fig. 2) (see attached EPO translation, Para. [0014]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for EP 1270363 to use a rail claw that is connectable to a rail of the railway system and mechanically connected to the sensor, as taught by EP 0374697, in order to reliably secure the sensor to the rail with a reasonable expectation of success.
Referring to Claim 13: EP 1270363 further teaches the method comprising arranging the sensor (4) below the movable railway element (2) (Fig. 1) (Para. [00012]).
Referring to Claim 14: EP 1270363 further teaches the method, wherein the sensor (4) is arranged below the movable railway element (2) without mechanical contact to the movable railway element (Fig. 1) (Para. [0002]).
Referring to Claim 15: EP 1270363 further teaches the method further comprising providing the measured spatial position at an output of the sensor (4) (Figs. 1-4) (Para. [0014]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1270363 A1 in view of EP 0374697 A1 and Rosenberger et al. (US 2018/0029619 A1) (hereinafter “Rosenberger ‘619”).
Referring to Claim 6: EP 1270363 does not specifically teach that the sensor comprises at least one capacitive sensor. However, Rosenberger ‘619 teaches a “sensor arrangement for railway monitoring, the position sensor comprises one or more of a capacitive sensor, a mechanical sensor, an optical sensor, a strain gage sensor, a piezoelectric sensor or a radar sensor.” (Para. [0030]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for EP 1270363 to use a capacitive sensor, as Rosenberger ‘619 teaches that capacitive and inductive sensors are well-known sensor alternatives, since capacitive sensors are reliable and provide high location accuracy with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1270363 A1 in view of EP 0374697 A1 and EP 1857344 A1.
Referring to Claim 7: EP 1270363 does not specifically teach that the sensor is a two-channel sensor. However, EP 1857344 teaches a two-channel sensor for detecting railway light signal conditions (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for EP 1270363 to use a two-channel sensor, as taught by EP 1857344, in order to provide redundancy and reliability with the sensor output with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The references made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references have a common inventor with the instant application and are highly interrelated: US-10737710-B2, US-20240409137-A1, US-20240409136-A1 and US-20240409135-A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY L KUHFUSS whose telephone number is (571)270-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00am to 6:00 pm CDT.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached on (571)272-6682. 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.
/ZACHARY L KUHFUSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615A
Prosecution Insights