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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 11-14 and 17-18 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 line 8 cites, “to move clevis” which should be –to move the clevis--.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (8292050) in view of Bach et al (20210190159) and further in view of Seo (KR 20200098219).
In reference to claim 1, Kim teaches an apparatus for a brake drum (10) having a drum brake assembly with first and second brake shoes (20, 30), comprising: a motor (120); a planetary gear train (150)for receiving torque from the motor and having a pinion gear (158); an actuator (115) for receiving torque from the pinion gear and having ends aligned with the respective first and second brake shoes, the motor being actuatable for lengthening the assembly to move the brake shoes and apply braking force to the brake drum.
Kim does not teach a ball ramp assembly as the actuator or a bi-stable actuator for locking the gear train.
Bach et al teaches a similar drum brake assembly where a motor (8) actuates the shoes (5). The actuator for the shoe includes a ball ramp mechanism (3, 3’) which is actuated by a motor (8) and a gear (10). The ball ramp assembly receiving torque from the motor via a gear and having ends aligned with the respective first and second brake shoes, the motor being actuatable for lengthening the ball ramp assembly to move the brake shoes and apply braking force to the brake drum.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to have replaced the actuator of Kim with the ball ramp actuator of Bach et al merely as a simple substitution of one well known drum brake actuator for another.
Seo teaches a bi-stable locking mechanism (240) for selectively locking the planetary gear train (224) of a brake device to lock the brake in position, the locking mechanism engaging a carrier (221, 224) of a planetary gear train to selectively lock the gear train.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have provided Kim with the bi-stable locking mechanism as taught by Seo merely to provide a reliable locking / parking mechanism to the brake assembly and to ensure that the brakes are locked ensuring safety as is recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art.
In reference to claim 2, Bach teaches wherein the ball ramp assembly comprises a spindle (21) splined to a gear (10) for receiving torque from the pinion gear, a nut (10, 17) threaded with the spindle, and a clevis (31) connected to the nut, wherein the motor is actuatable for rotating the spindle to translate the ball ramp assembly on the spindle and thereby move the brake shoes to apply braking force to or release braking force from the brake drum. Please note that applicant can be their own lexicographer, and the item applicant is calling a clevis is the equivalent to element 31 provided in Bach.
In reference to claim 3, Bach teaches wherein the nut comprises: a first ramp for receiving torque from the spindle; a second ramp unthreaded with the spindle and movable with the clevis (figure 4); a biasing member, a circlip (element on the other side of clevis 31 from the spring) , and thrust bearing (23) for preloading the first and second ramps, and rolling members (34) provided between the first and second ramps, wherein rotation of the first ramp relative to the second ramp causes the rolling elements to push the second ramp away from the first ramp to move the clevis away from the spindle, wherein rotation of the first ramp with the second ramp causes the nut and the clevis to advance relative to the spindle to account for wear on the brake shoes.
In reference to claim 4, Bach teaches wherein the ball ramp assembly comprises a nut (9) having a gear (10) for receiving torque from the motor gear and a spindle threaded with the nut and splined to the gear, the nut being aligned with the first brake shoe and the spindle being aligned with the second brake shoe, (the whole assembly is aligned) the motor being actuatable for rotating the nut to move the nut and the spindle away from one another for moving the brake shoes to apply braking force to the brake drum.
In reference to claim 5, Bach teaches a guide (14) fixed to the vehicle and receiving the ball ramp assembly, the gear on the nut extending through an opening (must be an opening to provide motion) in the guide for connecting to an output gear receiving torque from the motor gear. (see figure 3)
In reference to claim 6, Bach teaches wherein the opening allows the gear to move longitudinally relative to the output gear to accommodate relative movement between the nut and the spindle. Please note that any opening would provide some degree to ability of move.
In reference to claim 7, Bach teaches wherein the nut comprises: a first ramp for receiving torque from the output gear; a second ramp having a threaded connection with the spindle; a biasing member for preloading the spindle relative to the second ramp and rolling members provided between the first and second ramps, wherein rotation of the first ramp relative to the second ramp causes the rolling elements to push the second ramp away from the first ramp, wherein rotation of the first ramp with the second ramp causes the spindle to advance relative to the second ramp. (see rejection for claims 3, and 5 and figures 2-3)
In reference to claim 8, Seo teaches wherein the bi-stable locking mechanism has a first condition engaging the rotating member (224) for locking the same in response to receiving electrical power of a first polarity and having a second condition retracted from the rotating member for allowing rotation of the same in response to receiving electrical power of a second polarity (see paragraph on page 7 of the translation starting “When the solenoid 241”). Note the push pull is how solenoids work absent a spring.
In reference to claim 9, Seo teaches wherein the bi-stable locking mechanism includes a projection (242) that moves relative to the rotatable element between the first condition and the second condition.
In reference to claim 10, Kim teaches a return spring (see the many springs of figure 1) configured to be connected to both brake shoes for biasing the brake shoes towards one another.
In reference to claim 11, please note that combinations made for claim 1. An apparatus for a brake drum having a drum brake assembly with first and second brake shoes, comprising: a motor; a planetary gear train for receiving torque from the motor and having an output gear(Kim, claim 1 rejection); a ball ramp assembly comprising a spindle for receiving torque from the output gear, a nut threaded with the spindle, and a clevis connected to the nut, wherein the motor is actuatable for rotating the spindle to move clevis away from the spindle and thereby move the brake shoes to apply braking force to the brake drum; a biasing member for biasing the nut away from the spindle to automatically respond to wear on the brake shoes (Bach); and a bi-stable locking mechanism having a first condition engaging a carrier of the planetary gear train for locking the same in response to receiving electrical power of a first polarity and having a second condition retracted from the planetary gear train for allowing rotation of the same in response to receiving electrical power of a second polarity. (Seo, see rejection of claim 8 above. )
In reference to claim 12, see the rejection of claim 3.
In reference to claim 13, see rejection of claim 9.
In reference to claim 14, see rejection of claim 10.
In reference to claims 15 and 17, Kim teaches the carrier is connected to planet gears (153) meshed with a sun gear (151).
Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (8292050) in view of Bach et al (20210190159) and further in view of Seo (KR 20200098219) as evidenced by Beck et al (9127756) or Taniguchi et al (20070272458).
Kim lacks the teaching of the planet gears including a pinion gear of the motor. In Kim the pinion gear is connected to the sun gear, however, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that gears can be arranged in a number of known configurations in order to transmit torque.
Both Beck and Taniguchi teach the versatility of planetary gear transmission mechanisms and provide evidence that it is known to provide input power to a planetary gear rather than a sun gear. Beck teaches that an input shaft can be any shaft in a planetary gear mechanism (Col 5 lines 60-65). Taniguchi teaches a motor (20) providing input directly to a planetary gear (140) which is geared to a sun gear (120).
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to have provided the motor input on one of the planet gears merely as a matter of obvious to try as the evidentiary references and those of ordinary skill understand that power can be input to a number of shafts on the transmission. Further, this also can be considered a mere rearrangement of the essential working parts of the invention as a person of ordinary skill would understand how to adjust the gearing of Kim to provide the input at the planet gear. In re Japikse. .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The new references provided teach the amended subject matter argued in the response.
Conclusion
Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON C KRAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-7118. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Thursday 7AM-4PM; Friday Mornings.
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.
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.
DEVON C. KRAMER
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3746
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights