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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-13 are objected to because of the following informalities: “the vehicle” in claims 1 and 5-13 should read “the one or more vehicles”, for consistency in terminology with the initial claim 1/13 introduction of “one of more vehicles”. In claims 2-4, “the vehicle” should read “the plurality of vehicles”, for consistency in terminology with the limitation “the one or more vehicles is a plurality of the vehicles” in the beginning of claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Please note that claims 1-12 are directed to an apparatus which must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function [MPEP 2114]. Hence, the functional limitations “circuitry to decide…”, “circuitry to determine…”, “circuitry selects…”, “device to control…”, “circuitry to acquire…”, “circuitry to reduce…”, etc., which are narrative in form have been given very little patentable weight, insomuch as the examiner bears the burden of supplying art that discloses the claimed structure and is capable of performing the claimed functions, while not necessarily needing to explicitly disclose performing the claimed functions. In order to be given patentable weight, a functional recitation must be supported by recitation in the claim of sufficient structure to warrant the presence of the functional language. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997)
In this case, a configuration of the appropriate structure to perform each of the recited functions is required in order to give full patentable weight to each of the functions in the apparatus.
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 1-13 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.
Claims 1 and 13 recite “the axle speed” as singular after earlier reciting “an axle speed” for “each of a plurality of axles”, rendering it unclear which axle speed(s) the later singular recitation is referring to, or if it is intended to recite to each and every one of the axle speeds.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 11 also recite “the axle speed”.
Claims 2, 5, 8-9, and 12 are also rejected by virtue of dependence.
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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwabori (JP2000295705A) in view of Maeda et al (EP3056397A1).
Regarding claim 1, Iwabori teaches a slip-and-skid determining device provided for a vehicle (Figures 1+ illustrate the electronic control structure including controller 40/50/60/70), comprising: axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70, e.g., 31) capable of being configured to decide, for each of a plurality of axles in the vehicle, axle speed changeable in accordance with a rotational speed of a wheel attached to each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle (Paragraphs 0004, 0011+); reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70, e.g., 32a and/or 41) capable of being configured to decide, based on the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and a physical quantity changeable during travel of the railway vehicle, a reference axle speed in the vehicle; and determining circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70, e.g., 32a and/or 41/42/51/52/61/63/71/72) capable of being configured to determine, based on comparisons between the axle speeds for each of the plurality of axles and the reference axle speed, whether any slip or skid of the wheel occurs (paragraph 0004: "while the electric vehicle is in a powering operation by a powering command, The lowest rotation speed of the N1, N2, N3, and N4 is detected, and this is used as the reference speed NREF(A), and the difference between the N1, N2, N3, N4 and the reference speed NREF(A) is detected. Among them, when any one of the differences exceeds a predetermined value and the exceeded state continues for a predetermined time, or a change value (dNi/dt, i=1) of each of N1, N2, N3 and N4 per time. , 2, 3, 4), a change value exceeds a predetermined value, and if the changed value continues for a predetermined time, it is determined that the wheel is idling, and the electric vehicle receives a brake command. During the braking operation, the highest rotation speed of the N1, N2, N3 and N4 is detected and used as a reference speed NREF(B), and the reference speed NREF(B) and the N1, N2, N3 and N4 are detected. When any one of the differences from the difference exceeds a predetermined value and the exceeded state continues for a predetermined time, or the change value (-dNi) of each of the N1, N2, N3 and N4 per time. /Dt, i=1,2,3,4), any one of the change values exceeds a predetermined value, and when the changed state continues for a predetermined time, it is determined that the wheel is in a sliding state,"; paragraph 0032-0035+).
Iwabori does not teach that the vehicle is a railway vehicle.
Maeda teaches a slip-and-skid determining/prevention device provided for each of one or more vehicles included in a railway vehicle, wherein the one or more vehicles is a plurality of vehicles, in order to provide synchronized control to a plurality of mechanically connected vehicles in a railway vehicle (Figures 1-3; paragraphs 0007-0008, 0014-0018, 0032-0034, etc.).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Iwabori, such that the device is provided for each of a plurality of vehicles in a railway vehicle, as suggested and taught by Iwabori, in order to provide synchronized control to a plurality of mechanically connected vehicles in a railway vehicle.
Regarding claim 2, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to decide the reference axle speed based on the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and axle speed of each of a plurality of axles in another vehicle of the plurality of vehicles (the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions).
Regarding claim 3, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 2 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to select, as the reference axle speed, a maximum value of speeds that are the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the another vehicle, and the determining circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to determine, based on comparison between the axle speed and the reference axle speed, whether any skid of the wheel occurs (the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions).
Regarding claim 4, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 2 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to select, as the reference axle speed, a minimum value of the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the another vehicle, and the determining circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to determine, based on comparison between the axle speed and the reference axle speed, whether any slip of the wheel occurs (the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions).
Regarding claim 5, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to decide the reference axle speed based on the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and a speed of the railway vehicle (the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions).
Regarding claim 6, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 5 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to select, as the reference axle speed, a maximum value of speeds that are the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and the speed of the railway vehicle, and the determining circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to determine, based on comparison between the axle speed and the reference axle speed, whether any skid of the wheel occurs (the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions).
Regarding claim 7, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 5 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to select, as the reference axle speed, a minimum value of the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and the speed of the railway vehicle, and the determining circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to determine, based on comparison between the axle speed and the reference axle speed, whether any slip of the wheel occurs (paragraph 0004 [also, the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions]).
Regarding claim 8, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to decide the reference axle speed that maintains a rate of change in the reference axle speed within a target range (paragraphs 0011+ describe maintaining the rate of change via selection of the max/min speed [also, the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions]).
Regarding claim 9, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 8 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) is capable of being configured to decide the reference axle speed that maintains the rate of change in the reference axle speed within the target range defined based on an acceleration of the railway vehicle (the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions).
Regarding claim 10, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches axle acceleration deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70) capable of being configured to decide an axle acceleration based on the axle speed, wherein the determining circuitry is capable of being configured to determine, based on comparison between the axle speed and the reference axle speed or comparison between the axle acceleration and an acceleration of the railway vehicle, whether any slip or skid of the vehicle occurs (paragraphs 0011-0016 and previously cited sections [also, the claim does not recite configuration/programming of the circuitry to perform the functions]).
Regarding claim 11, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Iwabori teaches that the axle speed deciding circuitry decide, based on the rotational speed of the wheel attached to each of the plurality of axles, the axle speed corresponding to a circumferential speed of the wheel.
Regarding claim 12, Iwabori discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Iwabori further teaches a brake control device capable of being configured to control, in accordance with a braking command indicating a target deceleration being a target value for a deceleration of the railway vehicle, a mechanical brake device (air brake) provided for each of a plurality of wheels in a vehicle of one or more vehicles included in the vehicle, the mechanical brake device being configured to decelerate braking command the vehicle by pressing a frictional member against a rotor rotating during travel of the railway vehicle based on pressure of a fluid supplied (air brake); and the slip-and-skid determining device according to claim 1, wherein the brake control device includes target brake force deciding circuitry capable of being configured to acquire the braking command and decide a target brake force being a brake force to achieve the target deceleration, target pressure deciding circuitry capable of being configured to decide, based on the target brake force, a target pressure being a target value for the pressure of the fluid to be supplied to the mechanical brake device, an output valve capable of compressing the fluid supplied from a fluid source in accordance with the target pressure and supply the compressed fluid to the mechanical brake device (the above limitations include necessary structure [and their broad capabilities] for air brake operation described in paragraphs 0062-0063), and re-adhesion controlling circuitry capable of being configured to reduce, when a determination result is received from the slip-and-skid determining device and the determining circuitry in the slip-and-skid determining device determines that a skid of at least one wheel of the plurality of wheels occurs, the brake force generated by the mechanical brake device corresponding to the at least one wheel for which the occurrence of skid is determined by the determining circuitry (re-adhesion control and capability described throughout paragraphs 0011-0028, 0062-0063 [also, note that the majority of functional limitations in this claim are not configurations of any structure recited]).
Maeda also discloses a brake control device capable of being configured to control, in accordance with a braking command indicating a target deceleration being a target value for a deceleration of the railway vehicle (from target deceleration calculator 61), a mechanical brake device (air brake) provided for each of a plurality of wheels in a vehicle of one or more vehicles included in a railway vehicle (paragraph 0034), the mechanical brake device being configured to decelerate braking command the vehicle by pressing a frictional member against a rotor rotating during travel of the railway vehicle based on pressure of a fluid supplied (paragraph 0034); and the slip-and-skid determining device (previously cited), wherein the brake control device includes target brake force deciding circuitry (40, 60, 66) capable of being configured to acquire the braking command and decide a target brake force being a brake force to achieve the target deceleration (paragraphs 0050-0053), target pressure deciding circuitry (40, 60, 67) capable of being configured to decide, based on the target brake force, a target pressure being a target value for the pressure of the fluid to be supplied to the mechanical brake device (See "The air brake force command value Fam is a command value for the BC pressure of each of the air brakes 13A to 13D", "BC pressure corresponding to the air brake force command value Fam"; paragraphs 0049-0050, 0058), an output valve capable of compressing the fluid supplied from a fluid source in accordance with the target pressure and supply the compressed fluid to the mechanical brake device (paragraph 0002 acknowledges the compressed air structure/control being well known in the art), and re-adhesion controlling circuitry capable of being configured to reduce, when a determination result is received from the slip-and-skid determining device and the determining circuitry in the slip-and-skid determining device determines that a skid of at least one wheel of the plurality of wheels occurs, the brake force generated by the mechanical brake device corresponding to the at least one wheel for which the occurrence of skid is determined by the determining circuitry (paragraphs 0015-0018, 0025-0026, 0029, and 0077-0090 and Figure 9 describe the re-adhesion control and corresponding circuitry [also, again note that the majority of functional limitations in this claim are not configurations of any structure recited]).
Regarding claim 13, Iwabori teaches a slip-and-skid determining device and method provided for a vehicle (Figures 1+ illustrate the electronic control structure including controller 40/50/60/70), comprising: axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70, e.g., 31) configured to decide, for each of a plurality of axles in the vehicle, axle speed changeable in accordance with a rotational speed of a wheel attached to each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle (Paragraphs 0004, 0011+); reference axle speed deciding circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70, e.g., 32a and/or 41) configured to decide, based on the axle speed of each of the plurality of axles in the vehicle and a physical quantity changeable during travel of the railway vehicle, a reference axle speed in the vehicle; and determining circuitry (portion of 40/50/60/70, e.g., 32a and/or 41/42/51/52/61/63/71/72) configured to determine, based on comparisons between the axle speeds for each of the plurality of axles and the reference axle speed, whether any slip or skid of the wheel occurs (paragraph 0004: "while the electric vehicle is in a powering operation by a powering command, The lowest rotation speed of the N1, N2, N3, and N4 is detected, and this is used as the reference speed NREF(A), and the difference between the N1, N2, N3, N4 and the reference speed NREF(A) is detected. Among them, when any one of the differences exceeds a predetermined value and the exceeded state continues for a predetermined time, or a change value (dNi/dt, i=1) of each of N1, N2, N3 and N4 per time. , 2, 3, 4), a change value exceeds a predetermined value, and if the changed value continues for a predetermined time, it is determined that the wheel is idling, and the electric vehicle receives a brake command. During the braking operation, the highest rotation speed of the N1, N2, N3 and N4 is detected and used as a reference speed NREF(B), and the reference speed NREF(B) and the N1, N2, N3 and N4 are detected. When any one of the differences from the difference exceeds a predetermined value and the exceeded state continues for a predetermined time, or the change value (-dNi) of each of the N1, N2, N3 and N4 per time. /Dt, i=1,2,3,4), any one of the change values exceeds a predetermined value, and when the changed state continues for a predetermined time, it is determined that the wheel is in a sliding state,"; paragraph 0032-0035+).
Iwabori does not teach that the vehicle is a railway vehicle.
Maeda teaches a slip-and-skid determining/prevention device provided for each of one or more vehicles included in a railway vehicle, wherein the one or more vehicles is a plurality of vehicles, in order to provide synchronized control to a plurality of mechanically connected vehicles in a railway vehicle (Figures 1-3; paragraphs 0007-0008, 0014-0018, 0032-0034, etc.).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Iwabori, such that the device is provided for each of a plurality of vehicles in a railway vehicle, as suggested and taught by Iwabori, in order to provide synchronized control to a plurality of mechanically connected vehicles in a railway vehicle.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R STECKBAUER whose telephone number is (571)270-0433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30-7:30 PST.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/KEVIN R STECKBAUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747