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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in European Patent Office (EPO) on August 1, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the EP 23189031.0 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner’s Note: for additional information, see the Priority Document Exchange Failure Status Report mailed on January 1, 2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 18, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1-15 contain handwritten reference numbers. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 8, 10-11, and 13-17 are objected to because of the following informalities (note that the markings show the examiner’s suggested amendments):
Claim 1, lines 4-5, “running perpendicular to a longitudinal shaft axis, the conductor having a shaft contact portion for making contact with a circumferential contact are”, it appears that should be change to - - running perpendicular to a longitudinal shaft axis, the at least one conductor having a shaft contact portion for making contact with a circumferential contact
Claim 2, line 4, “conductors each having a shaft contact portion, the shaft contact portions”, it appears that should be change to - - two conductors each having a shaft contact portion, the shaft contact portions - -.
Claim 4, line 3, “portion connecting the leg portions, the spring element being disposed on”, it appears that should be change to - - portion connecting the two leg portions, the spring element being disposed on - -.
Claim 5, line 2, “leg portions and the connecting portion serves as a passage for the shaft”, it appears that should be change to - - two leg portions and the connecting portion serves as a passage for the shaft - -.
Claim 8, line 2, “attached to the holder by means of a fastening means of the discharge”, it appears that should be change to - - attached to the holder by
Claim 10, line 3, “base portion, the conductor being attached to the elastic portion”, it appears that should be change to - - base portion, the at least one conductor being attached to the at least one elastic portion - -.
Claim 11, lines 1-2, “wherein the elastic portion has a fastening mount for attaching the conductor”, it appears that should be change to - - wherein the at least one elastic portion has a fastening mount for attaching the at least one conductor - -.
Claim 13, line 1, “wherein the conductor is”, it appears that should be change to - - wherein the at least one conductor is - -.
Claim 14, line 1, “wherein the conductor”, it appears that should be change to - - wherein the at least one conductor - -.
Claim 15, line 1, “wherein the conductor is”, it appears that should be change to - - wherein the at least one conductor is - -.
Claim 16, line 1, “wherein the conductors are”, it appears that should be change to - - wherein the two conductors are - -.
Claim 17, line 1, “A machine comprising a discharge device according to claim 1”, it appears that should be change to - - A machine comprising [[a]] the discharge device according to claim 1- -.
Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner’s Note: Applicant is required to carefully review all pending claims for the presence of any similar informalities and to correct them accordingly.
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.
Claim 8, includes the limitation “the spring element is attached to the holder by means of a fastening means of the discharge device, the fastening means further serving to attach a ground conductor to the spring element” which has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because it uses use a generic placeholder “means” coupled with functional language “further serving to attach a ground conductor to the spring element” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
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.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification (i.e., page 13, lines 17-19) for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) limitation: “The measuring means 3 is an ammeter that continuously sends the electronic control unit 18 an electrical signal representative of the measured intensity I”.
Claim 8, recites the limitation “the spring element is attached to the holder by means of a fastening means of the discharge device, the fastening means further serving to attach a ground conductor to the spring element” 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 applicant’s specification recites in paragraph [0019] recites “the spring element can be attached to the holder by means of a fastening means of the discharge device, preferably the screw means, and the fastening means or screw means can further be provided for attaching a ground conductor to the spring element. The fastening means or screw means can then be used simultaneously to attach the spring element to the holder and to attach the ground conductor to the spring element, meaning no separate fastening means is required to attach the ground conductor to the spring element”, but fails to describe or explain which structure is capable to do the fastening means/screw means. In addition, the fastening means/screw means is recited in paragraphs [0019], [0020], [0047]; but do not remedy the deficiencies raised above. 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 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.
Claim(s) 8 is 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.
With regard to claim 8, recite the limitations “the spring element is attached to the holder by a fastening means of the discharge device, the fastening means further serving to attach a ground conductor to the spring element” which renders the claim vague and indefinite. The applicant’s specification recites in paragraph [0019] recites functional language “fastening means or screw means” but do not describe or explain which structure is capable to perform the fastening means or screw means. Paragraphs [0019], [0020], [0047] also recite the functional language “fastening means or screw means”, but do not remedy the deficiencies raised above.
For purposes of examination the fastening means has been interpreted as “holder cover” as the prior art Weigel (US 10,141,702 B2) teaches in Fig. 1.
Examination Notice
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was effectively filed in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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) 1-5, 7-10, 12, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Weigel (US 10,141,702 B2).
With regard to claim 1, Weigel teaches a discharge device (10 – Fig. 1-Fig. 3) (col. 3, lines 32-43) for discharging electrostatic charges from a shaft (Abstract, lines 1-2), the discharge device (10 – Fig. 1) comprising a holder (16 – Fig. 1), a spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) disposed on the holder (16 – Fig. 1), and at least one conductor (23 – Fig. 1, Fig. 3) disposed on the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) and running perpendicular to a longitudinal shaft axis (see longitudinal shaft axis – Fig. 2), the at least one conductor (23 – Fig. 1, Fig. 3) having a shaft contact portion (30, 31 – Fig. 2) for making contact with a circumferential contact (33, 34 – Fig. 2) of a shaft circumference (32, 35 – Fig. 2) in such a manner that the shaft contact portion (30, 31 – Fig. 2) is tangential (t1, t2 – Fig. 2) to the shaft circumference (32, 35 – Fig. 2) when in contact with the shaft circumference (32, 35 – Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 2, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the discharge device further comprises two conductors (21, 22 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) disposed on the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) and running perpendicular to the longitudinal shaft axis (see longitudinal shaft axis – Fig. 2), the two conductors (21, 22 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) each having a shaft contact portion (30, 31 – Fig. 2), the shaft contact portions (30, 31 – Fig. 2) together forming a set of contacts for making contact with two circumferential contact areas (33, 34 – Fig. 2) of the shaft circumference (32, 35 – Fig. 2), which are disposed opposite each other in a shaft contact plane (see Fig. 2), in such a manner that the shaft contact portions (30, 31 – Fig. 2) are tangential (t1, t2 – Fig. 2) to the shaft circumference (32, 35 – Fig. 2) when in contact with the shaft circumference (32, 35 – Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 3, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the holder (16 – Fig. 1) is in the form of a plate (see Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 4, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the holder (16 – Fig. 1) has a U-shaped cross section (17, 18 – Fig. 2), the holder (16 – Fig. 1) having two leg portions (26, 27 – Fig. 2) and a connecting portion (connecting portion where 24 – Fig. 2 is located) connecting the two leg portions (26, 27 – Fig. 2), the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) being disposed on the connecting portion (connecting portion where 24 – Fig. 2 is located).
With regard to claim 5, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 4, and further teaches a space defined by the two leg portions (26, 27 – Fig. 2) and the connecting portion (connecting portion where 24 – Fig. 2 is located) serves as a passage for the shaft (see passage for the shaft in Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 7, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) is attached to the holder (16 – Fig. 1) in a detachable manner (col. 3, lines 59-62)
With regard to claim 8, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) is attached to the holder (16 – Fig. 1) by a fastening means (19 – Fig. 1) (col. 4, lines 9-11) of the discharge device (10 – Fig. 1), the fastening means (19 – Fig. 1) further serving to attach a ground conductor (42 – Fig. 2) to the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) (col. 4, lines 54-56).
With regard to claim 9, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) is made of an electrically conductive material (Abstract, lines 1-4).
With regard to claim 10, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) has a base portion (24 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) and at least one elastic portion (21, 22 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3), which protrudes from the base portion (24 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3), the at least one conductor (23 – Fig. 1, Fig. 3) being attached to the at least one elastic portion (21, 22 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3).
With regard to claim 12, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the spring element (21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) is made of an elastic material (Abstract, lines 1-4).
With regard to claim 14, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the at least one conductor (23 – Fig. 1, Fig. 3) comprises carbon fibers (Abstract, lines 1-4).
With regard to claim 15, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the at least one conductor (23 – Fig. 1, Fig. 3) is elongate (see Fig. 3).
With regard to claim 16, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 2, and further teaches the two conductors (21, 22 – Fig. 2, Fig. 3) are disposed at an angle relative to each other (see Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 17, Weigel teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches a machine (col. 3, lines 44-47) comprising the discharge device (10 – Fig. 1-Fig. 3) according to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 6, 11, and 13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regard to claim 6, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “the holder has a recessed area on a radially inner side of the holder in the area of the connecting portion, the recessed area being configured to partially accommodate the spring element.”
With regard to claim 11, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “the at least one elastic portion has a fastening mount for attaching the at least one conductor.”
With regard to claim 13, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “the at least one conductor (23 – Fig. 1, Fig. 3) is attached to the spring element by plastic deformation.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892.
Yu (US 8,836,198 B2) teaches a slip ring 100 transmits electrical signals through the brush holder unit 1 of the present invention, the carbon brushes 30 touch the slip ring 100. The slip ring 100 extends the branches 24 of the brush frame 20 outwardly that the branches 24 of the brush frame 20 urges the carbon brushes 30 against the slip ring 100. The concave sidewalls 161 in the slots 16 provide spaces to extend the branches 24, and it provides the brush frame 20 stably against the sidewall of the slots 16 that the brush frame 20 is firmly secured in the recess 12 of the insulating base 10 without any movement.
Oh (US 7,1938,36 B2) teaches a grounding brush for mitigating static electric charge on a motor shaft includes a plurality of filaments secured to an annular frame around the shaft, with tips of the filaments disposed in a channel defined by the frame. Conductive powder can be provided in the channel to improve current flow from the shaft to the filaments.
Schunk Bahn (DE 202013001243 U1) teaches a discharge device (10, 35) for dissipating electrostatic charge from a shaft (20) having two swivel levers (14, 15) pivotably mounted on a swivel base (11) about a pivot axis (12, 13), respectively Shaft pivotable contact ends (16, 36) each having an electrically conductive contact device (17, 38), wherein the contact device is connected via an electrical guide formed on the pivot levers with the swiveling base for discharging charge into an electrical conductor (23) connected to the swivel base, and a biasing means (25) for generating a contact force on the shaft from the contactor, the contactor comprising a fiber array (32, 40) of a plurality of rectified carbon fibers (33, 39) contacting contact ends to abut against a contact surface (19) of the shaft are provided.
Denner (US 2017/0251544 A1) teaches a discharging device (10) for discharging electrostatic charges from a shaft (14), comprising a conductor arrangement having at least two bending-elastic conductors (24, 25) arranged on a holder (15) and made of a carbon-fiber arrangement, the holder having two holder legs (17, 18) arranged on a common pivot axis (12), each holder leg serving to accommodate a terminal section of a conductor and the holder legs being pivotable relative to each other in order for a holder angle (α) formed between the holder legs to be adjusted and the holder legs being lockable in a defined pivoted position.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicolas Bellido whose telephone number is (571) 272-5034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9:00 am to 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, Monica Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-1838. 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 (57) 272-1000.
/N.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2838
/MONICA LEWIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights