DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed 01 October 2024. In view of this communication, claims 1-4 are now pending in the application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 01 October 2024, 09 October 2024, 06 June 2025, and 12 December 2025 was/were filed before mailing of the first action on the merits. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Disclosure
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 101359865 A), hereinafter referred to as “Li”, in view of Imanishi et al. (US 2019/0393764 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Imanishi”.
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses an eddy current deceleration device [2-12] (fig. 1; ¶ 0002-0004) comprising:
two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] each including a braking member [4] fixed to a propeller shaft [1] (fig. 1; ¶ 0021-0023); and
PNG
media_image1.png
665
566
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a control unit [8-12] that controls braking states of the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] (fig. 1; ¶ 0022),
wherein the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] are arranged in different positions in an axial direction of the propeller shaft [1] (fig. 1; ¶ 0021; the two rotors are axially adjacent to one another).
Li does not disclose the main bodies [3,4] each including a braking member that is fixed to a propeller shaft and has a tubular shape; and a magnet facing toward the braking member in a radial direction of the braking member.
Imanishi discloses an eddy current deceleration device comprising a deceleration device main body (fig. 1), the deceleration device main body including a braking member [1] that is fixed to a propeller shaft [10] and has a tubular shape; and a magnet [3] facing toward the braking member [1] in a radial direction of the braking member [1] (fig. 1; ¶ 0062-0067).
PNG
media_image2.png
606
610
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form each of the deceleration device main bodies of Li having structures including braking members and magnets as taught by Imanishi, in order to provide an electricity generating function while minimizing an increase in the number of components, ensuring smooth rotation during non-braking, and enhancing braking efficiency (¶ 0017, 0069 of Imanishi).
Regarding claim 2, Li, in view of Imanishi, discloses the eddy current deceleration device according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the control unit [8-12] is configured to be able to switch among:
a first state in which both of the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] are in braking states (¶ 0024; both clutches are engaged and “maximum braking torque” is generated);
a second state in which one deceleration device main body [3,4] of the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] is in a braking state and the other deceleration device main body [3,4] is in a non-braking state (¶ 0023; only one of the clutches is engaged); and
a third state in which both of the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] are in non-braking states (¶ 0025; neither clutch is engaged).
Regarding claim 3, Li, in view of Imanishi, discloses the eddy current deceleration device according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the control unit [8-12] is configured to be able to place the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] into braking states alternately and consecutively (¶ 0022; the “control mechanism can independently control the working state of the two sets of rotors, so that the braking torque of the retarder can be controlled in stages”).
Regarding claim 4, Li, in view of Imanishi, discloses the eddy current deceleration device according to claim 2, as stated above, wherein the control unit [8-12] is configured to be able to place the two deceleration device main bodies [3,4] into braking states alternately and consecutively (¶ 0022; the “control mechanism can independently control the working state of the two sets of rotors, so that the braking torque of the retarder can be controlled in stages”).
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Prior art:
Imanishi et al. (US 2021/0036595 A1, US 2018/0138795 A1) discloses an eddy current decelerating apparatus similar to and from the same inventors as the present application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Andrews whose telephone number is (571)270-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30am-3:00pm.
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, Oluseye Iwarere can be reached at 571-270-5112. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Michael Andrews/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights