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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pein (US# 2022/0402297).
Pein discloses all the limitations of the instant claims including; a disc brake assembly particulate collection system, comprising: a disc brake assembly 8; a vessel 1 surrounding the disc brake assembly, the vessel comprising an inlet 16 and an outlet 17; a first fan 21 configured to introduce air into the vessel via the inlet; and a second fan 23 configured to draw air out of the vessel via the outlet.
Regarding claim 2, the vessel comprises a sealed unit [0024].
Regarding claim 13, Pein discloses a vehicle [0021] comprising the system of claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Pein discloses a method of collecting particulates from a disc brake assembly, the method comprising the steps of: providing the system of claim 1; operating the first fan 32 to introduce air into the vessel via the inlet; and operating the second fan 23 to draw air out of the vessel via the outlet.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by O’Rourke (US# 2006/0011425).
O’Rourke disclose all the limitations of the instant claim including; a disc brake assembly 10 comprising a brake disc 12, and a blade 20, wherein an edge of the blade is located adjacent to an outer surface of the brake disc 12. Figure 4.
Regarding claim 16, O’Rourke discloses a method of cooling a disc brake assembly, the method comprising the steps of: providing the disc brake assembly 10 of claim 15; providing a means for rotating the brake disc, such that a boundary layer is formed adjacent to the surface of the brake disc; removing the boundary layer adjacent to the brake disc via the blade (figure 4); enabling air passing over the brake disc to directly contact the surface of the brake disc (figures 3-4). [0046]
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3-4, 6-8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pein (US# 2022/0402297) in view of Nagaraja et al (US# 2022/0042565).
Pein discloses all the limitations of the instant claim with exception to the first and/or second fan comprising a bladeless fan. Nagaraja et al disclose a brake assembly and further teach a bladeless fan (device utilizing the “Coanda effect”) 310 to amplify airflow. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the airflow amplifiers of Nagaraja et al in the device of Pein to increase airflow without moving parts susceptible to wear.
Regarding claim 4, Nagaraja et al teach a compressor [0007] configured to produce a compressed stream of gas, wherein the bladeless fan is arranged to receive the compressed stream of gas and eject the compressed stream of gas over a Coandă surface, the bladeless fan configured to entrain ambient air from a fan inlet with the ejected compressed stream of gas to produce an amplified stream of gas.
Regarding claim 6, Nagaraja et al disclose the compressor comprises a pump to supply air [0007].
Regarding claim 7, Pein further lacks the pump being electrically driven, mechanically linked to the vehicle's crank shaft and/or rotor blades, and/or driven by a turbo. Pein does disclose an electric motor as part of the test arrangement [0022]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize an electric motor to drive the pump of modified Pein as an obvious and readily available drive source.
Regarding claim 8, Pein further lack a controller configured to control supply of the compressed stream of air. Pein is silent as to how the air source is controlled. Nagaraja et al further teach a controller configured to control supply of the compressed stream of air [0009]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a controller, such as taught by Nagaraja et al, for the system of Pein to facilitate control of the sources, allowing customization and/or automation of the control.
Regarding claim 12, Pein further discloses a screen 22. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place a screen such as disclosed by Pein such that it filters the ambient air prior to its entrainment by the bladeless fan, in modified Pein as an obvious placement that keeps the fan clean.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 9-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY T KING whose telephone number is (571)272-7117. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-5:00 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571 272-7124. 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.
/BRADLEY T KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
BTK
Prosecution Insights