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 .
OBJECTION TO DRAWINGS
The drawings are objected to because valve actuator motor is mentioned in spec (see spec., page 4, line 17). Valve actuator needs to be shown in fig.1. Limit switches included in the mechanical module needs to be shown (see spec., page 5, lines 10-15). Bidirectional actuation is mentioned (see Claim 1, page 2, lines 9-12) and needs to be shown and what is bidirectionally actuated? Claim 1 states (see claim 1, page 1, lines 6-8), “A power supply (1) powered from the mains (6) which is responsible for generating a voltage of 24V AC in order to power the other modules;” The power supply 1 is it a AC to DC power supply that converts 24V AC to DC to power the other modules and needs to be clarified and shown in fig.1 for proper understanding of the invention?
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Objection to Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: a valve actuator motor is mentioned in spec (see spec., page 4, line 17) and is not clear as to what kind of Valve actuator and in which field said valve actuator used for proper understanding of the invention?
Limit switches included in the mechanical module is mentioned (see spec., page 5, lines 10-15) and needs to be referenced in spec. and how they are connected relative to fig.1 needs to be shown. what is the mechanical module relative to fig.1? and what is the function of limit switches in the mechanical module relative to fig.1 needs to be shown.
Bidirectional actuation is mentioned (see Claim 1, page 2, lines 9-12) and needs to be shown and what is bidirectionally actuated?
Claim 1 states (see claim 1, page 1, lines 6-8 and fig.1), “A power supply (1) powered from the mains (6) which is responsible for generating a voltage of 24V AC in order to power the other modules;” The power supply 1 is it a AC to DC power supply that converts 24V AC to DC to power the other modules and needs to be clarified and shown in fig.1 for proper understanding of the invention?
The phrase (see Claim 1, page 2, lines 9-12, “A mechanical reducer (4) connected mechanically to the shaft of the brushless motor (5) which is connected to the control unit (3) by means of a set of connections for sending information and bidirectional actuation.”
What is the function of mechanical reducer connecting to the shaft of the motor? Is it a gear? What does it reduces? “Bidirectional actuation is mentioned and needs to be clarified relative to fig.1 and what is bidirectionally actuated?
Appropriate corrections and clarifications are required.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim 1 or 2. See MPEP § 608.01(n).
Claim 3 shown depended on multiple claims 1 OR 2 AND NEEDS TO CORRECTED.
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 1-3 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.
As to claim 1, (see claim 1, page 1, lines 6-8 and relative fig.1), “A power supply (1) powered from the mains (6) which is responsible for generating a voltage of 24V AC in order to power the other modules” is not clear. The power supply 1 is it an AC to DC power supply that converts 24V AC to DC to power the other modules and needs to be clarified and shown in fig.1 for proper understanding of the invention?
As to claim 1, The phrase (see Claim 1, page 2, lines 9-12, “A mechanical reducer (4) connected mechanically to the shaft of the brushless motor (5) which is connected to the control unit (3) by means of a set of connections for sending information and bidirectional actuation.”
What is the function of mechanical reducer connecting to the shaft of the motor? Is it a gear? What does it reduces?
“Bidirectional actuation is mentioned and needs to be clarified relative to fig.1 and what is bidirectionally actuated?
Appropriate corrections and clarifications required.
Allowable Subject-Matter
Claims 1-3 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 1, (closest prior art, ISHII TAKAAKI et al., WO 2014196065 A1) teaches (figs.1-9) a protection system 1 (fig.1) for a rotary motor 2 comprising: an AC to DC converter 11 powered from the AC power supply 4 to provide dc power to other power modules 12, 13;
ISHII TAKAAKI et al. teaches (page 4, 1st par., fig.1) when an abnormality (overtorque, overspeed) occurs, abnormality detection control unit 14 disconnect the connection between the inverter 10 and motor 2 via a disconnecting switch 20 by applying a signal to the open/close switch 25. ISHII TAKAAKI et al. teaches overvoltage protection of apparatus 3 and motor 2 (see abstract).
However, as to claim 1, ISHII TAKAAKI et al. fails to teach a rotation direction setter (2) which receives power from the power supply (1) by means of a power connection (1.2), wherein the rotation direction setter (2) has an opening and closing switch (7) at the inlet which is connected to an input power phase;
-A control unit (3) which receives power from the power - supply (1) by means of a power connection (1.1) and is connected to the rotation direction setter (2). The control unit is configurable and responsible for giving and receiving the instructions from the brushless motor;
-A brushless motor (5) which is connected to the control unit, specifically by means of: Two primary power connections (3.1); A third connection (3.2) to send an instruction from the on-off control unit to the motor (5);
A fourth connection (3.3) to send an opening/closing instruction from the control unit (3) to the motor (5); A fifth connection (3.4) to send the rotation revolutions of the motor (5) to the control unit;
-A mechanical reducer (4) connected mechanically to the shaft of the brushless motor (5) which is connected to the control unit (3) by means of a set of connections for sending information and bidirectional actuation.
Claims 1-3 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Formal requirements outstanding needs to be corrected and clarified (see Objection to drawings and specification and 35 USC 112 rejection).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTONY M PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1608. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am to 4 pm.
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, Mr. 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.
/ANTONY M PAUL/
Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2846