DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on 12.9.24. In view of this communication, claims 1-10 are now pending in this application.
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 .
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.
Claims 8,9 recite “limit angle” which is not shown in any drawing as to where it is being taken.
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
Claims below 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitations “coupling points”. Claim 3 upon which claim 5 depends recites “first coupling point” and “second coupling point” . It is not clear whether they are one and the same. In order to further prosecution, examiner is interpreting them to be same.
Claims 6-10 are rejected due to their dependency on Claim 5 .
Claim 8 recites “that a moment in the direction of a decreasing angle at the coupling points with respect to the direction of displacement”. It is not clear whether “moment” here means an instance in time or the physics definition of moment (Force times distance). Further claim limitation “with maximum actuation being above a limit angle” is not clear as limit angle can be taken anywhere before a certain actuation point and any actuation beyond automatically becomes a maximum. To further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this claim recitation same as increase in actuation distance due to presence of negative spring constant. Claim 10 is rejected due to their dependency on Claim 8 .
Claim 9 recites “relevant rod element” and then “relevant bar element” and it is not clear if they are same. Examiner interprets the same. Claim 9 further recites “at maximum drive” which is not clear. Examiner interprets “drive” as “displacement”. Claim 9 further recites “a moment is effected on the relevant rod element in the direction of an increasing angle between the direction of the acting spring force and the longitudinal direction of a section of the relevant bar element to the corresponding coupling point”. It is not clear from specification or claims where the moment is being taken, which is relevant rod (or bar) element, which angle, which coupling point. To further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this claim recitation same as increase in actuation distance due to presence of negative spring constant.
Claim 10 recites the phrase "in particular" which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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 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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hau et al (Silicone based dielectric elastomer strip actuators coupled with nonlinear biasing elements for large actuation strains, Smart Materials and Structures Published 6.5.2018), hereinafter NPLHau.
Regarding Claim 1, NPL Hau discloses (Figs 3,8a,8b,10,14) a translatory actuator comprising:
a dielectric elastomer actuator (DEA) (Fig 8a, DEA) configured to be altered from a non-activated state (Fig 3, U=0V) into an activated state (Fig 3, U=Umax) by applying an electrical voltage so that a change in length (delta l) occurs in at least one displacement direction (A) (delta l direction) between two terminals (Fig 3);
an actuating element (Frame,F2) for providing an actuating stroke and/or an actuating force in a translatory actuating direction (S) (delta l direction);
a linear gear (F2 connecting the DEA to the actuating element with a gear reduction or a gear ratio (elastomer and frame F2 are connected with a gear ratio of 1);
a spring device (Fig 8, linear spring + negative bias spring NBS) that is mechanically coupled (Fig 8a) to the DEA and/or to the linear gear and/or comprises the linear gear the spring device having an at least partially negative spring constant characteristic (NBS is negative bias spring) , so that when the DEA is activated, its displacement in the displacement direction (A) (delta l direction) is supported with a greater force or its displacement is counteracted by a smaller force than in the non-activated state (Fig 10 discloses slope of NBS+LS is lesser than SIP-DEA at 0 and 3000V).
PNG
media_image1.png
430
340
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
372
371
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
206
708
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
364
318
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, NPL Hau discloses the actuator according to claim 1. NPL Hau further discloses wherein a first connection (F1) of the DEA (Fig 8) is fixed in a stationary manner (Fig 8) with respect to the actuator (F2).
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.
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.
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.
Claims 3-5,8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPLHau in view of Sundstrom (DE2404386 English translation).
Regarding Claim 3, NPL Hau discloses the actuator according to claim 1. NPL Hau further discloses wherein the linear gear (F2) is bidirectional (F2 can move both left and right in Fig 8) and has a first coupling point (F2 with DEA) and a second coupling point (F2 with rest of moving frame) but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first coupling point can be detachably connected to a second terminal of the DEA and the second coupling point can be detachably connected to the actuating and the second coupling point can be detachably connected to a second terminal of the DEA and the first coupling point can be detachably connected to the actuating element.
Sundstrom discloses (Fig 1) wherein the first coupling point (10,6 with 11 or 12) can be detachably connected (Fig 1 is a kinematic mechanism with hinges) to a second terminal (10 terminal) of the DEA (DEA is disclosed by NPL Hau and 10 takes the place of DEA as displacement source) and the second coupling point (16) can be detachably connected to the actuating element (20) and the second coupling point can be detachably connected to a second terminal of the DEA and the first coupling point can be detachably connected to the actuating element (Since Fig 1 is kinematic mechanism 10 with hinges can be connected to 14,15 instead of 11,12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed actuator of NPLHau with detachable kinematic mechanism of Sundstrom in order to achieve desired gear reduction ratio of lesser or greater than 1.
PNG
media_image5.png
426
460
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom discloses the actuator according to claim 3. NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom further discloses wherein the spring device (Fig 6) has a buckled beam mechanism (NBS Page 4 discloses “The NBS… compression forces lead the center of the stainless steel cross to buckle out of plane”) which is mechanically coupled (Fig 8) to the DEA in such a way that the displacements both in the non-activated state (Fig 10, 0V) and in the activated state (Fig 10, 3000V) are in a range of negative spring constant characteristics (Fig 10 discloses NBS characteristics) in which a spring constant of the spring device is negative (NBS = negative bias spring) with respect to a displacement (Fig 10) of the DEA.
PNG
media_image6.png
204
342
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom discloses the actuator according to claim 3. NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom further discloses wherein the linear transmission has a linkage transmission in which rod element (NPLHau, F2 has rod element) is connected at coupling point (Connection between two F2) but does not explicitly disclose wherein the linear transmission has a linkage transmission in which at least three rod elements are pivotally connected to one another at coupling points, so that during an actuating movement of the actuator all the angles between the rod elements change, two of the coupling points being displaceably mounted.
Sundstrom further discloses (Fig 1) wherein the linear transmission (Fig 1) has a linkage transmission in which at least three rod elements (11,12,14,15) are pivotally connected to one another at coupling points, so that during an actuating movement of the actuator all the angles between the rod elements change (included angles between 11,12 and 6 and between 15,12 and 14,11 will change) , two of the coupling points (11,12 with 6 and 14,15 with 16) being displaceably mounted (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed actuator of NPLHau in view of Sundstrom with at least 3 rod linkage kinematic mechanism of Sundstrom in order to achieve an in plane desired gear reduction ratio of lesser or greater than 1.
Regarding Claim 8, NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom discloses the actuator according to claim 5. NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom further discloses (NPLHau) wherein at least one spring element (Fig 8, LS) with a predetermined positive spring constant (LS is linear spring) is arranged on one (F2) of the rod elements and/or between two rod elements coupled to one another in a pivotable manner in such a way that a moment in the direction of a decreasing angle at the coupling points with respect to the direction of displacement, the angular range of possible angles at the coupling points for a displacement of the DEA in the non-activated state and in the activated state with maximum actuation being above a limit angle, from which the negative spring constant characteristic is present (See 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection) (NPLHau in Fig 12 discloses presence of NBS increases displacement Fig 12(b).
PNG
media_image7.png
574
710
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom discloses the actuator according to claim 5. NPL Hau in view of Sundstrom further discloses (NPLHau) wherein at least one spring element (Fig 8, LS) with a predetermined positive spring constant (LS is linear spring) is arranged on one (F2) of the rod elements so that a moment is effected on the relevant rod element in the direction of an increasing angle between the direction of the acting spring force and the longitudinal direction of a section of the relevant bar element to the corresponding coupling point, the angular range of possible angles between the bar elements and the direction of the spring force for a displacement of the DEA in the non-activated state and in the activated state at maximum drive being below a limit angle below which the negative spring constant characteristic is present (See 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection) (NPLHau in Fig 12 discloses presence of NBS increases displacement Fig 12(b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7,10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 6 recites “ The actuator according to claim 5, wherein the linear gear comprises a first linkage arrangement with first rod elements arranged to form a flat square, which are connected to one another at corners of the square and are pivotable in the surface direction of the square, wherein a second linkage arrangement is provided with two second rod elements forming a further flat square of different size with two of the first rod elements of the first linkage arrangement, which has corners at which the rod elements can be pivoted relative to one another, the rod elements being dimensioned such that three comers of the linkage arrangements lie in a row and form an attachment point and the first and second coupling points”. NPLHau does not disclose the linear gear square structure. Sundstrom discloses a first square linkage along with three corners in a row but does not disclose a second square linkage that shares rods with first square linkage. Sundstrom Fig 1 has a square and triangle arrangement of rods. Therefore claim 6 is allowable. Claim 7 is allowable as it depends upon claim 6.
Claim 10 recites “ The actuator according to claim 8, wherein the at least one spring element is removably attached to the respective rod element(s), wherein in particular a plurality of attachment points are arranged on the respective rod elements for removably attaching the spring element at different distances from a corner between the respective rod elements”. Neither NPLHau nor Sundstrom explicitly discloses spring structure as recited above. Therefore claim 10 is allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hau et al(US20220163019A1) discloses relevant DEA elastomer structure with buckle beam type spring.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights