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 (IDS) submitted on 07/03/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
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 9 and 12-20 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 9
Claim 9 recites that the plurality of curved rails are “spaced a distance along the straight rail to enable the vehicle to turn down a first curved rail, of the plurality of curved rails, without interference from a second curved rail, of the plurality of curved rails.”
The phrase “without interference from a second curved rail” renders the scope of claim 9 unclear because the claim does not specify what type of interference is being excluded. It is unclear whether “interference” refers to physical collision or clearance, magnetic interference, actuator force interference, propulsion/guidance interference, vehicle envelope interference, or switching-control interference. The specification states that rail spacing may depend on the vehicle turning radius and/or the curved-rail radius. See Spec., paras. [0110]-[0111]. However, the claim does not recite an objective structural clearance, vehicle envelope, radius relationship, or magnetic/operational threshold by which the required spacing can be determined.
Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of claim 9.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claim 9 to specify the type of interference being avoided. For example, if physical interference is intended, the claim may recite that the plurality of curved rails are spaced such that a defined vehicle envelope following the first curved rail physically clears the second curved rail. If magnetic or operational interference is intended, the claim should recite the relevant magnetic or operational relationship.
CLAIM 12
Claim 12 recites that “the rail is one or more of flat, curved, and twisted” and that “the one or more electromagnetic actuators are positioned such that the one or more electromagnetic actuators are tangent to tightly curved rail surfaces, minimally curved rail surfaces, and straight rail surfaces.”
The terms “tightly curved” and “minimally curved” render claim 12 indefinite because they are relative terms of degree without objective boundaries in the claim. The claim does not recite a radius of curvature, curvature range, threshold, comparative standard, or structural relationship by which one of ordinary skill in the art can determine whether a rail surface is “tightly curved” rather than “minimally curved.” The specification discusses curved rails, straight/flat rails, and force authority as related to curvature, and provides an example in which a rail radius may be 5 meters. See Spec., paras. [0120], [0137]. However, the claim does not incorporate any objective limit that defines the transition between tightly curved, minimally curved, and straight rail surfaces.
Claim 12 is further indefinite because it is unclear whether the same electromagnetic actuator or same group of electromagnetic actuators must be tangent to tightly curved rail surfaces, minimally curved rail surfaces, and straight rail surfaces, or whether different actuators, different positions, or different operating states may satisfy the limitation. The phrase “the one or more electromagnetic actuators are positioned such that the one or more electromagnetic actuators are tangent to tightly curved rail surfaces, minimally curved rail surfaces, and straight rail surfaces” may be read as requiring simultaneous tangency to all three categories of rail surfaces, or alternatively as requiring tangency in different configurations. The claim does not specify which interpretation is intended.
Claim 12 is also unclear because it recites that the “electromagnetic actuators” are tangent to rail surfaces without identifying the portion of each actuator that is tangent. The specification refers to actuator surfaces and actuator orientation relative to rails, but the claim does not specify whether tangency is determined by an actuator pole face, housing face, ski-mounted actuator surface, magnetic pole plane, centerline, or other structural feature.
Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of claim 12.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claim 12 to recite objective curvature ranges or radius thresholds for the curved rail surfaces. Applicant may also specify whether tangency is simultaneous or occurs in alternative operating positions, and may identify the actuator surface or pole plane that is tangent to the rail surface.
CLAIM 13
Claim 13 recites “a sequence of actuators which have coplanar poles, including the one or more electromagnetic actuators, and at least one angled actuator disposed at an angle to other actuators.”
Claim 13 is indefinite because it is unclear whether the “at least one angled actuator” is part of the “sequence of actuators which have coplanar poles” or is a separate actuator in addition to that sequence. If the angled actuator is part of the sequence, the claim creates ambiguity as to how the sequence has coplanar poles while also including an actuator disposed at an angle to other actuators. If the angled actuator is separate from the sequence, the claim does not clearly state that separation.
Claim 13 is also indefinite because the phrase “disposed at an angle to other actuators” does not identify the structural reference for the angle. It is unclear whether the angle is measured between actuator pole faces, actuator housings, magnetic pole planes, actuator centerlines, ski mounting planes, or rail-facing surfaces. The phrase “other actuators” also lacks clear antecedent scope because it could refer to the sequence of actuators, the one or more electromagnetic actuators of claim 12, or all actuators in the system.
Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of claim 13.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claim 13 to clarify whether the angled actuator is included in the sequence or is separate from the sequence. Applicant may further specify the surfaces or planes that define the angle, such as an angled actuator pole face disposed at an angle relative to a coplanar pole plane of the sequence of actuators.
CLAIM 14
Claim 14 recites that “the at least one angled actuator is fixed at an angle such that the at least one angled actuator remains tangent to a tightly curved rail.”
Claim 14 is indefinite because it depends from claim 13 and inherits the ambiguity regarding the angled actuator and the undefined angle. Claim 14 also uses the term “tightly curved rail,” which lacks objective boundaries for the reasons stated above with respect to claim 12. Further, the phrase “remains tangent” is unclear because the claim does not specify whether the actuator remains tangent throughout vehicle travel, only at a design position, only when adjacent a particular rail portion, or only for a particular radius of curvature.
Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of claim 14.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claim 14 to recite a defined rail radius or radius range and specify the operating condition under which the angled actuator is tangent to the rail.
CLAIMS 15-18
Claims 15-18 depend, directly or indirectly, from indefinite claims 12 and/or 13 and therefore are indefinite for at least the same reasons.
Claim 16 additionally recites that “all of the actuators are movably positionable as a group.” The phrase “all of the actuators” should be clarified because claim 16 recites a “sequence of actuators, including the one or more electromagnetic actuators,” and it is not clear whether “all” refers only to the sequence, all electromagnetic actuators attached to the ski, or all actuators in the electromagnetic guidance system.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claim 16 to recite “all actuators of the sequence” or “the sequence of actuators is movably positionable as a group,” if that is the intended scope.
CLAIMS 19 AND 20
Claims 19 and 20 recite that the sequence of actuators is positionable using “an active mechanism” and “a passive system,” respectively.
The terms “active mechanism” and “passive system” render the claims indefinite because they do not identify the structure or objective operating criteria that distinguish an active mechanism from a passive system. The claims do not specify whether “active” requires powered control, electronic control, closed-loop control, a motor, a servo, a commanded actuator, or another structure. The claims also do not specify whether “passive” refers to a spring, compliant mount, rail-following linkage, self-aligning pivot, magnetic force response, gravity-based arrangement, or another structure. As drafted, the terms describe broad functional categories without sufficient structural boundaries.
Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of claims 19 and 20.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claims 19 and 20 to recite the particular active or passive structure used to position the sequence of actuators, and may state how that structure performs the positioning.
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 18-20 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
CLAIM 18
Claim 18 depends from claim 17 and recites that “the sequence of actuators are positionable using a force generated by the sequence of actuators interacting with the at least one rail.”
The specification discloses electromagnetic actuators interacting with rails to generate guidance forces, and discloses that actuators may be configured to pivot with respect to a shared axis. See, e.g., Spec., paras. [0120]-[0121], [0135]-[0137]. However, the specification does not describe a structure, control arrangement, linkage, pivot relationship, or operating sequence by which the force generated by the sequence of actuators interacting with the rail is used to position the sequence of actuators as a group. The cited disclosure describes generation of guidance/yawing forces and actuator tangency/force authority, but does not reasonably convey possession of using the actuator-generated rail force itself to reposition the actuator sequence.
Accordingly, the originally filed disclosure does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that Applicant was in possession of the subject matter of claim 18 at the time of filing.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claim 18 to recite the disclosed pivoting relationship, such as a ski or actuator support configured to pivot about a shared axis, if that is the intended scope. Alternatively, Applicant may identify specific support in the originally filed disclosure for the force-generated positioning mechanism.
CLAIMS 19 AND 20
Claim 19 recites that “the sequence of actuators are positionable using an active mechanism.” Claim 20 recites that “the sequence of actuators are positionable using a passive system.”
The specification does not appear to describe an “active mechanism” or a “passive system” for positioning the sequence of actuators. The terms “active mechanism” and “passive system” are not meaningfully linked in the specification to any structure or operating arrangement for positioning the actuator sequence, such as a powered actuator, motor, servo, controller-driven linkage, spring, biasing member, compliant mount, cam, rail-following linkage, or other positioning structure. Although the specification discloses fixed angled actuators and pivoted skis/actuator groups, the disclosure does not reasonably convey possession of the broader active/passive positioning alternatives now recited.
Accordingly, the originally filed disclosure does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that Applicant was in possession of the subject matter of claims 19 and 20 at the time of filing.
SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION
Applicant may amend claims 19 and 20 to recite the particular disclosed structure relied upon for positioning the sequence of actuators, or identify where the originally filed specification expressly or inherently describes the active mechanism and passive system.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitation “active mechanism” and “passive system” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
The limitations “active mechanism” in claim 19 and “passive system” in claim 20 are also treated, in the alternative, as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because they use generic placeholder language coupled with the function of positioning the sequence of actuators, without reciting sufficient structure for performing that function.
For claim 19, the claimed function is positioning the sequence of actuators using an active mechanism. The specification does not disclose corresponding structure clearly linked to that function. The specification does not identify an active positioning mechanism, such as a motor, servo, powered linkage, controller-actuated pivot, hydraulic actuator, electromechanical actuator, or equivalent structure, for positioning the sequence of actuators.
For claim 20, the claimed function is positioning the sequence of actuators using a passive system. The specification does not disclose corresponding structure clearly linked to that function. The specification does not identify a passive positioning system, such as a spring, compliant mount, biasing member, cam follower, rail-following linkage, self-aligning pivot, or equivalent structure, for positioning the sequence of actuators.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
CLAIM OBJECTIONS / INFORMALITIES
Claim 4 includes the phrase “curves away the straight rail.” The phrase appears to be missing the word “from.” Correction to “curves away from the straight rail” is suggested.
Claim 6 begins the added limitation with “A guidance rail.” The capital “A” should be corrected to lower case for consistency. Claim 6 also includes the phrase “curves away the straight rail,” which appears to be missing the word “from.”
Claim 12 recites “at least one rail” and then “the rail.” Although likely understandable, Applicant should consider amending “the rail” to “the at least one rail” or “each rail of the at least one rail,” depending on intended scope.
Claim 1 recites a “magnetic gap between the straight rail and the curved rail” and further recites a region “at which the straight rail and the curved rail meet.” In view of dependent claim 2 reciting air as the magnetic gap, Applicant should consider clarifying whether “meet” means physically contact, are adjacent, intersect in plan view, or form a switch junction region.
REFERENCES USED
Reference 1: Breitling, U.S. Patent No. 3,964,398, “Magnetic-suspension vehicle system having switch tracks.”
Reference 2: Dull, U.S. Patent No. 3,854,412, “Switch for use in a magnetic suspension railroad.”
Reference 3: Fiske et al., U.S. Patent No. 7,757,609, “Track switching for a magnetically levitated transportation system and method.”
Reference 4: Feistkorn et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,259,908, “Electromagnetic suspension vehicle.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 –
Claims 1-3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reference 1.
────────────
CLAIM 1
A switch for a levitation rail for a vehicle, the switch comprising: a straight rail; a curved rail, curving away from the straight rail, the straight rail and the curved rail comprising magnetic material to magnetically interact with a motor of the vehicle; and a magnetic gap between the straight rail and the curved rail, the magnetic gap comprising a region, at which the straight rail and the curved rail meet, of lower magnetic permeability relative to the straight rail and the curved rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses a switch for a levitation rail for a vehicle. Reference 1 discloses magnetic-suspension vehicle 1 traveling along track 2, with the track having magnetic armature rails that cooperate with vehicle-mounted electromagnets. The switch portion is shown by the main rail path and branch rail path in the area of intersection C/20.
Reference 1 discloses the claimed straight rail. The main armature rail path includes rails 5 and 9, with straight/main portions including rail portions 16, 17, 21, and 22. These rail portions define the straight or main guide path through the switch, as indicated by the main travel direction through the switch.
Reference 1 discloses the claimed curved rail, curving away from the straight rail. Reference 1 discloses auxiliary/branch armature rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23, which diverge from the main rail path and form a curved branch or spur path away from the main straight rail. The auxiliary rail portions cooperate with auxiliary electromagnets 13 and 14 on the vehicle to guide the vehicle along the branch path.
Reference 1 discloses that the straight rail and curved rail comprise magnetic material to magnetically interact with a motor of the vehicle. The rails 5, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, and 23 are magnetic armature rails of ferromagnetic or magnetically permeable material. These rails magnetically interact with vehicle-mounted electromagnets 7, 11, 13, and 14. The vehicle-mounted electromagnetic structures constitute the vehicle magnetic motor/actuator system under the broadest reasonable interpretation because they generate magnetic force with the rails to levitate, support, and guide the vehicle. Reference 1 also discloses that linear-induction motor reaction rails may be provided with, or formed on, the armature rail structure, thereby further satisfying the motor-interaction language.
Reference 1 discloses the claimed magnetic gap between the straight rail and the curved rail. At the rail junction/intersection C/20, the main rail portions and auxiliary rail portions approach one another and meet at the switch region. Reference 1 discloses an air gap s between rail ends and further discloses a nonmagnetic body S, such as aluminum, positioned at the rail junction. The air gap s and nonmagnetic body S form a region of lower magnetic permeability relative to the surrounding ferromagnetic armature rails. This region is located where the straight rail and branch/curved rail meet and is used to reduce unwanted magnetic interaction between adjacent rail portions and vehicle electromagnets.
Accordingly, Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 1.
────────────
CLAIM 2
The switch of claim 1, wherein the magnetic gap comprises one or more of a non-magnetic material and air.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 for the reasons stated above.
Reference 1 further discloses that the magnetic gap includes air and/or nonmagnetic material. Specifically, Reference 1 discloses air gap s between adjacent rail ends and also discloses nonmagnetic body S positioned in the switch-junction region. The nonmagnetic body S is disclosed as aluminum or other nonmagnetic material. Air gap s and nonmagnetic body S each have lower magnetic permeability than the ferromagnetic armature rails.
Accordingly, Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 2.
────────────
CLAIM 3
The switch of claim 1, wherein the magnetic gap comprises one or more of a groove and a slot between the straight rail and the curved rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 for the reasons stated above.
Reference 1 further discloses that the magnetic gap comprises a slot-like opening between adjacent rail portions. In particular, Reference 1 discloses narrow gap s between the proximal ends of the magnetic rail portions at the switch region. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the narrow elongate space s between adjacent rail ends constitutes a slot or slot-like gap between the straight/main rail portion and the curved/auxiliary rail portion. The nonmagnetic body S may also occupy this rail-end space while preserving a lower-permeability discontinuity between the adjacent magnetic rail portions.
Accordingly, Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 3.
────────────
CLAIM 10
A vehicle comprising: a body; at least one levitation actuator attached to the body, the at least one levitation actuator to interact with a rail that includes a straight rail and a curved rail and a magnetic gap between the straight rail and the curved rail, the magnetic gap being of lower magnetic permeability relative to the straight rail and the curved rail; and at least one guidance actuator to interact with a guidance rail located at a same side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends, the at least one guidance actuator controllable to guide the body along the straight rail or the curved rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses a vehicle comprising a body. Reference 1 discloses magnetic-suspension vehicle 1, including the vehicle body supported and guided relative to track 2.
Reference 1 discloses at least one levitation actuator attached to the body. Vehicle-mounted electromagnets 7 and 11 are attached to the vehicle by support arms/aprons 8 and 12 and cooperate with armature rails 5 and 9 to support and levitate the vehicle. Auxiliary electromagnets 13 and 14 are also mounted to the vehicle for operation in the branch/switch region.
Reference 1 discloses that the levitation actuator interacts with a rail including a straight rail, a curved rail, and a magnetic gap between the straight rail and the curved rail. The main rail path includes rail portions 5, 9, 16, 17, 21, and 22, and the branch/curved path includes rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23. The switch junction includes lower-permeability air gap s and/or nonmagnetic body S in the region where the rail portions meet.
Reference 1 discloses that the magnetic gap is of lower magnetic permeability relative to the straight rail and curved rail. Air gap s and nonmagnetic body S are lower-permeability regions relative to the ferromagnetic armature rail portions.
Reference 1 discloses at least one guidance actuator to interact with a guidance rail located at the same side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends. Auxiliary electromagnets 13 and 14 interact with auxiliary/branch armature rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23 disposed on the branch side of the main rail path. These vehicle-mounted electromagnets operate as guidance actuators because they generate magnetic forces that guide the vehicle into or along the branch path.
Reference 1 discloses that the guidance actuator is controllable to guide the body along the straight rail or curved rail. Reference 1 discloses selective energization/deenergization of the main and auxiliary electromagnets 7, 11, 13, and 14 to pass through the switch and follow the selected path. The vehicle is guided along the main rail path when the main rail/electromagnet interaction is maintained, and along the branch/curved rail path when the auxiliary rail/electromagnet interaction is used.
Accordingly, Reference 1 discloses every limitation of claim 10.
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.
Claims 4, 6, 7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, and further in view of Reference 4.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 3.
Claims 12, 16, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 3.
Claims 13, 14, 15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 3 in view of Reference 4.
────────────
CLAIM 4 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 2
The switch of claim 1, further comprising: a guidance rail located along a same side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends, the guidance rail further following an inner radius of the curved rail, such that the guidance rail curves away the straight rail in the region of the magnetic gap, the guidance rail to interact with a first guidance actuator of the vehicle, wherein no corresponding guidance rail is located at an opposite side of the straight rail and the curved rail such that a second guidance actuator of the vehicle, opposite the first guidance actuator, is inoperative in the region of the magnetic gap.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 as discussed above, including the switch, straight magnetic rail, curved magnetic rail, and lower-permeability magnetic gap at the rail junction.
Reference 1 further discloses branch-side magnetic rail structure used for guiding the vehicle through the switch. Auxiliary rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23 are located on the branch side of the main rail path and interact with auxiliary vehicle electromagnets 13 and 14 to guide the vehicle toward the curved branch path. Reference 1 does not expressly emphasize the specific one-sided guidance-rail arrangement and inoperative opposite guidance actuator in the exact manner claimed.
Reference 2 teaches that feature. Reference 2 discloses vehicle F traveling over roadbed 1 using support conductor plates 3 and primary loops 4 for suspension, and guidance conductor plates 5 interacting with vehicle primary loops 6 for lateral guidance. In switch W, the secondary guidance plates 5 are provided only on the two outer sides A and B of the roadbed. For the curved branch, the relevant guidance plate 5 follows the curved path and is positioned on the side corresponding to the branch/curve. Reference 2 expressly teaches that a selected primary loop 6 is moved out of the action range of its associated guidance plate 5 by pivot 6a, actuating rod 6b, and positioning device ST, so that the vehicle follows the selected branch path. Reference 2 also teaches that when a primary loop 6 is moved away from a guidance plate 13, guidance is no longer effective on that side and the loop cooperates with support plate 12 to maintain suspension.
It would therefore have been obvious to modify the switch of Reference 1 to include a branch-side guidance rail, as taught by Reference 2, located on the same side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends and following the inner radius of the curved branch in the magnetic-gap region. It also would have been obvious to omit or functionally remove the corresponding opposite guidance rail in the gap region so that the opposite vehicle guidance actuator is inoperative while the vehicle follows the branch.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 1 with Reference 2 to improve vehicle-side route selection through a magnetic-suspension switch while avoiding conflicting guidance forces at the rail junction. Reference 1 already recognizes that adjacent magnetic rails and vehicle electromagnets can create interference in a switch region, and Reference 2 teaches one-sided guidance with the opposite guidance loop moved out of the action range to select the path. The combination would predictably reduce magnetic and physical interference in the switch region, maintain suspension, and permit controlled selection of the curved path without requiring a movable main track section.
────────────
CLAIM 5 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 2 AND REFERENCE 4
The switch of claim 4, further comprising walls within which the straight rail, the curved rail and the guidance rail are located, the walls located such that the second guidance actuator of the vehicle clears the walls at the opposite side of the straight rail and the curved rail when the vehicle follows the curved rail from the straight rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 discloses the switch of claim 4 for the reasons stated above.
Reference 4 teaches rail-support walls or wall-like guideway structures within which magnetic suspension and propulsion rail components are mounted. Reference 4 discloses vehicle 101 traveling between hollow parallel rail-support beams 102 mounted on pylon structure 103. Each beam 102 includes lateral flank 104 carrying rail assembly 105, including support rail 106, reaction rail 110, armature rail 112, and associated vehicle electromagnet 113. The beams 102 and flanks 104 form wall-like guideway supports that contain and support the rail structure while providing clearance for vehicle-mounted magnetic assemblies.
Applying this guideway support arrangement to the switch of Reference 1 as modified by Reference 2 would result in walls or wall-like supports within which the straight rail, curved rail, and guidance rail are located. The inactive or opposite guidance actuator of the vehicle would be located to clear the wall/support structure while the vehicle follows the curved rail, because Reference 2 already teaches moving the non-selected primary loop 6 out of the action range and Reference 4 teaches providing guideway support beams/flanks with clearance for vehicle-mounted electromagnets.
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 the wall-like guideway supports of Reference 4 in the switch of Reference 1 and Reference 2 to provide structural support, rail alignment, and a protected guideway envelope for magnetic rails and vehicle-mounted actuators. This modification would have been a predictable guideway packaging choice because magnetic suspension vehicles conventionally require fixed rail support, clearance for vehicle electromagnets, and avoidance of contact between vehicle-side actuators and guideway structures during switching.
────────────
CLAIM 6 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 2
The switch of claim 1, further comprising: A guidance rail located along a same side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends, the guidance rail further following an inner radius of the curved rail, such that the guidance rail curves away the straight rail in the region of the magnetic gap, the guidance rail to interact with a first guidance actuator of the vehicle to switch the vehicle to the curved rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Reference 1 further discloses auxiliary rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23 on the branch side of the main rail path, which interact with auxiliary electromagnets 13 and 14 on vehicle 1 to guide the vehicle along the branch rail path. Reference 1 therefore discloses branch-side magnetic guidance structure associated with the curved rail.
Reference 2 further teaches the claimed guidance rail and switching function. Reference 2 discloses guidance plates 5 positioned on the switch sides A and B, with the relevant guidance plate 5 following the curved branch path. The guidance plate 5 interacts with vehicle-mounted primary loop 6 to provide lateral guidance. Reference 2 teaches switching the vehicle to the curved branch by moving the non-selected guidance loop 6 out of action range while leaving the selected loop 6 operative with the branch-side conductor plate 5. Reference 2 further discloses additional rail/plate 13 interacting with primary loop 6 to exert an attraction force opposing centrifugal force in the switch.
It would have been obvious to provide the switch of Reference 1 with the one-sided branch-following guidance rail of Reference 2, located along the side from which the curved rail extends and following the inner radius of the curved rail in the magnetic-gap region, so that the guidance rail interacts with a first vehicle guidance actuator to switch the vehicle to the curved rail.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 1 with Reference 2 to provide a clear vehicle-side switching command using electromagnetic guidance forces rather than relying solely on the main/auxiliary levitation rail interaction. Reference 2 teaches that selective interaction between a vehicle guidance actuator 6 and a branch-side guidance plate 5 directs the vehicle onto the curved branch. Incorporating that teaching into Reference 1 would predictably improve branch selection, reduce unwanted guidance force from the opposite side, and maintain contactless guidance through the magnetic-gap region.
────────────
CLAIM 7 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 2
The switch of claim 1, wherein the straight rail comprises a primary portion of a levitation rail, the straight rail extending away from the curved rail in opposite directions, and the curved rail is towards a station for the vehicle.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Reference 1 discloses that the straight rail comprises a primary portion of the levitation rail. The main armature rail path includes primary rail portions 5 and 9 and main continuation rail portions 16, 17, 21, and 22, which define the principal path through the switch. These main rail portions extend through and away from the branch region in opposite directions, corresponding to the straight or primary guide path.
Reference 1 also discloses that the curved rail extends away from the primary straight rail as a branch or spur. Auxiliary rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23 form the branch/curved rail path away from the straight rail.
Reference 1 does not expressly state that the curved rail is toward a station. Reference 2 teaches use of a magnetic-suspension switch in a system where travel direction can be selected even before the vehicle leaves a station. Thus, Reference 2 recognizes stations as known locations in magnetic-suspension vehicle systems and teaches switching arrangements associated with vehicle routing before or from a station.
It would have been obvious to route the curved branch rail of Reference 1 toward a station, as suggested by the station-routing context of Reference 2. A branch rail in a magnetic-suspension guideway predictably serves to route a vehicle from a primary line to a destination, siding, loading area, unloading area, or station.
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 the branch switch of Reference 1 to direct vehicles toward a station because Reference 2 teaches that vehicle direction may be selected in relation to station departure and because stations are ordinary destinations in guided vehicle systems. Routing a curved branch from a primary levitation rail to a station would predictably allow vehicles to leave a mainline for passenger or vehicle handling while other vehicles remain on the primary route.
────────────
CLAIM 8 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 2 AND REFERENCE 4
The switch of claim 1, further comprising: first track segments to interact with a propulsion motor of the vehicle, the first track segments located along a first side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends, the first track segments further following an inner radius of the curved rail; and second track segments to interact with the propulsion motor of the vehicle, the second track segments located along a second side of the straight rail, opposite the first side, the straight rail extending away from the curved rail in opposite directions, the second track segments further following the straight rail in the opposite directions on the second side.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Reference 1 discloses propulsion interaction between the vehicle and track. Reference 1 discloses that a linear-induction motor may be provided on the vehicle and that reaction rails may be mounted on, or directly formed with, the magnetic armature rail structure. Thus, Reference 1 teaches track-based propulsion interaction along the magnetic guide path.
Reference 2 also discloses a vehicle having a linear motor stator part that cooperates with a reaction rail on the line to generate propulsion forces. Reference 2 further discloses straight and curved switch paths, including branch-side guidance and support structures, so that the vehicle can be directed along either the straight path or curved path.
Reference 4 discloses a more detailed propulsion rail arrangement. Reference 4 discloses linear induction motor 107 on vehicle 101, stator stacks 111, and reaction rail 110 forming a track segment interacting with the propulsion motor. Reference 4 further shows rail assembly 105 including reaction rail 110 and armature rail 112 mounted along guideway support beam 102.
It would have been obvious to provide the switch of Reference 1 with propulsion track segments along both the branch side and the straight side, as taught by References 2 and 4. The first track segments would be placed along the side of the straight rail from which the curved rail extends and would follow the inner radius of the curved rail, so that the propulsion motor continues to interact with the track when the vehicle follows the curved branch. The second track segments would be placed along the opposite side of the straight rail and follow the straight rail in both directions, so that the propulsion motor continues to interact with the track when the vehicle remains on the straight path.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the propulsion teachings of References 2 and 4 with the switch of Reference 1 to maintain propulsion force regardless of whether the vehicle follows the primary straight route or the curved branch route. Providing propulsion reaction segments along both selectable guide paths would predictably avoid loss of thrust in the switch, maintain speed control, and use known linear-motor reaction rail placement techniques in a magnetic-suspension guideway.
────────────
CLAIM 9 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 3
The switch of claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of curved rails, curving away from the straight rail, including the curved rail, each of the plurality of curved rails comprising a respective magnetic gap between the straight rail and a respective curved rail, the plurality of curved rails spaced a distance along the straight rail to enable the vehicle to turn down a first curved rail, of the plurality of curved rails, without interference from a second curved rail, of the plurality of curved rails.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 1 as discussed above, including a magnetic-suspension switch having a main rail path, a curved/branch rail path, and lower-permeability rail-gap structure at the switch junction.
Reference 1 discloses one curved/branch rail arrangement. Reference 3 teaches extending that concept to a plurality of fixed magnetic switching rails. Reference 3 discloses magnetically levitated vehicle 20 traveling over magnet rails 12 and discloses fixed guideway switching arrangements including track switch 100 and double-slip switch 130. Reference 3 discloses multiple rails 132, 134, 136, and 138, multiple bifurcations 140, 142, 144, 146, 150, 152, 154, and 156, and multiple crossovers 160, 162, 164, and 166. These structures provide a plurality of branch or curved path portions curving away from straight guideway portions.
Reference 3 further discloses gaps in the magnet rails, including crossover gap 120 between rail portions such as 114a, 114b, 114c and 116a, 116b, 116c. These gaps permit one rail path to cross or diverge relative to another while maintaining vehicle levitation because vehicle magnet array 16 overlaps enough magnetic rail elements to avoid significant force loss.
It would have been obvious to modify the switch of Reference 1 to include a plurality of curved rails spaced along the straight rail, as taught by Reference 3, with each curved rail having its own rail-gap region where it diverges from or crosses the straight rail. The spacing of the curved rails along the straight rail would be selected so that the vehicle can follow one curved rail without physical or magnetic interference from another curved rail, consistent with Reference 3’s double-slip switch layout using spaced bifurcations and crossovers.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 1 with Reference 3 to provide multiple selectable routes in a fixed magnetic-suspension guideway. Reference 3 teaches that multiple bifurcations and crossovers can be arranged without moving guideway track portions and while maintaining magnetic support. Applying that teaching to Reference 1 would predictably increase routing flexibility while preserving the magnetic-gap approach that reduces rail-interaction problems at switch junctions.
────────────
CLAIM 11 - REFERENCE 1 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 2
The vehicle of claim 10, wherein the at least one levitation actuator is further to balance guidance forces pulling the body towards the guidance rail along the curved rail due to the at least one guidance actuator interacting with the guidance rail along the curved rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 1 discloses all limitations of claim 10 as discussed above, including vehicle 1, vehicle-mounted levitation electromagnets 7 and 11, auxiliary guidance electromagnets 13 and 14, main rails 5 and 9, and branch/curved rail portions 15, 18, 19, and 23.
Reference 1 discloses that vehicle electromagnets and armature rails generate support and guidance forces through the switch. Reference 1 also discloses using main and auxiliary electromagnet/rail interactions through the junction region to reduce disturbing magnetic effects and maintain vehicle guidance.
Reference 2 further teaches the claimed balancing of guidance forces along a curved rail. Reference 2 discloses that primary loop 6 interacts with guidance plate 5 to laterally guide vehicle F along the branch, and further discloses an additional ferromagnetic rail 13 interacting with primary loop 6 to exert an attraction force opposing centrifugal force. Reference 2 also teaches that when one guidance loop is moved out of effective guidance range, it cooperates with support plate 12 to maintain suspension, while the remaining loop provides both guidance and support.
It would have been obvious to operate the levitation actuators of Reference 1 to balance the lateral/guidance forces created by interaction of a guidance actuator with a branch-side guidance rail, as taught by Reference 2. In the combined system, the levitation actuator maintains the vehicle’s supported position while the guidance actuator pulls or steers the vehicle toward the branch-side guidance rail along the curved rail.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 1 with Reference 2 to maintain stable levitation while the vehicle is subject to lateral guidance forces in a curve. Reference 2 expressly recognizes that branch travel creates guidance and centrifugal-force conditions and provides additional magnetic force interaction to oppose such forces while maintaining suspension. Applying that teaching to Reference 1 would predictably prevent side loading, reduce loss of levitation balance, and maintain stable vehicle clearance through the curved switch.
────────────
CLAIM 12 - REFERENCE 3
An electromagnetic guidance system comprising: at least one rail; and a vehicle comprising at least one ski and one or more electromagnetic actuators attached to the at least one ski, such that a force is generated between the at least one electromagnetic actuator and the at least one rail; wherein: the rail is one or more of flat, curved, and twisted; and the one or more electromagnetic actuators are positioned such that the one or more electromagnetic actuators are tangent to tightly curved rail surfaces, minimally curved rail surfaces, and straight rail surfaces.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses an electromagnetic guidance system. Reference 3 discloses magnetically levitated vehicle 20 operating over a guideway having magnet rails 12, 52, 54, 102, 104, 132, 134, 136, and 138.
Reference 3 discloses at least one rail. The magnet rails 12 and the switch rails 102, 104, 132, 134, 136, and 138 constitute the claimed rail.
Reference 3 discloses a vehicle comprising at least one ski. Vehicle 20 includes magnetic assemblies 24a, 24b, 24c, and 24d. Each magnetic assembly 24 is an elongated rail-facing support assembly that travels along the guideway and carries magnetic components adjacent the rail. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, each magnetic assembly 24 constitutes a ski because it is a rail-following vehicle-mounted support carrying magnetic levitation/guidance components.
Reference 3 discloses one or more electromagnetic actuators attached to the ski. Each magnetic assembly 24 carries stabilization coil set 18, including coils 18a and 18b, and vehicle magnet array 16. The stabilization coils 18 are electromagnetic actuators because current in the coils creates magnetic fields that interact with magnet rails 12 to generate lateral forces for steering and stabilization.
Reference 3 discloses that a force is generated between the electromagnetic actuator and the rail. The stabilization coils 18 interact magnetically with magnet rails 12 to create lateral control forces that steer and stabilize vehicle 20 relative to the guideway.
Reference 3 discloses that the rail is one or more of flat, curved, and twisted. Reference 3 discloses straight rail portions, curved/diverging rail portions, and switch rail portions. Examples include curved rails 112 and 116, straight rails 114 and 118, and the rail/bifurcation arrangements in double-slip switch 130. The rail surfaces are rail-facing surfaces of the magnet rails, and the “one or more of” language is satisfied by the disclosed straight/flat and curved rail configurations.
Reference 3 discloses or renders obvious positioning the electromagnetic actuators tangent to tightly curved rail surfaces, minimally curved rail surfaces, and straight rail surfaces. Reference 3 discloses pivot joints 30a and 30b, structural element 36, and pivot 38, which allow magnetic assemblies 24a-d to rotate and follow curved tracks. Because the stabilization coils 18 are mounted to the magnetic assemblies 24, pivoting the assemblies positions the coils in the local rail direction as the rail curvature changes. On straight rails 114 and 118, the assemblies align with the straight rail surface. On curved rails 112 and 116 and the bifurcating/crossover rails of switch 130, the assemblies rotate to follow the local curvature. Thus, the rail-facing actuator surfaces/poles are positioned tangentially to straight, minimally curved, and tightly curved portions of the rail path.
MOTIVATION
To the extent Reference 3 does not expressly use the word “tangent,” a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to orient the rail-facing electromagnetic actuators tangent to the local rail surface because magnetic guidance/levitation systems require a controlled air gap and predictable magnetic force direction. Reference 3 already teaches pivoting magnetic assemblies 24a-d to follow curved tracks and decrease minimum turn radius. Tangential positioning is the predictable orientation that maintains uniform rail-actuator spacing and stable magnetic force as the vehicle transitions among straight, gradual-curve, and tight-curve rail portions.
────────────
CLAIM 13 - REFERENCE 3 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 4
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 12, further comprising a sequence of actuators which have coplanar poles, including the one or more electromagnetic actuators, and at least one angled actuator disposed at an angle to other actuators.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 12 as discussed above.
Reference 3 discloses multiple electromagnetic actuators in sequence. Stabilization coils 18, including coils 18a and 18b, are carried on magnetic assemblies 24a-d. These magnetic assemblies are arranged along the vehicle and move along the rail path. The coils have rail-facing pole/active surfaces arranged in a common rail-facing plane on the corresponding assembly, thereby providing coplanar poles under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Reference 3 further discloses actuator assemblies that may be angularly positioned relative to one another. Pivot joints 30a and 30b and pivot 38 allow magnetic assemblies 24a-d to rotate relative to other vehicle portions and relative to one another when following a curved rail. Because each magnetic assembly 24 carries stabilization coils 18, the electromagnetic actuators of one assembly may be disposed at an angle relative to actuators of another assembly during curve following.
Reference 4 further teaches rows of electromagnets and angled pole geometry. Reference 4 discloses rows of electromagnets used for support and guidance of a magnetic levitation vehicle. Reference 4 also discloses electromagnet 2 having pole faces 5 and 6 facing armature rail 9 with pole surfaces 7 and 8. Reference 4 further discloses the angled arrangement of pole faces 5’, 6’, 7’, and 8’ in the FIG. 3 embodiment. This teaches that electromagnet pole faces may be angularly oriented relative to other reference planes to maintain desired rail-facing geometry.
It would have been obvious to configure the actuator sequence of Reference 3 so that one actuator, or one actuator-bearing magnetic assembly, is disposed at an angle relative to other actuators, as taught by the pivoting and angular relationships of Reference 3 and the angled pole-face arrangement of Reference 4.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 3 with Reference 4 to improve magnetic coupling between actuator poles and rails in curved guideway portions. Reference 3 teaches pivoting magnetic assemblies to follow curved tracks and reduce turn radius, while Reference 4 teaches that electromagnet pole faces may be angled to match rail-facing geometry. Combining these teachings would predictably maintain a uniform air gap, improve force authority, and reduce magnetic inefficiency when a sequence of electromagnetic actuators traverses a curve.
────────────
CLAIM 14 - REFERENCE 3 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 4
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 13, wherein the at least one angled actuator is fixed at an angle such that the at least one angled actuator remains tangent to a tightly curved rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 in view of Reference 4 discloses or renders obvious the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 13 as discussed above.
Reference 3 discloses tightly curved rail portions in the switch and branch arrangements, including curved rails 112 and 116 and curved/bifurcating paths in double-slip switch 130. Reference 3 further teaches that magnetic assemblies 24a-d pivot to follow curved tracks and reduce minimum turn radius.
Reference 4 teaches fixed angled pole-face geometry. In the FIG. 3 embodiment, pole faces 5’ and 6’ of the electromagnet and pole surfaces 7’ and 8’ of armature rail 9’ are angularly oriented. This teaches that an electromagnet/pole-face structure may be set at an angle to match a rail-facing surface.
It would have been obvious to fix at least one actuator of the actuator sequence at a predetermined angle corresponding to a known tight curve radius so that the actuator remains tangent to the tightly curved rail at the relevant operating location. In a guideway having a known fixed switch geometry, a fixed angled actuator provides the desired tangency without requiring a separate active pivot for that individual actuator.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide a fixed angled actuator in the system of Reference 3 using the angled pole-face teaching of Reference 4 where the tight curve geometry is known in advance. This would have reduced moving parts, reduced control complexity, and maintained predictable magnetic air-gap geometry at the tight curve. Fixed angular mounting is a predictable alternative to active positioning when the rail radius and actuator location are predetermined.
────────────
CLAIM 15 - REFERENCE 3 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 4
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 13, wherein the at least one angled actuator is movably positioned with respect to the sequence of actuators.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 in view of Reference 4 discloses or renders obvious the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 13 as discussed above.
Reference 3 discloses movable positioning of magnetic assemblies carrying electromagnetic actuators. Magnetic assemblies 24a-d are connected through pivot joints 30a and 30b, structural element 36, and pivot 38. These pivots allow one magnetic assembly, carrying stabilization coils 18, to rotate relative to other magnetic assemblies and relative to the vehicle body. Therefore, the angled actuator is movably positioned with respect to other actuators in the sequence.
Reference 3 also discloses control of pivoting by controller 210 using inputs from sensors 200 and by servo motors or other devices associated with the pivot joints. This provides movable positioning of the angled actuator relative to the sequence as rail curvature and vehicle operating conditions change.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to make the angled actuator movable with respect to the actuator sequence to accommodate different curve radii, switch geometries, and vehicle speeds. Reference 3 expressly teaches pivoting magnetic assemblies to follow curved tracks and to reduce minimum turn radius. Movable angular positioning would predictably improve tangency, maintain the magnetic air gap, and preserve guidance force over both tight and gradual rail curves.
────────────
CLAIM 16 - REFERENCE 3
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 12, further comprising a sequence of actuators, including the one or more electromagnetic actuators, which have coplanar poles, wherein all of the actuators are movably positionable as a group.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 12 as discussed above.
Reference 3 discloses a sequence of electromagnetic actuators. Stabilization coils 18, including coils 18a and 18b, are carried by magnetic assemblies 24a-d along vehicle 20. The rail-facing active surfaces/poles of the coils on a given assembly are arranged along a common rail-facing plane and operate together relative to the associated magnet rail.
Reference 3 discloses that all of the actuators are movably positionable as a group. Each magnetic assembly 24 carries the associated stabilization coils 18 and vehicle magnet array 16. When the magnetic assembly 24 pivots about pivot joints 30a, 30b, and/or pivot 38, the actuators mounted to that assembly move together as a group. Thus, the sequence of actuators on the assembly is movably positionable as a group.
MOTIVATION
To the extent the group-movement feature is not considered expressly disclosed, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious from Reference 3 to mount multiple electromagnetic actuators on a common pivotable support so that the actuators move as a group. Group movement simplifies control, maintains relative pole alignment among the actuators, preserves a common air-gap geometry, and allows the entire rail-facing actuator set to follow curved rails without independently actuating each coil.
────────────
CLAIM 17 - REFERENCE 3
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 16, wherein the sequence of actuators are movably positionable using a pivoted mechanical structure.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 16 as discussed above.
Reference 3 discloses that the sequence of actuators is movably positionable using a pivoted mechanical structure. Reference 3 discloses pivot joints 30a and 30b connected to magnetic assemblies 24a-d and further discloses structural element 36 and pivot 38. These pivoted mechanical structures allow the magnetic assemblies carrying stabilization coils 18 to rotate relative to the vehicle so the assemblies can follow curved rails.
Thus, the actuator sequence carried by each magnetic assembly is movably positionable using pivot joints 30a, 30b, and/or pivot 38.
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 the pivoted mechanical structure of Reference 3 to position the actuator sequence because pivoting provides a simple, robust, and predictable way to align a rail-facing magnetic assembly with a curved guideway. The pivoted arrangement maintains tangency and air-gap control while reducing the minimum turn radius achievable by the magnetic-suspension vehicle.
────────────
CLAIM 18 - REFERENCE 3 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 4
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 17, wherein the sequence of actuators are positionable using a force generated by the sequence of actuators interacting with the at least one rail.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 17 as discussed above, including pivoted magnetic assemblies 24a-d carrying stabilization coils 18 and movable by pivot joints 30a, 30b, and pivot 38.
Reference 3 discloses that stabilization coils 18 generate forces by interacting with magnet rails 12. These forces steer and stabilize vehicle 20 relative to the rails. Because the coils 18 are mounted to pivotable magnetic assemblies 24a-d, the magnetic forces generated between the coils and rails act through the pivoted assembly.
Reference 4 further teaches positioning by magnetic interaction force. Reference 4 discloses electromagnet 2 facing armature rail 9, with pole faces 5 and 6 facing pole surfaces 7 and 8. Reference 4 teaches that deviation from centered juxtaposition between the electromagnet and rail results in a force tending to restore centered juxtaposition, thereby providing lateral guidance. Reference 4 further discloses passive support components including leaf springs 11 and 12, spring 13, damper 14, and elastomeric supports 211 and 212 that permit the electromagnet to move and be restored by the magnetic/elastic force system.
It would have been obvious to configure the pivoted actuator sequence of Reference 3 so that forces generated by the actuator sequence interacting with the rail are used to position or self-align the actuator sequence, as taught by Reference 4. In the combined system, magnetic forces generated by stabilization coils 18 interacting with magnet rails 12 urge the pivotable assembly toward a centered or tangent position relative to the rail.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 3 with Reference 4 to obtain passive or semi-passive self-alignment of the pivoted actuator sequence. Reference 3 already provides pivoted magnetic assemblies, and Reference 4 teaches that magnetic interaction with the rail can create restoring/centering forces through movable electromagnet supports. Using the rail-generated actuator force to position the sequence would predictably reduce active positioning burden, maintain air-gap alignment, and improve stability during curved-rail travel.
────────────
CLAIM 19 - REFERENCE 3
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 17, wherein the sequence of actuators are positionable using an active mechanism.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 17 as discussed above, including pivoted magnetic assemblies 24a-d carrying stabilization coils 18.
Reference 3 discloses active positioning of the actuator sequence. Reference 3 discloses controller 210 receiving information from sensors 200 and controlling servo motors or other devices associated with pivot joints 30a, 30b, and pivot 38. These components actively position the magnetic assemblies 24a-d according to operating conditions such as turn radius and vehicle speed. Because the stabilization coils 18 are mounted on the magnetic assemblies, actively positioning the magnetic assemblies actively positions the sequence of actuators.
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 the active positioning mechanism of Reference 3 to adjust actuator orientation during switching and curve following. Active positioning allows the actuator sequence to respond to vehicle speed, rail curvature, and switching route, thereby maintaining magnetic alignment and improving control authority through curves and crossovers.
────────────
CLAIM 20 - REFERENCE 3 IN VIEW OF REFERENCE 4
The electromagnetic guidance system of claim 17, wherein the sequence of actuators are positionable using a passive system.
ANALYSIS
Reference 3 discloses the electromagnetic guidance system of claim 17 as discussed above, including pivoted magnetic assemblies 24a-d and electromagnetic stabilization coils 18.
Reference 3 discloses pivotable assemblies that can follow curved tracks. Reference 4 teaches passive positioning structure for vehicle electromagnets. Reference 4 discloses leaf springs 11 and 12, spring 13, damper 14, and elastomeric supports 211 and 212, which allow electromagnet 2 to move relative to the vehicle and return toward a centered position. Reference 4 further teaches that restoring force may be generated by spring force or intrinsic elasticity of the damping/elastomeric members, and that magnetic interaction with the rail contributes to centering and guidance.
It would have been obvious to position the actuator sequence of Reference 3 using the passive system of Reference 4. In the combined arrangement, the pivoted magnetic assembly 24 carrying stabilization coils 18 would be biased, damped, or self-centered by passive springs, elastomeric supports, or damping members so that the actuator sequence follows the rail without requiring continuous active drive.
MOTIVATION
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine Reference 3 with Reference 4 to provide passive positioning as a lower-complexity alternative or supplement to active servo positioning. Passive springs, elastomeric supports, and damping members would predictably reduce power consumption, reduce controller burden, provide fail-safe centering, and maintain actuator-to-rail alignment through curved track sections.
CONCLUSION
The attached Mihirogi reference, U.S. Patent No. 4,109,584, was reviewed but not used in the rejection above. Mihirogi is relevant because it discloses track switching for magnetic floating rolling stock and shows branch/straight track switching concepts. However, it relies on movable track/rail members rather than the stronger fixed magnetic-gap rail junction of Reference 1. Mihirogi is therefore cumulative as to general magnetic-rail switching and less directly applicable to the claimed lower-permeability magnetic gap between fixed straight and curved magnetic rails.
Other located magnetic-suspension switch references were also not used because they were cumulative of Reference 1 for magnetic switch tracks, cumulative of Reference 2 for vehicle-side guidance switching, or less directly applicable to the actuator/ski limitations than Reference 3 and Reference 4. Reference 1, Reference 2, Reference 3, and Reference 4 provide the clearest combination for the present claim set.
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