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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/17/24 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 6, “the brush” should be change to –the grounding brush--.
Claim 2 line 2, “the brush” should be change to –the grounding brush--.
Claim 6 line 2, “the brush” should be change to –the grounding brush--.
Claim 7 line 1, “the brush” should be change to –the grounding brush--.
Claim 10 line 5, “the brush” should be change to –the grounding brush--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kovacs (US 11,773,908 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Kovacs teaches a grounding brush assembly (10) comprising:
a grounding brush (12) including a support (20) and a plurality of conductive fibers (22) disposed at least partially within the support (20, fig 12-14), the grounding brush (12) being formed as an open ring having a first end (13a) and a second end (13b), the first and second ends (13a, 13b) being spaced circumferentially apart and facing each other so as to define a circumferential space (Ga, fig 6); and
a brush mounting plate (14) rigidly secured to the support (20) of the brush (12) and having at least one anti-rotation lug (42A, 42B) disposed within the circumferential space (Ga) separating the first and second ends (13a, 13b) of the grounding brush (12, fig 4).
Regarding claim 2, Kovacs teaches the mounting plate (14) includes a plurality of retention tabs (40) for retaining the support (20) of the brush (12).
Regarding claim 3, Kovacs teaches the at least one anti-rotation lug (42A, 42B) of the mounting plate (14) is distinct from the retention tabs (40).
Regarding claim 4, Kovacs teaches the mounting plate (14) includes an annular radial portion (16) and the grounding brush (12) bears axially against the radial portion (16).
Regarding claim 5, Kovacs teaches the at least one anti-rotation lug (42A, 42B) extends from the radial portion (16) of the mounting plate (14).
Regarding claim 6, Kovacs teaches the mounting plate (14) includes a plurality of retention tabs (40) for retaining the support (20) of the brush (12) extending from the radial portion (16) of the mounting plate (14).
Regarding claim 7, Kovacs teaches the support (20) of the brush (12) bears axially against the radial portion (16) of the mounting plate (14).
Regarding claim 9, Kovacs teaches the anti-rotation lug (42A, 42B) is formed at least by plastic deformation of the mounting plate (col 5 ln 55-60).
Regarding claim 10, Kovacs teaches electric motor (M) comprising a casing (6); a shaft (3); and at least one grounding brush assembly (10) mounted radially between the casing (6) and the shaft (3), the conductive fibers (22) of the brush (12) of the assembly being in contact with the shaft (3, fig 2).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kovacs in view of Arnault et al. (US 11,862,949 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Kovacs teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 4, except for the added limitation of the mounting plate includes at least one centering portion extending at least axially from the radial portion, offset radially outwardly with respect to the support and having an outer surface defining an outside diameter of the mounting plate.
Arnault teaches an earthing brush assembly having a mounting plate (40) includes at least one centering portion (44) extending at least axially from the radial portion (42), offset radially outwardly with respect to the support (32) and having an outer surface defining an outside diameter of the mounting plate (fig 5) to radially and axially retain the brush (col 2 ln 1-5).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kovacs’s brush assembly with the mounting plate includes at least one centering portion extending at least axially from the radial portion, offset radially outwardly with respect to the support and having an outer surface defining an outside diameter of the mounting plate as taught by Arnault. Doing so would radially and axially retain the brush (col 2 ln 1-5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hubert et al. (US 11,309,775 B2) teaches a grounding brush assembly includes a plurality of conductive fibers extending from at least one support, a mounting plate having a first side and a second side and an opening configured to surround a rotatable motor shaft having an axis of rotation, and a plurality of tabs disposed in a circle around the periphery. Each of the tabs extends axially from the first side of the mounting plate and radially toward or away from the axis of rotation to define with an adjacent portion of the first side of the mounting plate a U-shaped bracket. The at least one support is secured against the first side of the mounting plate by the plurality of tabs.
Arnault et al. (US 2021/0364040 A1) teaches a combined electrical insulator and conductor assembly for a bearing disposable between a shaft and a housing. An annular insulator is disposeable about the bearing and configured to prevent electric current flow between an outer ring and the housing. An electrical conductor has retainer(s) releasably engaged with the insulator so as to couple the conductor with the bearing, an outer radial end and an inner radial end. The conductor outer radial end, or/and a portion of the conductor between the outer and inner ends, is conductively engageable with the housing and the conductor inner radial end is conductively engageable with the shaft so as to provide an electrically conductive path between the shaft and the housing. Preferably, the conductor includes a conductive disk having arcuate retainer clips engageable with an insulator groove of the insulator and a brush subassembly including conductive fibers engaged with the shaft outer surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEDA T PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at (571) 272-3560. 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.
/LEDA T PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights