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 .
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.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed 08/10/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
REGARDING THE DRAWINGS:
“First surfaces are identified as 31’ & 14”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The applicant’s Specification describes element 31’ as a free main surface or a first main face and element 14 as a flat annular face. Neither element describe “first surfaces” as recited in the claim.
“Second surfaces are identified as 32’ & 16.1”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The applicant’s Specification describes element 32’ as a free main surface or first main face and element 16.1 an internal surface. Neither element describe “second surfaces” as recited in the claim.
“Third surfaces are identified as 33’ & 15.2”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The applicant’s Specification describes element 33’ as a free main surface or a first main face and element 15.2 an external surface. Neither element describe “third surfaces” as recited in the claim.
“Fourth surfaces are identified as 34’ & 16.2”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The applicant’s Specification describes element 34’ as a free main surface and element 16.2 an internal surface. Neither element describe “fourth surfaces” as recited in the claim.
“Reference numeral 105.1 has been added to FIG. 4 and into the specification for designation the rim flank”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The specification does not mention 105.1 as the rim flank nor amended specification was submitted.
“The magnetic braking device further comprises three magnetic rings 31, 32, 33 each comprising a three magnetic rings 31, 32, 33 each comprising a plurality of magnets.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The three magnetic rings 31, 32, 33 are not described which one is the first, second or third magnet, third, fourth of magnets as recited in the claims.
In the figures, one magnet of each magnetic ring is shown transversally cut. The first and second rotor sleeves 11.1, 11.2 are shown in the drawings, and the stator inner and outer sleeves 21.2, 21.1 are shown in FIGS. 10 and 11.
The examiner agrees with the applicant’s remarks regarding the first and second rotor sleeves and stator inner and outer sleeve. However, those are not all the limitations as recited in the objection.
Landing gears and rolling devices are shown in FIG. 1 and described at pages 5-6: "Each landing gear comprises a leg 101 having one end provided with two coaxial shafts 102, on each of which a wheel 103 is mounted so as to pivot.", and "an aircraft 100 comprising rolling devices each forming a landing gear mounted on the structure of the aircraft to pivot between a deployed position (shown in Figure 1) and a position stowed in a hold 108 under the action of a landing gear actuator 109 that is known per se and connected to an electronic control unit 110".
The examiner agrees with the applicant. The specific objection for the landing gear and structure & rolling device is withdrawn.
REGARDING THE 112 REJECTION:
Without acquiescing to the rejection, the claims as amended delete "at least" before each recitation of a plurality of magnets. Accordingly, each claim now recites a single first, second, third, or fourth plurality of magnets, as applicable. The claims themselves specify which pair of surfaces each magnetic flux passes through. It is noted that the pluralities of magnets may be carried by either the stator or the rotor. See As-Filed Specification, page 18, lines 10-14 ("Preferably, the pluralities of magnets 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 are secured to the stator 20 and the rotor 10 is made from an electrically conductive material. However, as a variant, the magnets may be carried by the rotor instead of the stator").
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The recited “a plurality of magnets” from the first & second plurality of magnets still recites multiple magnets and therefore still unclear for the same reasoning as in Office Action dated 08/10/2026.
REGARDING THE 102 REJECTION:
In explaining the rejection of claim 1, the Office takes the position that Sullivan's element 5 corresponds to the claimed rotor. However, Applicant respectfully submits that this interpretation is incorrect.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Although the citation does not expressly apply a separate reference numeral to a “rotor”, a person of ordinary skill would reasonably understand that a rotor is associated with shaft 3 and rotates about the shaft axis and bearings. In a rotating electrical machine, the rotor need not be drawn as separately named component for its presence to be understood from the disclosed figure and annotated figure.
Furthermore, Sullivan describes a disk-type axial flux motor/generator in which the permanent magnets produce only axial flux. Sullivan explicitly states that the permanent magnets "are substantially located within the rotor disk 1 with an axial flux orientation in which all said permanent magnets are in the same vector direction." Sullivan, paragraph [0031]. Sullivan further describes that the system is "unique in the area of disk type axial flux motor/generators." Sullivan, paragraph [0023]. Accordingly, Sullivan describes only a single plurality of magnets arranged on the rotors 1 to produce only axial flux. Sullivan therefore neither discloses nor suggests a second plurality of magnets arranged so that the second magnetic flux is radial while the first magnetic flux is axial, as recited by claim 1 as amended.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. The applicant’s claim recites “a first magnetic flux” & “a second magnetic flux”. Moreover, “The rotor disks 1, which may be constructed of an electrically conductive material or may be constructed of permanent magnets” (Sullivan para [0030]). Therefore, each rotor disk 1 carries one or more magnets and consequently functions as each disk with an individual magnetic flux. Moreover, each disk is “radial” and therefore each magnetic flux from each disk.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
first/second surface; first/second pair of surfaces; first/second plurality of magnets recited in Claim 1;
rim flank recited in Claim 2;
third/fourth surface/magnets/plurality of magnets/plurality of magnets etc. recited in the Claims;
all elements as recited in Claim 5-13;
landing gear recited in Claim 14;
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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.
Claims 1-15 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.
Regarding Claim 1, the applicant recites “… the wheel and provided with a first surface facing a first surface of the stator to form a first pair of surfaces, and a first plurality of magnets for generating a first magnetic flux which passes through the first pair of surfaces, characterized in that the rotor comprises at least one second surface facing a second surface of the stator to form a second pair of surfaces and the magnetic braking device comprises a second plurality of magnets for generating a second magnetic flux which passes through the second pair of surfaces, and in that the first pair of surfaces and the first plurality of magnets are arranged in such a way that the first magnetic flux is axial and the second pair of surfaces and the second plurality of magnets are arranged in such a way that the second magnetic flux is radial.”
Regarding the “a first surface facing a first surface of the stator to form a first pair of surfaces, and a first plurality of magnets for generating a first magnetic flux which passes through the first pair of surfaces” – how many “first plurality of magnets” are there? From the “first plurality of magnets”, what first surface(s) “generates the first magnetic flux”? Moreover, what “first surface(s)” (if any or all or some or one) comprises the “first plurality of magnets”?
The same reasoning applies regarding the “a second plurality of magnets for generating a second magnetic flux which passes through the second pair of surfaces”.
Claims 2-6 & 8-13 are rejected similar as in claim 1 for the additional “surface(s)” & “magnet(s) or magnetic flux(es)”.
Claims 2-15 are rejected based on the dependency from Claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sullivan (US 2008/0179146).
Regarding Claim 1, Sullivan discloses a rolling device for a vehicle [Aircraft landing gear] (Abstract), comprising
a wheel [4] having a hub [ “hub” where elements 1 & 2 are located] arranged to be mounted to pivot on a shaft [3] and a rim [“rim” – front part of 4] linked to the hub [“hub” where element 1 & 2 are located] by a disc [“disc” where tire would be placed on top and bottom of 4] so as to extend coaxially with the hub [ “hub” where element 1 & 2 are located] (Abstract, FIG. 1, Annotated FIG. Below),
the rim [“rim” – front part of 4] comprising at least one first annular portion [top annular portion for the rim] protruding axially from the disc [“disc” where tire would be placed on top and bottom of 4] and delimiting therewith a recess receiving an eddy current magnetic braking device comprising a stator [“stator” where elements 1 & 2 are located] constrained to rotate with the shaft [3] (Annotated FIG. Below, FIG. 1, ¶ [0033]; a motor action is produced either in the forward or reverse directions dependent upon the input from the user brake and motoring input control 7 which provides information to the processor 3 through the optical isolators 5 such as to initiate user input for forward or reverse motor action within the wheel hub motor/generator and the input from the parking brake controller 4),
a rotor [“rotor” where element 5 is located] constrained to rotate with the wheel [4] and provided with a first surface [“first surface” below for the top element 5] facing a first surface [“first surface” above for the top element 5] of the stator [“stator” where elements for the top elements 1 & 2 are located] to form a first pair of surfaces [at least one rotor and at least one stator arranged such that a gap exists between said rotor and said stator, said rotor being operably connected to a wheel of said wheeled ground vehicle for rotation and said stator member being operably connected to an axle or torque tube of said wheeled ground vehicle for non-rotational support], and a first plurality of magnets for generating a first magnetic flux which passes through the first pair of surfaces [the rotor member comprising a permanent magnet structure with an associated magnetic flux field and the stator member comprising current carrying conductors] (Claim 1, Annotated FIG. Below),
characterized in that
the rotor comprises at least one second surface [“second surface” below for the bottom element 5] facing a second surface [“second surface” above for the bottom element 5] of the stator to form a second pair of surfaces and the magnetic braking device comprises a second plurality of magnets for generating a second magnetic flux which passes through the second pair of surfaces, and in that the first pair of surfaces and the first plurality of magnets are arranged in such a way that the first magnetic flux is axial and the second pair of surfaces and the second plurality of magnets are arranged in such a way that the second magnetic flux is radial [the rotor member comprising a permanent magnet structure with an associated magnetic flux field and the stator member comprising current carrying conductors] (Claim 1; element (b), ¶ [0030]; The stator disks 2, which may be constructed of an electrically conductive material, are coupled to the shaft 3 and/or central torque tube, and are stationary with respect to the wheel in which said disks are electrically isolated from each other except through available electrical connections (not shown)).
PNG
media_image1.png
662
481
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Sullivan discloses the rolling device according to claim 1 [see rejected Claim 1],
in which the first pair of surfaces [“top surfaces” – refer to rejected Claim 1] is arranged in the vicinity of a rim flank [“rim flank” on the opposite side of the rim] secured to the first annular portion of the rim [rim] opposite the disc and the second pair of surfaces [“bottom surfaces” – refer to rejected Claim 1] is arranged in the recess in the vicinity of the first annular portion of the rim [rim] (FIG. 1 and annotated FIG. above).
Regarding Claim 14, Sullivan discloses the rolling device according to claim 1 [see rejected Claim 1] forming part of an aircraft landing gear [Aircraft landing gear] (FIG. 1).
Regarding Claim 15, Sullivan discloses an aircraft comprising a structure to which at least one of the rolling device according to claim 1 is fastened (FIG. 1, Abstract; a rolling device for a vehicle includes a wheel having a hub to be mounted to pivot on a shaft).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSEPH ORTEGA whose telephone number is (469)295-9083. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, TULSIDAS C. PATEL can be reached at (571)272-2098. 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.
/JOSEPH ORTEGA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights