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 .
________________________________________
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed June 24, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
boundary.
________________________________________
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because "larger magnetic field then central coils" should read "larger magnetic field than central coils." Claim 17 is objected to because "the surface is removable attached" should read "the surface is removably attached." Claim 21 is objected to because "adjacent to one and another" should read "adjacent to one another."
________________________________________
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The phrase "wherein at least once two series of coils are interrupted" does not establish a reasonably certain relationship among "at least once," "two series of coils," and "are interrupted." It is unclear whether the claim requires a single plate that interrupts two series of coils at one location, at least two interruptions, or a different arrangement.
Suggested Correction - Claim 6
Applicant may consider amending the phrase, if consistent with the original disclosure and intended scope, to read: "wherein, at one or more locations along the track, at least two series of coils are interrupted by at least one of an electrically conducting plate and a permanent-magnet plate."
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.-Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 15, 18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form.
Claim 15 recites an infrastructure "for a method according to claim 1" but does not incorporate all of the method steps of claim 1, including providing the vehicle module and performing the lifting, horizontal transfer, deceleration, and set-down steps. Claim 18 recites a vehicle module "for a method according to claim 1" but likewise does not include all limitations of the referenced method. Claim 21 recites a series of coils "for the infrastructure of claim 15" but does not incorporate all limitations of the referenced infrastructure, including the track, controller, locator, and power-supply limitations.
Suggested Correction - Claims 15, 18, and 21
Applicant may rewrite claims 15, 18, and 21 in independent form without purporting to depend from a claim of a different subject matter, or may amend each claim to incorporate every limitation of the referenced claim and then add a further limitation, provided that the amendment is supported by the original disclosure.
________________________________________
References Used
Reference 1 (Primary) - WO2020130804A1.
Reference 2 - US3815511A.
Reference 3 - JP2002238109A.
Reference 4 - US5722326A.
________________________________________
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 102 that forms 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.
Reference 1 was published in English on June 25, 2020, more than one year before the December 23, 2021 effective filing date of the present application, and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
________________________________________
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) A method of transferring a vehicle module over an infrastructure, comprising (L2) providing said infrastructure, wherein the infrastructure comprises at least one individual track, wherein each track comprises at least one series of coils, wherein series of coils extend in the direction of the width of the track, wherein each series of coils is adapted to provide a levitational magnetic force wherein coils are placed at a distance from one another, (L3) at least one switch per series of coils, wherein each coil individually can be energized by an electrical current and de-energized, wherein each coil is adapted to be energized in a pulsed mode, (L4) wherein on at least one side of the track side coils are provided adapted to provide a larger magnetic field than central coils at a central part of the track, (L5) at least one controller for energizing individual coils such that at a side of the track a larger magnetic field is provided than at a central part of the track, (L6) an electrical power supply for providing an electrical current, (L7) providing said vehicle module, wherein said vehicle module comprises an array of permanent magnets, at a bottom side thereof, (L8) providing a vertical magnetic field in the track at a location of the vehicle module, thereby lifting the module, (L9) providing a horizontal magnetic field in the track at a changing location of the vehicle module, thereby hovering the module at a certain speed in a horizontal direction over the track, (L10) providing an opposite magnetic field in the track controlling the horizontal magnetic field, thereby decelerating the module, and (L11) cancelling the vertical magnetic field in the track thereby letting the module down to the track.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses the NIFTI method for transferring vehicle module 20 over infrastructure 10. (L2) Infrastructure 10 includes individual track 11, multiple series or rows of spaced coils 12 extending across the width of track 11, with each row producing levitational and horizontal magnetic forces. (L3) Reference 1 provides at least one switch per coil row and optionally per coil, states that each coil is individually energized and de-energized, and uses a controller and relay board to pulse individual coil rows as vehicle module 20 travels over them. (L4) The tested eight-row by eight-coil array has reduced field intensity in the middle because neighboring coils dampen the central field, while the side or edge rows produce stronger edge effects and higher lift and propulsion-field contributions. Thus, the edge coils are side coils adapted to provide a larger magnetic field than the central coils. (L5) Reference 1 further discloses switching a single coil row at a time to obtain the higher edge-field contribution and discloses a controller that individually activates the rows according to a switching-time profile. The controller therefore energizes the side row independently so that the field at the side is larger than the dampened field at the central part. (L6) Infrastructure 10 includes an electrical power supply connected to the coil-switching hardware. (L7) Vehicle module 20 includes an array of permanent magnets 21 at bottom side 22. (L8) Energizing coils 12 provides a vertical magnetic field and gradient that lifts vehicle module 20. (L9) The coils provide a horizontal magnetic field at the changing vehicle location to propel or hover vehicle module 20 over track 11. (L10) Reference 1 cancels the horizontal field and/or provides an opposite magnetic field, including through side guiders 13, to decelerate the module. (L11) Reference 1 then cancels the vertical field to lower vehicle module 20 onto track 11.
________________________________________
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein at least once two series of coils are interrupted by at least one of an electrically conducting plate and permanent magnet plate, wherein the plate extends in a longitudinal direction and width direction of the track, and (L3) wherein each series of coils is located below a surface of the track, and wherein at least one coil and part thereof may or may not be tilted with respect to a perpendicular of the surface of the track.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 discloses two series of coils 12 interrupted by electrically conducting plate 14 and alternatively permanent-magnet plate 15, with the plate extending in both the longitudinal and width directions of track 11, as shown in Figure 5c. (L3) Figures 1 and 5a-5c place coils 12 below the track surface, and Reference 1 discloses both non-tilted and tilted coil-array configurations, including coils held in tilted positions by rack 18.
________________________________________
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) comprising an element selected from a series of coils whose respective centres are separated by a mutual distance of 1-50 cm, a track which has a width of 0.6-3 m, and a vehicle module which has a width of 0.6-3 m, and a vehicle module which has a length of 0.6-3 m, and an empty vehicle module which has a weight of 150-750 kg, and from a track which has a width of 0.05-0.3 m, and a vehicle module which has a width of 0.03-0.4 m, and a vehicle module which has a length of 0.05-0.4 m, and an empty vehicle module which has a weight of 0.05-2 kg, and from a track which has a width of 0.1-1.5 m, and a vehicle module which has a width of 0.1-1 m, and a vehicle module which has a length of 0.1-1 m, and an empty vehicle module which has a weight of 4-50 kg, at least two vehicle modules which are connectable, a coil, each individually, which has a length 1-60 cm, a coil, each individually, has a radius of 1-20 cm, a coil, each individually, has a thickness of 0.1-10 cm, a coil, each individually, has a number of windings n_c ∈[1,10000]/m, a coil, each individually, comprises an electrically conducting material, a series of coils is adapted to provide a magnetic field Bz of 10^-3-10^1 T, over a width of a track 1-100/m coils in series are provided, two series of coils are separated by a respective centre distance of 1-20 cm, a magnet comprises high magnetic density materials, a magnet comprises at least one magnetic material selected from Group 3-12, Period 4-6 elements, each coil individually is adapted to receive a current of 0.5-200 A, wherein a switch is adapted to switch within 1000 μsec, at least one switch per individual coil or per row of coils, and wherein each coil is adapted to be energized within 1-10^5 μsec.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) The claim requires an element selected from the recited alternatives. Reference 1 expressly discloses several alternatives within the claimed ranges, including 5-50 cm coil-row spacing, a track width of 0.6-3 m, a vehicle-module width and length of 0.6-3 m, a vehicle-module weight of 200-600 kg, coil length of 1-60 cm, coil radius of 1-20 cm, coil thickness of 0.1-10 cm, 1-10,000 windings per meter, 0.5-200 A coil current, and a switch per coil or coil row. Each disclosed range either equals or lies within the corresponding claimed range, and any one disclosed alternative satisfies the selected-element limitation.
________________________________________
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein each coil is energized in pulses with a duration of 1-100 msec, and wherein a length of a pulse is adapted to the speed of the vehicle module.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 discloses energizing each coil or coil row with pulses having a duration of 1-100 milliseconds and adapting pulse length to vehicle-module speed. Its prototype uses 50 millisecond simulated pulses and 100 millisecond experimental pulses in a speed-dependent switching sequence.
________________________________________
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the speed of the vehicle module is from 0-150 m/sec.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 expressly discloses a vehicle-module speed from 0-150 m/sec, including narrower preferred ranges within that range.
________________________________________
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein at least one of the vehicle module comprises an array of i∈[1,p] magnets with the same field orientation, 50-100% of the bottom of the vehicle is provided with magnets, magnets have a height of 1-25 cm, a length of all magnets is 20-200 cm; wherein magnets are provided above or below the bottom of the vehicle, wherein a total volume of magnets is 0.1*10^-3-100*10^-3 m^3, wherein a magnetic moment is 0.1-2000 Am^2, wherein coils provide an acceleration/deceleration of 0.01-10 m/sec^2, and wherein an additional braking mechanism provides a deceleration of 1-20 m/sec^2.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) The claim requires at least one listed alternative. Reference 1 discloses multiple alternatives, including magnets over 50-100% of bottom 22 of vehicle module 20, magnet height of 1-25 cm, total magnet length of 20-200 cm, magnets below bottom 22, total magnet volume of 0.1*10^-3 - 100*10^-3 m^3, magnetic moment of 0.1-2000 Am^2, coil acceleration of 0.01-10 m/sec^2, and guider deceleration of 1-20 m/sec^2.
________________________________________
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the controller is adapted to control hovering and propagation of the vehicle module, and/or wherein a multitude of vehicle modules is transferred, and wherein the infrastructure is partly or fully incorporated in an existing infrastructure, wherein at least one track, each individually, is covered by a protecting layer.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 discloses a controller that controls hovering and propagation of vehicle module 20, transferring many vehicle modules, incorporating infrastructure 10 into existing road infrastructure, and covering track 11 with protective polymer layer 16.
________________________________________
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the infrastructure comprises physical and controllable guiders, and guidance coils, wherein guidance coils are oriented accordingly.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Infrastructure 10 includes physical and controllable guiders 13 along the sides of track 11, energized guider sections 13a, and guidance coils oriented to control lateral vehicle motion, restriction, and deceleration.
________________________________________
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) A vehicle module for a method according to claim 1 wherein (L2) said vehicle module comprises an array of permanent magnets, (L3) at least one seat, (L4) an identifier, and (L5) control interface.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses the full method of claim 1 for the reasons stated above and separately discloses vehicle module 20 for that method. (L2) Vehicle module 20 has an array of permanent magnets 21 at bottom side 22. (L3) Vehicle module 20 includes at least one seat 23. (L4) Vehicle module 20 includes identifier 24 for vehicle control. (L5) Vehicle module 20 includes control interface 25, including a destination-entry interface or an interface implemented through a smartphone, computer, or network.
________________________________________
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) A method of transferring a vehicle module over an infrastructure according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the infrastructure comprises a multitude of interconnected tracks, and wherein each track comprises a plurality of series of coils.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 expressly discloses infrastructure 10 having a multitude of interconnected tracks 11 and multiple series or rows of coils 12 extending across each track.
________________________________________
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein in an inclined section of the track at least one series of coils is tilted over an angle α in a direction of the inclination.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 discloses tilted rows of coils 12, tilted coil positions in rack 18, and tested coil-row tilts of 30 degrees. Reference 1 does not expressly limit the disclosed tilt to an inclined track section or name the direction of an incline.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to orient the tilted coil row disclosed by Reference 1 in the direction of an inclined section of track 11 so that the coil field remains predictably directed relative to the inclined travel surface and continues to provide the intended lift and propulsion components. Reference 1 already teaches both tilted coil rows and use of track 11 in existing road infrastructure; applying the disclosed tilt where the road rises or falls is a predictable geometric placement of the same coil structure for its disclosed function.
________________________________________
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 4.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein in a left or right curved section of the track at least one series of coils is tilted inwards over an angle β.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 discloses tilted rows of coils 12 and controllable side guiders 13 for lateral restraint. Reference 4 discloses stationary track inductive circuits 31 having a tilted face matched to tilted vehicle pole arrays 30 to provide a lateral centering force. Reference 4 further explains that its track circuits provide automatic centering as the vehicle traverses a curved track section and counter centrifugal and other decentering influences. Reference 4 does not use Reference 1's particular transverse pulsed coil-row architecture.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to place Reference 1's disclosed tilted coil row in a left or right curved track section and orient the row inward in accordance with Reference 4's tilted track circuits so that the resulting magnetic-force component centers vehicle module 20 and counters centrifugal displacement through the curve. Reference 1 already supplies the pulsed transverse coil row and side-guidance objective, while Reference 4 teaches that an inwardly directed track-circuit geometry predictably provides the needed centering force on a curve. The combination retains Reference 1's coil control while applying Reference 4's established curved-guideway orientation to the same lateral-stability problem.
________________________________________
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the vehicle module is a monocoque, wherein the vehicle module comprises at least one composite, and wherein a drag coefficient of the vehicle C_D <0.3, and wherein a vehicle module impact on collision is minimized.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 teaches a monocoque vehicle module comprising a composite, a streamlined or droplet shape having a drag coefficient below 0.3, impact-resistant material, energy-absorbing zones, reduced vehicle mass, and a design that minimizes damage from collisions. Reference 1 presents these attributes as preferred features of the same NIFTI vehicle module but does not expressly require every attribute in one embodiment.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to implement Reference 1's NIFTI vehicle module 20 using its disclosed monocoque composite construction, sub-0.3 drag shape, and impact-minimizing structure together because Reference 1 identifies each feature for the same lightweight passenger module and explains their compatible benefits. Selecting those preferred features together predictably reduces structural mass and aerodynamic resistance while limiting collision damage, without changing the module's magnetic operation.
________________________________________
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) An infrastructure for a method according to claim 1, comprising (L2) at least one individual track, wherein each track comprises at least one series of coils, wherein series of coils extend in the direction of the width of the track, wherein each series of coils is adapted to provide a levitational magnetic force and a horizontal magnetic force, wherein the horizontal magnetic force is directed along the length direction of the track, wherein coils are placed at a distance from one another, (L3) at least one switch per series of coils, wherein each coil individually can be energized by an electrical current and de-energized, (L4) wherein on at least one side of the track side coils are provided adapted to provide a larger magnetic field then central coils at a central part of the track, (L5) a controller for energizing individual coils such that at a side of the track a larger magnetic field is provided than at a central part of the track, (L6) a vehicle module track-position locator, and (L7) an electrical power supply for providing an electrical current.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 discloses infrastructure 10 for the NIFTI method of claim 1. (L2) Infrastructure 10 includes individual track 11 and spaced transverse rows of coils 12 that provide vertical lift and horizontal propulsion along the track. (L3) Reference 1 provides switches for the rows and optionally for each coil, permitting individual energization and de-energization. (L4) Reference 1's tested array has dampened central fields and stronger edge-field contributions, so side coils provide a larger field than central coils. (L5) Its controller and relay board individually activate coil rows according to a time profile, including single-row activation that produces the stronger edge contribution. (L6) Reference 1 pulses a coil at the precise time vehicle module 20 is above it but does not separately identify the locator hardware. Reference 2 expressly provides track-position hardware: vehicle transmitter 34 and directional antenna 36 successively signal track-mounted receiving antennas 28, 30, and 32 located at prescribed positions relative to coils 14, thereby locating the vehicle relative to the track coils. (L7) Reference 1 provides the electrical power supply for coils 12.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Reference 2's transmitter 34 and track-mounted receivers 28, 30, and 32 into Reference 1's infrastructure 10 so the controller can determine when vehicle module 20 reaches each coil row and issue the precise individual-coil pulses that Reference 1 requires. Both references energize track coils as a vehicle-mounted magnet reaches a prescribed relative position. The combination therefore uses a known position-detection arrangement to perform Reference 1's stated timing function and predictably improves synchronization of lift and propulsion fields.
________________________________________
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The infrastructure according to claim 15, (L2) selected from an indoor infrastructure, a logistics infrastructure, a toy race track, a toy train track, a wafer transporter, an outdoor infrastructure, (L3) wherein in an inclined section of the track at least one series of coils is tilted over an angle α in a direction of the inclination.
Analysis
(L1) References 1 and 2 disclose the infrastructure of claim 15 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 expressly installs track 11 in existing road and bicycle-lane infrastructure, thereby disclosing the claimed outdoor-infrastructure alternative. (L3) Reference 1 discloses tilted rows of coils 12 and tilted coil positions in rack 18 but does not expressly locate the tilt on an inclined track section.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to orient Reference 1's tilted coil row in the direction of an inclined section of its outdoor road track so that the coil field remains predictably directed relative to the rising or falling travel surface while Reference 2's locator continues to synchronize energization. The modification applies Reference 1's disclosed tilt to a predictable road geometry without altering the combined infrastructure's operating principle.
________________________________________
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The infrastructure according to claim 15, (L2) comprising a hollow tube-like structure under the road, wherein a surface of the tube-like structure comprises a polymeric material, wherein the surface is removable attached, wherein in the tube-like structure coil receiving elements are provided.
Analysis
(L1) References 1 and 2 disclose the infrastructure of claim 15 for the reasons stated above. (L2) Reference 1 expressly discloses hollow tube-like structure 17 under the road, removable polymeric surface layer 16, and coil-receiving elements or rack 18 within tube 17, as shown in Figure 7. Reference 2 remains part of the inherited claim-15 combination for the track-position locator.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's hollow tube 17, removable polymer surface 16, and coil rack 18 when adding Reference 2's position locator because those support structures house and permit maintenance of the same track coils whose energization is synchronized by the locator. The elements perform their established functions together without interference.
________________________________________
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 3.
Claim Text
(L1) A series of coils for the infrastructure of claim 15, (L2) wherein, in the series of coils, coils are adjacent to one and another, and (L3) wherein each coil individually has an oblong shape with a width and a length, (L4) wherein the length is more than two times larger than the width.
Analysis
(L1) References 1 and 2 disclose the infrastructure of claim 15 for the reasons stated above, including transverse series of coils 12 and a synchronized track-position locator. (L2) Reference 3 discloses drive and propulsion electromagnetic coils 305 arranged successively and adjacently along coil-integrated monorail 601 and connected to slip rails 301, 302, and 303. (L3) Figures 3 and 4 of Reference 3 depict each coil 305 as an elongated or oblong loop having a longitudinal length and transverse width. (L4) Reference 3 does not state a numerical aspect ratio, but its depicted coils are substantially longer than they are wide and provide the same linear-motor track function.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 3's adjacent elongated propulsion coils 305 as the coil series 12 in the Reference 1 and Reference 2 infrastructure and to select a longitudinal length greater than twice the coil width to fit successive active conductors along the track while maintaining the required transverse packaging. Reference 3 teaches that coil geometry in the same linear-motor guideway environment, and selecting the aspect ratio is a predictable dimensional optimization of the disclosed oblong coil. The present specification identifies no critical threshold or unexpected result at the recited two-to-one
________________________________________
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, and 11 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected claim 1, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all limitations of claim 1.
________________________________________
Claim Disposition
Canceled Claims: 19 and 20.
Rejected Claims - 35 U.S.C. 112: 6, 15, 18, and 21.
Rejected Claims - 35 U.S.C. 102: 1, 6-10, 12, 13, 18, and 22.
Rejected Claims - 35 U.S.C. 103: 2, 3, 14-17, and 21.
Objected-to Claims: 4, 5, and 11.
Allowed Claims: None.
________________________________________
Conclusion
US8171858B2 was not used because its permanent-magnet guideway and coil-array teachings are less direct than WO2020130804A1 for the claimed NIFTI architecture and do not add the otherwise allowable junction-insert or magnet-strip matching limitations. US20200195118A1 was not used because its levitation and propulsion disclosure is also less complete than WO2020130804A1 for the individually pulsed transverse coil rows and the side-to-central field relationship.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights