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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/19/24 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to preliminary amendment filed on 12/19/24. Regarding the amendment, claims 1-10 are present for examination.
The amended specification is accepted and recorded in file.
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 1-10 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 language shown, there are several places where the repeated use of “which” could give rise to an indefinite issue, although not every “which” is indefinite by itself. The issue is whether a person of ordinary skill can determine what antecedent each “which” refers to with reasonable certainty. Such as “a contact element which is ….electrically connected to the component which has a first sliding contact surface which bear against …” in lines 4-6. Here “which” refers to the contact element or the component? This creates a temporary ambiguity because the immediately preceding noun is “component”. Furthermore, “which, at least in a second length region of the fluid channel, has a direction of passage” in lines 18-19 lacks a reasonably certain antecedent. It is unclear whether ““which, at least in a second length region of the fluid channel, has a direction of passage” refers to the fluid channel, the lubricant and /or coolant, or another recited structure. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined with reasonable certainty.
The claim 1 also recited a phrase “the electrical currents can be transmitted from the rotor…. And can thereby be discharged from the rotor” lines 9-10. The phrase is indefinite because the term "can be ” creates doubts as to whether the electrical current is in fact transmitted or discharged from the rotor and therefore is unclear. “Can” and “capable” are not equivalents. For examination purpose, it is understood as "the electrical currents transmitted and discharged from the rotor”.
The claim 1 also recited “a lubricant and/or coolant can flow and which at least …” in line 17-18 and “the lubricant and/or coolant can flow through …” in line 20. The phrase is indefinite because the term "can be ” creates doubts as to whether lubricant and/or coolant is in fact flow or flow through therefore is unclear. “Can” and “capable” are not equivalents. For examination purpose, it is understood as “the lubricant and/or coolant flowed…”.
The claim 1 also recited “the lubricant and/or coolant in the direction of passage …can be sprayed out … can be sprayed through …… can be injected into the hollow” in lines 24-27. The phrase is indefinite because the term "can be ” creates doubts as to whether lubricant and/or coolant is in fact sprayed out, sprayed through or injected into the hollow therefore is unclear. “Can” and “capable” are not equivalents. For examination purpose, it is understood as “the lubricant and/or coolant in the direction of passage sprayed out, sprayed through, and injected into the hollow”.
Claim 2 recited “the lubricant and/or coolant can flow through …” in line 4. The phrase is indefinite because the term "can be ” creates doubts as to whether lubricant and/or coolant is in fact flow through therefore is unclear. “Can” and “capable” are not equivalents. For examination purpose, it is understood as “the lubricant and/or coolant flowed through…”.
Claims 3-10 are rejected because of their dependency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Weigel (US 8,382,494 B2) teaches a grounding contact (10) for an axle, particularly an axle of a rail vehicle or the like, includes a housing unit (12), a contact device (16) and a sensor device (24). The housing unit consists of a housing structure (13) and a housing cover (14), wherein the contact device consists of a sliding contact element (17) that may be attached to an axle and of a contact element (18), wherein an electrical sliding contact can be created between the sliding contact device and the contact element, wherein the sensor device consists of a signal output device and at least one sensor for acquiring operating parameters of the axle. The sensor device is arranged inside the housing unit and the signal output device is able to output at least two signals having differing structures.
Fisher et al. (US 5,804,903 A) teaches a grounding system for an AC or DC motor or other rotating apparatus comprising a conductive brush in resilient contact with a contamination-free conductive member removably secured onto a rotating part such as a motor shaft or tachometer shaft. The contacting surface is preferably formed of brass and is shielded from contamination from motor bearings and the like, for reliably shunting the shaft to the frame of the machine so as to avoid high voltage transients across bearings as would otherwise result in bearing damage or destruction. A brush housing or holding means positions the brush in juxtaposition with the rotating conductive member and cooperates to substantially enclose the region of contact between the brush and the conductive member. The apparatus defines a cavity for extending the immediate enclosed region of contact between the brush and the conductive member for the purpose of receiving and holding residue produced by the brush as the shaft rotates, thereby preserving a clean room environment in which the motor may be utilized.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEDA T PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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 (571) 272-3560. 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.
/LEDA T PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights