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 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 1-7 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 claim recites that the at least two measurement cells are “configured to increase an acceptable air gap between a stator and a rotor of a tachometer for an aircraft wheel”. It is unclear as to what structure is being referred to in the claim that results in an increase in an acceptable air gap between a stator and a rotor. When looking to the instant specification, the specification appears to state that the acceptable air gap is generally directly related to the size of the targets, and thus increasing the size of the targets therefore makes it possible to increase the air gap (Para [0010]), giving an ex ample of reducing the number of teeth 37 of the toothed ring 35 so that the size of the teeth can be increased (Para [0045]). The claim fails to include any limitations regarding the sizing of the targets, which would presumably result in the configuration of increasing an acceptable air gap. As such, the limitation “configured to increase an acceptable air gap […] renders the claim indefinite. For the purposes of further examination, any prior art that teaches the structure claimed by claim 1 is assumed to meet the limitation “configured to increase an acceptable air gap between a stator and rotor”.
Regarding claims 2-7, they are dependent on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zabulon et al. (US 2020/0391705 A1) (hereinafter Zabulon).
As best understood regarding claim 1, Zabulon teaches a contactless sensor [measurement device 22] comprising at least two measurement cells [two sensing components 31] configured to increase an acceptable air gap between a stator [ring 26] and a rotor [rim 23] of a tachometer for an aircraft wheel [aircraft wheel tachometer; aircraft landing-gear wheel 20], the stator being configured to be secured to an axle [ring 26 mounted on axle 25; prevented from rotating relative to the axle 25], and the rotor being configured to be rotatably connected to the wheel mounted on the axle so as to rotate about an axis of rotation [wheel 20 comprises rim 23 that receives 24 and is rotatably mounted on axle 25], one of the stator or the rotor bearing the contactless sensor [measurement device 22 mounted on ring 26], the measurement cells of which are adapted to interact with a plurality of targets borne by the other of the stator or the rotor [target 30 is a metal toothed wheel that is mounted on the rim 23] in order to generate two signals representative of a rotational speed of the wheel [configured for producing an electrical measurement signal that is representative of the speed of rotation of the target 30; two measurement signals produced by the two sensors 31], the measurement cells being offset angularly from one another about the axis so as to detect a direction of rotation of the wheel by combining the two signals [direction of rotation of the wheel 20] (Para [0056-0074, 0080-0085], see Abstract, Figs. 3 and 5-7).
Regarding claim 2, Zabulon as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the contactless sensor [22] is borne by the stator [26] and the targets [30] are borne by the rotor [23] (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Zabulon as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the contactless sensor is a Hall effect sensor [Hall effect sensor] (Para [0073]).
Regarding claim 4, Zabulon as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the rotor comprises a toothed ring having a plurality of teeth regularly angularly distributed about the axis to form the targets [target 30 having axial teeth] (see Figs. 6-7).
Regarding claim 6, Zabulon as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the measurement cells [31] extend opposite the targets [30] in a radial direction during operation (see Figs. 6-7).
Regarding claim 7, Zabulon as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the rotor comprises a wheel cover configured to be secured to the wheel (Para [0007]).
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, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) 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 as of the effective filing date of the later invention 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zabulon, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sterling (US 2009/0295382 A1) (hereinafter Sterling).
Regarding claim 5, Zabulon as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, except for wherein the toothed ring comprises a paramagnetic material so that the teeth form magnetic targets. Sterling teaches the usage of paramagnetic material in the teeth of a tooth-wheel (Para [0027]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Zabulo9n with Sterling such that the toothed ring comprises a paramagnetic material so that the teeth form magnetic targets, in order to improve sensing accuracy of the magnetic sensors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID Z HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/DAVID Z HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights