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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's submission filed on 09/05/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-15 remain(s) pending in the application. Applicant's amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 06/05/2025, hereinafter NFOA.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by HERWIG KARL-WILHELM et al. EP 3957868 A1, hereinafter Herwig, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, the applicant’s argument that Herwig fails to disclose the newly added subject matter is accurate. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, claim 1 has been rejected in further view of Beales; Thomas David et al. US 20160356290 A1, hereinafter Beales.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herwig in view of Beales; Thomas David et al. US 20160356290 A1, hereinafter Beales. The references is/are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because the references is/are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (fluid actuated actuators); or the references is/are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (piston position determination). MPEP2141.01(a) I.
Regarding claim 1, Herwig discloses (Fig. 10-17) a piston-cylinder unit (1)
a) with a cylinder (2) which has a cylinder head (4),
b) with a piston (7) axially movable in the cylinder, which is pressurized with a pressurized fluid via a pressure chamber (3, [0087]),
c) with a piston motion sensor (30) that includes a sensor housing (31),
d) wherein the piston motion sensor and the sensor housing are arranged in a transverse bore (27) of the cylinder head having a longitudinal axis (47), and
e) the piston motion sensor emits a sensor signal which travels through the pressure chamber to the piston or a piston rod (8), is reflected by the piston or the piston rod and travels through the pressure chamber to the piston motion sensor again [0106],
wherein the transverse bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber to prevent the bore from being pressurized by the fluid in the pressure chamber (seals (43, 44) fluidically separate the (27) from (3)) and
a seal (43, 44) between the pressure chamber and the transverse bore prevents the fluid from escaping into the transverse bore and into a surrounding environment [0102-0103].
Herwig fails to explicitly state that the transverse bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber to prevent a pressure from the fluid from acting on the sensor housing, and wherein, when the sensor housing of the piston cylinder is removed from the transverse bore, a seal between the pressure chamber and the transverse bore prevents the fluid from escaping into the transverse bore and into a surrounding environment. Instead, the seals of Herwig prevent pressure from the fluid from action on only a portion of the sensor housing, and the depicted structure could not perform the functional limitation whereby when the sensor housing of the piston cylinder is removed from the transverse bore, the seal between the pressure chamber and the transverse bore prevents the fluid from escaping into the transverse bore and into a surrounding environment.
Beales discloses (Fig. 1-4) a piston-cylinder unit (20)
a) with a cylinder (24) which has a cylinder head (depicted top end of (20)),
b) with a piston (28) axially movable in the cylinder, which is pressurized with a pressurized fluid via a pressure chamber (32, [0021-0022]),
c) with a piston motion sensor (26),
d) wherein the piston motion sensor is arranged in a bore (48) of the cylinder head (depicted as residing within the head) and
e) the piston motion sensor emits a sensor signal which travels through the pressure chamber to the piston, is reflected by the piston or the piston rod and travels through the pressure chamber to the piston motion sensor again [0029],
wherein the bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber to prevent a pressure from the fluid from acting on the sensor housing (seals (62, 62) fluidically separate the (32) from (48));
wherein the bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber via a sealing element (seals (62, 62) fluidically separate the (32) from (48));
wherein the sensor signal, through a dielectric lens or a collimator (58),
a) travels from the piston motion sensor (26) to the pressure chamber (32) [0029] and/or
b) after the reflection at the piston (28), travels from the pressure chamber (32) to the piston motion sensor (26) [0026],
wherein the dielectric lens or the collimator (57) is arranged in a sensor signal channel (64) and the sealing element (62, 62) is arranged between the dielectric lens or the collimator, and the sensor signal channel [0028].
One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known element (sealing at the lens/collimator) for another (sealing at the piston motion sensor), and the results of the substitution (protect fluid leakage from the pressure chamber) would have been predictable. Because both Herwig and Beales teach optical piston motion sensors, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute sealing at the lens/collimator for the sealing at the piston motion sensor to achieve the predictable result of protecting fluid leakage from the pressure chamber.
To further clarify the modification, Beales discloses a method of sealing the bore/sensor cavity (48) from the high pressures of the pressure chamber by placing the seals on the dielectric lens or collimator that substitutes/replaces the method of sealing the bore/transverse bore (27) from the high pressures of the pressure chamber of Herwig. Stated another way, the modification substitutes/replaces seals (43,44) of Herwig with seals (62, 62) of Beales.
As a result of the modification, the resultant structure is capable of performing the functional limitation: when the sensor housing of the piston cylinder is removed from the transverse bore, the seal between the pressure chamber and the transverse bore prevents the fluid from escaping into the transverse bore and into a surrounding environment.
Regarding claim 2, Beales further discloses (Fig. 1-4), and in accordance with the previous modification above of claim 1: the transverse bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber via a sealing element (seals (62, 62)) fluidically separate the (32) from (48)).
Regarding claim 3, Herwig further discloses (Fig. 10-17) the sensor signal, through a dielectric lens or a collimator (57),
a) travels from the piston motion sensor (30) to the pressure chamber (3) [0106] and/or
b) after the reflection at the piston (7) or the piston rod (8), travels from the pressure chamber (3) to the piston motion sensor (30) [0106],
wherein the dielectric lens or the collimator (57) is arranged in a sensor signal channel (26).
Beales further discloses (Fig. 1-4), and in accordance with the previous modification above of claim 1: a piston-cylinder unit (20)
a) with a cylinder (24) which has a cylinder head (depicted top end of (20)),
b) with a piston (28) axially movable in the cylinder, which is pressurized with a pressurized fluid via a pressure chamber (32, [0021-0022]),
c) with a piston motion sensor (26),
d) wherein the piston motion sensor is arranged in a bore (48) of the cylinder head (depicted as residing within the head) and
e) the piston motion sensor emits a sensor signal which travels through the pressure chamber to the piston, is reflected by the piston or the piston rod and travels through the pressure chamber to the piston motion sensor again [0029],
wherein the bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber (seals (62, 62) fluidically separate the (32) from (48));
wherein the bore is fluidically separated from the pressure chamber via a sealing element (seals (62, 62) fluidically separate the (32) from (48));
wherein the sensor signal, through a dielectric lens or a collimator (58),
a) travels from the piston motion sensor (26) to the pressure chamber (32) [0029] and/or
b) after the reflection at the piston (28), travels from the pressure chamber (32) to the piston motion sensor (26) [0026],
wherein the dielectric lens or the collimator (57) is arranged in a sensor signal channel (64) and the sealing element (62, 62) is arranged between the dielectric lens or the collimator, and the sensor signal channel [0028].
Regarding claim 4, Herwig discloses (Fig. 10-17) a positioning and/or alignment element (29) is supported in the transverse bore (27) in the direction of the longitudinal axis (47) of the transverse bore, and the piston motion sensor (30) is supported on the positioning and/or alignment element in the direction of the longitudinal axis [0099-0101].
Regarding claim 6, as far as is determinate, Herwig discloses (Fig. 10-17) a) a position of the positioning and/or alignment element (29), in the direction of the longitudinal axis (47) of the transverse bore (27), and/or b) an alignment of the positioning and/or alignment element, around the longitudinal axis of the transverse bore, is/are secured by a securing element (39) [0101], wherein the securing element is preferably a screw which extends parallel to the longitudinal axis of the transverse bore or radially to the longitudinal axis of the transverse bore.
Regarding claim 7, Herwig discloses (Fig. 10-17) the positioning and/or alignment element (29) and the piston motion sensor (30) lie against one another via contact surfaces (32, 33), which restrict or predetermine an alignment of the piston motion sensor relative to the positioning and/or alignment element via a form-fit in circumferential direction around the longitudinal axis of the transverse bore [0099-0100].
Regarding claim 8, Herwig discloses (Fig. 10-17) the piston motion sensor (30) is retained on the positioning and/or alignment element (29) via a latching connection (such as by (38, 39) [0101]) or a permanent magnet.
Regarding claim 9, as far as is determinate, Herwig discloses (Fig. 10-17) the piston motion sensor (30) has, on the side facing away from the positioning and/or alignment element (29), a detachment catch (38) which can be coupled to a detachment tool in order to apply detachment forces onto the piston motion sensor to detach the piston motion sensor from the positioning and/or alignment element (as depicted in Fig. 12, and disclosed in [0101], (30) is releasably coupled to (29)),
wherein the detachment catch is preferably formed as an internal thread (38) of the piston motion sensor and in particular the internal thread is formed by a threaded insert, which is injected or pressed into a sensor housing of the piston motion sensor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 and 10-15 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:
Regarding claim 5, Herwig discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 4. Herwig further discloses (Fig. 10-17) the transverse bore (27) is a blind-hole bore (depicted as such).
Herwig fails to explicitly state that the positioning and/or alignment element (29) is supported on a floor of the blind-hole bore. Instead, (29) is depicted as having a space between it and the blind-hole bore floor.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed structural relationship between the blind-hole bore floor and the positioning and/or alignment element. Although Herwig discloses a blind-hole bore floor and a positioning and/or alignment element, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Herwig to incorporate the details of the positioning and/or alignment element is supported on a floor of the blind-hole bore, along with the other claimed components of the piston-cylinder unit. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the independent claim.
Regarding claim 10, as far as is determinate, Herwig discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for Claim 1. Herwig further discloses (Fig. 10-17) the piston motion sensor (30) is connected to a housing plug (37).
Herwig fails to explicitly state that the piston motion sensor is connected to the housing plug via a sensor cable, wherein the sensor cable is preferably releasably connected to the piston motion sensor and/or the housing plug.
Withstanding the formalities/rejections listed previously, Claims 10-15, specifically 10, contains allowable subject matter. The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the claim, and specifically does not show the claimed structural relationship between the piston motion sensor and housing plug. Although Herwig discloses a piston motion sensor and housing plug, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Herwig to incorporate the details of the housing plug via a sensor cable, wherein the sensor cable is preferably releasably connected to the piston motion sensor and/or the housing plug, along with the other claimed components of the piston-cylinder unit. Therefore, when viewed as a whole and for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in the independent claim.
Claims 11-15 depend from claim 10.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MATTHEW WIBLIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9836. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/MATTHEW WIBLIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745