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 statements filed 24 July 2024, 12 March 2026, and 17 April 2026 are acknowledged and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Claim Interpretation
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim(s)
Generic placeholder or "means for"
Functional language
Corresponding structure
(citations as-published)
1, 9, 10
a wear amount detection unit/step
configured to detect an amount of wear of the bearings in the thrust direction, based on a difference between a combined signal obtained by combining each detection signal output from a pair of the thrust detection coils and a combined signal obtained by combining each detection signal output from another pair of the thrust detection coils
Controller 54 as configured to perform the operations described in [0127]-[0135], etc.
1, 9, 10
a frequency acquisition unit/step
configured to acquire a driving frequency of the motor
Controller 54 as configured to perform the operations described in [0100]-[0110], [0160]-[0175], etc.
1, 9, 10
a data acquisition unit/step
configured to acquire adjustment data corresponding to the driving frequency, based on the acquired driving frequency
Controller 54 as configured to perform the operations described in [0111]-[0115], [0196]-[0199], etc.
1, 9
an offset processing unit/step
configured to execute offset processing to the combined signal used to calculate the difference, based on the acquired adjustment data, in such a way that the difference indicates the amount of wear corresponding to the driving frequency
The circuit depicted in fig. 10, described in [0017]-[0126], [0201]-[0202], etc.
10
a data extraction unit
configured to extract, from the adjustment data, offset information to be used for offset processing to be executed by the combined signals used to calculate the difference in such a way that the difference indicates the amount of wear corresponding to the driving frequency
Controller 54 as configured to perform the operations described in [0086], etc.
3
a pulse signal generation unit
configured to generate a pulse signal corresponding to each voltage across the lines
The circuit depicted in fig. 8 and described in [0069], etc.
5
an FFT processing unit
configured to generate a frequency spectrum of the combined signal by executing Fast Fourier transform processing to the combined signal obtained by combining each detection signal output from each of the pair of detection coils among the plurality of detection coils
Controller 54 as configured to perform the operations described in [0160]-[0163], etc.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-9 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.
Claims 1 and 9 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) for the limitations above. This requires specific structure be disclosed that performs the claimed functionality. Among the elements invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the offset processing unit/step corresponds to the circuitry depicted in fig. 10. However, offset processing unit 57 is not shown in specific detail, only schematically. It is only shown as a series of schematic boxes described functionally. Specifically lacking is the structure for the elements: offset voltage generation circuit 57b, arithmetic circuit 57c, and difference absolute value conversion circuit 57d. As best understood, these elements are not implemented by a programmed processor or controller as is the case for other unit/step elements, but some sort of circuitry.
Accordingly, claims 1 and 9, and by extension dependent claims 2-8, are found to contain 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, and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
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 1-10 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.
In claims 1 and 9, the offset processing unit/step limitation 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. No specific structure for performing this function is described. In fig. 10, for example, this structure is only shown schematically and described in general functional terms. Therefore, these claim are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. The same applies to dependent claims 2-8.
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.
In addition:
Claims 1, 5, 9, and 10 all recite "the combined signal." However, there are two "a combined signal" elements in claims 1 (from which claim 5 depends), 9, and 10. It is unclear which of these combined signals "the combined signal" refers to. For the purpose of examination, this is read as if saying "the combined signals."
Claims 1, 9, and 10 all recite, in the last line, "the amount of wear corresponding to the driving frequency." In other words, this states that the amount of wear of a bearing corresponds to the current driving frequency. An amount of wear of a bearing is logically independent of a current driving frequency. Clarification/correction is requested.
In claims 1 and 9 it is unclear, in the last clause, whether calculating the difference is based on the acquired adjustment data or executing the offset processing is based on the acquired offset data. Clarification/correction is requested.
Claims 2-8 also inherit the various deficiencies of claim 1.
Claim 10 additionally recites "… offset processing to be executed by the combined signals …". It is not understood how signals are to execute processing, as signals lack agency. Clarification/correction is requested.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 2013-078170 to Tanaka is the closest document discovered in the search. The apparatus disclosed therein for monitoring wear of a bearing of a canned motor similarly combines detection signals from coil pairs (see fig. 2) to detect wear. However, this document discloses nothing related to the driving frequency of the motor, specifically with how it relates to processing to determine an amount of wear of a bearing.
US 2005/0012630 to Misato discloses a related device for detecting bearing wear in a canned motor (see fig. 1). However, this document also discloses nothing related to the driving frequency of the motor, specifically with how it relates to processing to determine an amount of wear of a bearing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Split whose telephone number is (571)270-1524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9:00 to 3:30.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-2258. 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.
/JS/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/JUDY NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights