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 02/14/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 1-20 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 1 recites “a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis”. This language is ambiguous because “radially oriented” could have different interpretations.
A radial direction is defined by a direction that goes either from a center outward or from the outside to a center.
Oriented is defined as being physically positioned in a manner
Being radially oriented could mean that the perimeter surface lies along the radial line with respect to a 2-D cross section. A perimeter that is radially oriented in an opposite direction to the main axis could mean that a perimeter section that is formed from portions intersected by radial lines extending from the main axis. A perimeter that is radially oriented in an opposite direction to the main axis could also mean a radially outermost perimeter section.
The language should be revised to more clearly claim the invention. As best understood, the following language captures applicant’s intended subject matter: “a radially outermost surface of the brake piston with respect to the main axis is configured to prevent the brake piston from rotating relative to the bearing support member”.
For examination purposes, either interpretation will meet the claim limitation.
Claims 2-20 are indefinite because they depend from indefinite claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Masson et al. (US 10221831), hereinafter ‘Masson’.
Masson discloses:
1. (Currently Amended) A hydraulic machine (10), the hydraulic machine comprising:
- a bearing support member (20, 21),
- a cylinder block (40, 48),
- a brake piston (70) movably mounted with respect to the bearing support member between a braking position in which the brake piston is shape-matchingly engaged with the cylinder block in such a way as to prevent the cylinder block from rotating with respect to the brake piston (when piston 70 is engaged with cylinder block 40, 48, Col. 8 lines 26-44 discloses matching shapes 46, 72 of the braking means), and
a brake-release position in which the brake piston allows the cylinder block to rotate freely with respect to the brake piston (Fig. 5 shows the brake-release position, brake piston 70 is not engaged with cylinder block 40, 48), and
- at least one bearing (42, 41) supported by the bearing support member, the brake piston and the bearing being on the same side of the cylinder block with reference to a direction of a main axis of the machine (bearings 42, 41 and brake piston 70 are both located on the same side of the cylinder block 40, 48 with respect to the main axis 11),
a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis being configured to prevent the brake piston from rotating with respect to the bearing support member (in light of the ambiguous wording, the brake piston outer perimeter includes a perimeter section that is oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis with the surfaces secured in recesses 25 of the bearing support member 21 such that the brake piston 70 is prevented from rotating any significant amount relative to housing 21;
alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the brake piston 70 of Masson to have its rotational prevention structures positioned on its radially outer surface that engages the bearing support member as a matter of rearrangement of parts rationale which holds that the position of the anti-rotation engagement features being on the inner or outer radial surfaces would be a matter of obvious design choice because using either position would not have modified the operation of the device).
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masson et al. (US 10221831), hereinafter ‘Masson’ in view of Allart (US 6199377) and/or Allart (US 6293100), hereinafter ‘Allart’100’.
Masson discloses:
1. (Currently Amended) A hydraulic machine (10), the hydraulic machine comprising:
- a bearing support member (20, 21),
- a cylinder block (40, 48),
- a brake piston (70) movably mounted with respect to the bearing support member between a braking position in which the brake piston is shape-matchingly engaged with the cylinder block in such a way as to prevent the cylinder block from rotating with respect to the brake piston (when piston 70 is engaged with cylinder block 40, 48, Col. 8 lines 26-44 discloses matching shapes 46, 72 of the braking means), and
a brake-release position in which the brake piston allows the cylinder block to rotate freely with respect to the brake piston (Fig. 5 shows the brake-release position, brake piston 70 is not engaged with cylinder block 40, 48), and
- at least one bearing (42, 41) supported by the bearing support member, the brake piston and the bearing being on the same side of the cylinder block with reference to a direction of a main axis of the machine (bearings 42, 41 and brake piston 70 are both located on the same side of the cylinder block 40, 48 with respect to the main axis 11),
Masson does not explicitly disclose the brake piston having a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis being configured to prevent the brake piston from rotating with respect to the bearing support member with the interpretation that the perimeter must extend along a radial line extending away from the main axis which is a direction opposite of towards the main axis from the brake piston.
However, Allart discloses a hydraulic machine similar to Masson and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Allart discloses a hydraulic machine comprising:
- a bearing support member (2B),
- a cylinder block (6),
- a brake piston (22) movably mounted with respect to the bearing support member between a braking position in which the brake piston is shape-matchingly engaged with the cylinder block in such a way as to prevent the cylinder block from rotating with respect to the brake piston, and
a brake-release position in which the brake piston allows the cylinder block to rotate freely with respect to the brake piston (Col. 4 lines 59-67), and a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis being configured to prevent the brake piston from rotating with respect to the bearing support member (Col. 5 lines 49-65 discloses faces 2'B and 22' having shapes adapted to constrain the piston 22 in rotation with the bearing support member 2B).
Further, Allart’100 discloses a hydraulic machine (Fig. 9) similar to Masson and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Allart discloses a hydraulic machine comprising a cylinder block 806, a brake piston 840 that is shape matchingly engaged with cylinder block 806 via 842, 844, wherein a brake-release position in which the brake piston allows the cylinder block to rotate freely with respect to the brake piston (Col. 12), and a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis being configured to prevent the brake piston from rotating with respect to the bearing support member (outer radial surface 854 is engaged with inner radial surface 850 to prevent relative rotation between the two structures; therefore it is known in the art to position the anti-rotation structures on a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis being configured to prevent the brake piston with the interpretation being oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis means a radially outer surface of the brake piston)
Since the brake pistons of Masson, Allart, and Allart’100 are disclosed to be coupled to housing structures corresponding to a bearing support member in such a manner that prevents relative rotation between the brake pistons and the bearing support member, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Masson to have used a perimeter of the brake piston oriented radially in an opposite direction to the main axis being configured to prevent the brake piston from rotating with respect to the bearing support member as taught by Allart and/or Allart’100 as a matter of simple substitution of one known coupling location for another with respect to the brake pistons and their adjacent housing structures. Changing the location of the engaged surfaces that prevents the brake piston from rotating with respect to the bearing support member does not change any function of the device of Masson and would only yield the predictable results of a brake piston rotationally locked and coupled to the bearing support member.
The combination of Masson and Allart further renders obvious:
2. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim1,wherein the bearing support member comprises a first part (Masson 21) and a second part (Masson 80) assembled onto the first part, the first part and the second part together forming a housing receiving the brake piston (the Figures renders obvious assembling the parts to reached the device shown in the Figures).
3. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 2, wherein the second part forms an abutment against egress of the brake piston outside the housing (Masson second part 80 secures the piston 70).
4. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 1, wherein the bearing support member forms a groove opening in direction of the cylinder block, the groove receiving the brake piston (Masson see Fig. 4 and 5, groove 25 receives brake piston 70, and opens towards the cylinder block 40,48).
5. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 1,the machine comprising a cam (Allart 31) and securing members passing through the cam, the perimeter of the brake piston comprising extensions (Allart 73 in Fig. 6) extending in a direction radial to the main axis to coincide with zones lying between the securing members or in a continuation of these zones in a direction parallel to the main axis (Allart discloses securing member 3 it passes through the cam 2A of Allart;
since Masson remains silent as to how its housing is coupled together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Masson to have used screws 3 to coupled together the housing components including the bearing support member and the cam as taught by Allart as a matter of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; when implementing a screw as taught by Allart, the screw would couple structures 20, 21, 22 30 together).
6. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 5, wherein the brake piston has cavities opening in direction of the main axis and extending perpendicular to the extensions in a direction radial to the main axis (Masson cavities in between extensions 73 of brake piston 70 seen in Fig. 6).
7. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 1, wherein the bearing support member has extensions extending into cavities of the brake piston (Masson see Fig. 4, extensions between recesses 25 of the bearing support member 20, 21 extend into the recesses of brake piston 70).
9. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 1 which comprises a shaft carrying an abutment forming an obstacle against sliding of the cylinder block in the direction of the main axis (Masson abutment of shaft 47 is seen in Fig. 1, positioned at the center of the cylinder block 40,48).
Claim(s) 8, 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masson in view of Allart and Allart’100 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Viard (US 10563641).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Masson, Allart, and Allart’100 renders obvious claim 1 and further renders obvious:
8. (Currently Amended) The machine according to claim 1, wherein a perimeter of the brake piston has faces conformed to block rotation of the brake piston in relation to the bearing support member, and resulting from forming operations without machining (Masson see Fig. 6, perimeter of brake piston 70 includes faces 7 that conform and engage with the bearing support member 21 best seen in Fig. 4, with the alternating extensions and recesses engaged and preventing relative rotation between the bearing support member 21 and the brake piston 70).
Masson does not explicitly disclose forming operations with machining as it remains silent as to how its components are formed.
However, Viard discloses a hydraulic machine similar to Masson and the present application and therefore constitutes analogous art. Viard discloses a hydraulic machine including a cylinder block, bearing support member, cam, housing, etc., and teaches that components can be made in one piece by casting and/or machining (Viard, Col. 5 lines 53-60).
Since one piece manufacturing techniques with or without machining that are applicable to from components of hydraulic machines similar to Masson are known in the art, and since Masson remains silent as to how its components are manufactured, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the device of Masson to have its components such as the brake piston formed by one piece casting, with or without machining as taught by Viard.
The combination of Masson, Allart, Allart’100, and Viard further renders obvious:
10. (Currently Amended) A method for manufacturing a machine according to claim 1 comprising:- forming the brake piston other than by machining, a perimeter of the brake piston having faces conformed to prevent rotation of the brake piston in relation to the bearing support member, the faces being in the as-formed state, and- assembling the brake piston onto the bearing support member with the faces in the as-formed state (Viard, Col. 5 lines 53-60, renders obvious forming the bearing support member completely from casting, which would include the faces of the bearing support member that prevent rotation relative to the brake piston;
Further, examiner takes official notice that casting and 3D-additive manufacturing are known in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have formed the brake piston via 3D-additative manufacturing techniques as a matter of design choice; the disclosure of Masson does not disclose how its brake piston is formed, therefore utilizing a known manufacturing technique such as casting or 3D-additive manufacturing without machining would only yield the expected result of a formed component).
11. (Currently Amended) A method for manufacturing a machine according to claim 1 comprising: - forming the bearing support member other than by machining, with faces of the bearing support member conformed to prevent rotation of the brake piston in relation to the bearing support member, the faces of the bearing support member conformed to prevent rotation being in the as-formed state, and - assembling the brake piston onto the bearing support member with the faces of the bearing support member conformed to prevent rotation being in the as-formed state (Viard renders obvious forming the bearing support member completely from casting, which would include the faces of the bearing support member that prevent rotation relative to the brake piston;
Further, examiner takes official notice that metal 3D-additive manufacturing techniques are known in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have formed the brake piston via a 3D-additative manufacturing techniques as a matter of design choice; the disclosure of Masson does not disclose how its brake piston is formed, therefore utilizing a known manufacturing technique such as a 3D-additive manufacturing without machining would only yield the expected result of a formed component having the desired surfaces).
12. (Currently Amended) A method for manufacturing a machine according to claim 7, comprising :
- forming the bearing support member other than by machining, with the extensions in the as-formed state (Viard, Col. 5 lines 53-60 renders obvious forming the bearing support member completely from casting, which would include the extensions of the bearing support member), and
- assembling the brake piston onto the bearing support member with the extensions in the as-formed state (Masson renders obvious assembling the device together formed components from the Figures).
13. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 10, comprising machining the brake piston (Viard, Col. 5 lines 53-60, renders obvious forming hydraulic machine components from casting and machining, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have applied this teaching to the brake piston component of the hydraulic machine since Masson remains silent as to how it is formed, and the manufacturing techniques of Viard appears suitable).
14. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 10, comprising :
- preparing an assembly comprising the brake piston connected to the bearing support member (Masson renders obvious assembling the device together formed components from the Figures), and
- mounting the assembly on a casing of the machine (Masson renders obvious assembling the device together formed components from the Figures, the order in which these components are assembly do not affect the final assembly).
15. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 10, comprising: assembling a first part of the bearing support member onto a second part of the bearing support member, and assembling a first part of the bearing support member onto a second part of the bearing support member, and inserting the brake piston between the first and second parts of the bearing support member, the first part and the second part of the bearing support member together forming a housing receiving the brake piston (Masson, first part 20,21 and second part 80 are assembled together and together form a receiving area for the brake piston 70; Masson renders obvious assembling the device together formed components from the Figures, the order in which these components are assembly do not affect the final assembly).
16. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 15, comprising:
- arranging at least one spring (Masson, 24) is arranged in the first part of the bearing support member and,
- assembling the brake piston onto the second part of the bearing support member with interposing of seals between the brake piston and the second part of the bearing support member (Masson, Col 8 lines 1-25, second part 80 has seals engaged with the first part 20, 21 and the brake piston 71; Fig. 5, the rectangles shown as part of 80 indicate seals).
17. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 15, comprising interposing a sealing element between opposite-facing surfaces of the first and second parts of the bearing support member (Masson, sealing element 26 or the rectangle between first part 20,21 and second part 80).
18. (New) The machine according to claim 1, wherein a perimeter of the bearing support member has faces conformed to block rotation of the brake piston in relation to the bearing support member (Masson, see Fig. 6, perimeter of brake piston 70 includes faces 7 that conform and engage with the bearing support member 21 best seen in Fig. 4, with the alternating extensions and recesses engaged and preventing relative rotation between the bearing support member 21 and the brake piston 70), and resulting from forming operations without machining (Viard, Col. 5 lines 53-60, renders obvious forming hydraulic machine components from casting without machining, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have applied this teaching to the bearing support member of the hydraulic machine since Masson remains silent as to how it is formed, and the manufacturing techniques of Viard appears suitable;
Further, examiner takes official notice that metal 3D-additive manufacturing techniques are known in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have formed the bearing support member via a 3D-additative manufacturing techniques as a matter of design choice; the disclosure of Masson does not disclose how its bearing support member is formed, therefore utilizing a known manufacturing technique such as a 3D-additive manufacturing without machining would only yield the expected result of a formed component having the desired surfaces)
19. (New) The method according to claim 10, comprising machining the bearing support member (Viard, Col. 5 lines 53-60, renders obvious forming hydraulic machine components from casting and machining, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have applied this teaching to the bearing support member of the hydraulic machine since Masson remains silent as to how it is formed, and the manufacturing techniques of Viard appears suitable).
20. (New) The method according to claim 10, comprising:
- preparing an assembly comprising the brake piston connected to the bearing support member (Masson renders obvious assembling the device together formed components from the Figures, the order in which these components are assembly do not affect the final assembly), and
- mounting the assembly on a rotating part of the machine (Masson, 47 is a rotating part of the machine, the brake piston 70 and the bearing support member are capable of being assembled prior to mounting on the rotor 47, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the time the invention was filed to have prepared the brake piston connected to the bearing support member and mounting the assembly on the rotating part 47 as a matter of design choice as doing so would not change any function or result in any difference in the device).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Martin (US 5855115), Forster (US 6907962), Feusse et al. (US 8534431), all disclose pertinent hydraulic machines including a cylinder block, housing components, bearings, and/or brake pistons, etc.
Vidal et al. (US 9518466) discloses a hydraulic machine with a braking piston 7 engages with a cylinder block 4 on the same side as a bearing 21
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dustin T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-0163. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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 E. 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.
/DUSTIN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 July 2, 2026
Prosecution Insights