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 12/24/2024 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of the Preliminary Amendment(s) filed 12/24/2024
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Analyzing claim 1 the claim recite(s) a method for calculating an actual contact ratio of a pair of gears including at least one thermoplastic resin gear. The claim does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because of the claimed series of steps:
(rotating the pair of gears, measuring a temperature distribution…; creating a structural analysis model…; inputting temperatures…; calculate a temperature distribution; preparing data on temperature dependency…; correcting the elastic modulus…; measuring an actual amount of deformation…; calculating an amount of deformation…; obtaining a ratio…; calculate a contact stress distribution…; calculating an angular difference…; dividing the angular difference…; calculate the actual contact ratio… ),
appears to be a process that can be implemented through mental analysis of measurements and/or mathematical calculations while applying the abstract idea and does not provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Furthermore, regarding “gears” and “a maximum tensile strain is generated in a tooth root strain distribution of meshing teeth when the pair of gears are meshed,” does not appear to add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because it would be routine in any analog or computerized structural analysis of the integrity of toothed gears.
Regarding claims 2-9 respectively , considering the additional method steps individually or in ordered combination, the recitations directed to the use through a thermoplastic resin toothed gear system and / or its data (i.e. solving for mathematical expressions, deriving a coefficient of friction, predicting a tooth root temperature, and predicting fatigue life) in these claims at a high level of generality is requiring no more than a generic analyzing and solving of mathematical expressions with respect to a thermoplastic and / or metal, toothed gears system to determine / predict structural integrity system would be considered well-known, routine and conventional activities of monitoring gears systems. These recitations do not constitute applying the judicial with, or by use of, a particular machine as discussed in the Alice Supreme Court Decision. Unlike Diamond V. Diehr, the claims here do not recite doing anything meaningful with the result of the calculations that would permit an improvement to the technology to be realized. As such, the additional limitations fail to qualify as "significantly more" than the judicial exception.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 111144044 B A method for evaluating contact fatigue life of plastic gear considering temperature influence
US 20220334027 A1 SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING AND UPDATING GEARBOX LIFETIME EXPECTANCY
KR 20200062813 A System and method of predicting damage of carbon fiber composites
CN 110907171 A A high-molecular gear durability test method
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE J ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2174. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9am-5PM.
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 M 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.
/ANDRE J ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights