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.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/13/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/20/has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The examiner finds that the specification does not reasonably provide enablement for the claimed “drive ring carried by said support shaft…for translation along said axis”. The specification merely recites the same language as the claim without any explanation to how, when or why the drive ring(s) translate along the central axis. There is no disclosure of any structure that would allow for the translation of these components. The alignment of the drive rings and the drive wheels with the transmission members depend on the axial position of the drive rings and wheels, and any translation would necessarily need to be compensated for. There is no discussion in the specification nor any structure depicted in the drawings to provide for such compensation. The state of the prior art, which one skilled in the art would have known at the time the application was filed, about the subject matter to which the claimed invention pertains, does not teach the necessary structure to make and use the invention to have the claimed results.
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 1-17 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 1, lines 7-8 recite “a drive ring carried by said support shaft for rotation about said central axis and for translation along said axis” which is unclear and renders the claims indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear how the drive ring translates along the axis while still functioning as claimed.
Claim 1, lines 9-10 recite “wherein the drive ring is driven in rotation by the transmission member having a body and a first end of which, the driven end” which is unclear and renders the claims indefinite. First, the claim language does not clearly define if the ‘body” and “first end” are describing the drive ring or the transmission member. Additionally, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the driven end” in the claims.
Claim 1, lines 11-12 recite “and the a second end” which is unclear and renders the claims indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the a second end”. This appears to be a typo and should instead read - - and a second end- -.
Claim 1, lines 13-14 recite “the carrier shaft” which lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 1, line 15 recites “the carrier shaft” which lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 1, lines 15-18 are generally unclear and render the claims indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear how many of each recited component are required by the claim, and how these components are structurally related. The recitation “and in that each of the traction devices is a traction shaft rotating about an axis…” makes it unclear if there is two traction shafts, and if each traction shaft has a drive wheel, or more than one drive wheel. Lastly, the recitation of “the corresponding transmission member” is unclear, as only a single transmission member is previously claimed. The number of transmission members required by the claims cannot be determined.
Claim 2, line 3 recites “a second transmission member” which is unclear and the claims are rendered indefinite, as the number of transmission members required by the claims cannot be determined. That is, it is unclear if “a second transmission member” is on of “the corresponding transmission member” or an additional transmission member.
Claim 6, line 2 recites “each strap transmission member” which lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 7 recites “the cable is looped on itself by a splice and the belt by a seam” which is unclear and renders the claims indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear if the claim requires a cable, a belt or some combination of both.
Claim 8 recites “the driven end of the transmission member” which is unclear and renders the claims indefinite. While the number of transmission members required by the claims cannot be determined, it appears to be more than one, and the transmission member referenced by “the driven end of the transmission member” cannot be determined. Subsequent recitations of “the transmission member” in the claim are similarly unclear.
Claim 10, line 3, recites “the traction shaft is common to the traction device” which is unclear and renders the claim indefinite. Specifically, claim 1 previously recites “each one of the traction devices is a traction shaft” which is inconsistent with the language of claim 10. It is unclear how a traction shaft can be common to a traction device while also being a traction device. Additionally, multiple traction devices are previously claimed and it is unclear which traction device is being referenced.
Claim 10 recites “this traction shaft”, “this drive wheel” and “these drive wheels” which is unclear and renders the claim indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear which traction shaft and drive wheel (s)is being referenced by the claim, and how many traction shafts and drive wheels are required by the claims.
Claim 11 recites “the drive wheels” which is unclear and renders the claim indefinite, as the number of drive wheels required by the claims cannot be determined.
Claims 12 and 13 each recite “each drive wheel” which is unclear for the same reasons given for claim 11 above.
Claim 13 recites “the angular sector” which lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 14 recites “the predefined maximum angle” which lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 15 recites “the common traction shaft” which lacks antecedent basis in the claims.
Claim 15 recites “each drive wheel” which is unclear for the same reasons given for claim 11 above.
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) 1-13, 15 and 17, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 2136104 A1 (hereinafter D1).
D1 discloses an assembly of a mechanical drive connection for rotating a support shaft of a structure which rotates about a central axis of the support shaft driven by said connection, the assembly comprising: at least one traction device (1/3/10);a transmission member (4/5) a drive ring (21) carried by said support shaft (2) for rotation about said central axis and for translation along said axis (as best can be understood, support shaft can translate along the axis at least during installation); wherein the drive ring is driven in rotation by the transmission member having a body (see Fig. 2) and a first end (see Fig. 2 where 24/25 indicated) fitted to the drive ring and wound around said ring; and a second end (see Fig. 1 where 24/25 are indicated) fitted into the traction device causing the transmission member to unwind from the drive ring and causing the support shaft to rotate in a given direction; a rotation in the opposite direction being generated by a second traction device (the other of 1/3) connected to the support shaft; each of the traction devices is a traction shaft (as best understood, 10) rotating about an axis of rotation parallel to the central axis of rotation; and comprising a drive wheel (1/3) which winds up the corresponding transmission member; the connection between the second traction device and the support shaft is made by a second transmission member (other of 4/5) also having a body and two ends (see Figs. 1-2), fitted at one end to a second rive ring (other portion of 21) also positioned on the support shaft, its other end being fitted into the second traction device;
Wherein the drive rings are united (united via shaft 2) and form a single part (considered a single part once assembled); wherein each transmission member is looped on itself (see Fig. 1) to form an elongate bracelet extending in a plane perpendicular to the central axis of rotation of the support shaft;
wherein each bracelet transmission member is made of a flexible material (see Figures, transmission members are clearly flexible); wherein each strap transmission member is of a type selected from a cable (see Figures) and a belt; wherein the cable is looped on itself by a splice (41/51); wherein each drive ring is equipped with a fastener for securing the driven end of the transmission member, this fastener comprising at least one fixing bar (24/25) which holds the transmission member directly to the drive ring; wherein each drive wheel, drive ring, and corresponding transmission member form a connecting group (see Fig 1) extending in a plane perpendicular to the central axis of the support shaft;
wherein the traction shaft is common to the traction device and one of the rive wheels (1) is fixed to this traction shaft, the other drive wheel (3) being fixed to this drive wheel by a tensioning mechanism (7) aching an angular adjustment between these drive wheels; wherein the drive wheels have a radius greater than (see Figs 1-2) that of the drive rings and form an angular sector (see Figs. 1-2) defined by an angle dependent on the radius of the drive rings, the radius of the drive wheels and a predefined maximum angle of rotation of the support shaft (all of the dimensions of the system are interdependent and matters of routine design); wherein each drive wheel is equipped with an engagement device (see Figs. 1 and 2 where 14/34 are indicated) for winding the drive end of the transmission member comprising a tension terminal (14/34) extending in a plane perpendicular to the central axis of the support shaft; wherein the engagement device of each drive wheel is positioned along a radial side (see Fig. 1) of the angular second and the drive end (see Fig. 1) of the transmission member is folded along (see Fig, 1) this radial side; wherein the common traction shaft has an activation device (page 3 paragraph 3 of provided machine translation, “lever” not shown) which drives its rotation and that of each drive wheel; and wherein the drive rings and the drive wheels are made of metal (see Page 4, last paragraph of machine translation, steel).
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) 14, as best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1.
D1 discloses the claimed invention, except for wherein the predefined maximum angle of rotation of the support shaft is 300 degrees.
D1 instead states that the extreme angular position produces a rotation of the support shaft 2 is “about 296 degrees” (page 5, 2nd to last paragraph of provided machine translation).
The selection of a predefined maximum angle of rotation of a shaft is one of many requirements determined by routine engineering design, and the selection of such an angle only requires routine skill in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the device of D1 to have the predefined maximum angle be 300 degrees, as 300 degrees can be considered “about 296 degrees” and the selection of such an angle suitable for a given intended use only requires routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 16, as best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Salisbury, Jr. et al. (USPN 11,951,619).
D1 discloses the claimed invention, except for wherein the bracelet transmission members are made of a material chosen from composites and metals.
The use of metal and composite cables is well known in the art of cable actuators.
Salisbury discloses an actuator having a cable that “may be made of steel or alloys thereof, synthetic materials, composite materials such as carbon fiber reinforced plastic, and Kevlar (Column 5, lines 13-17).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the device of D1 to have metal or composite cables, as the selection of a material suitable for a given intended use only requires routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAKE COOK whose telephone number is (571)272-5968. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
JAKE COOK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3618
/Jake Cook/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618