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 .
Claims 1-16 have been canceled. Claims 17-32 are pending
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 17-32 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.
In claim 17, lines 25-26, and claim 28, line 26, claim 29, line 18, and claim 31, line 21, “a defined minimum distance” should be -the defined minimum distance-, unless applicant means to refer to a different minimum distance to that recited in line 20.
In claim 18, lines 3-4, it is not clear what applicant means by “in relation to the first axis” and, in line 6, it is not clear what is meant by “in relation to the second axis”.
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.
Claim(s) 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamata (JP 3-117761).
Kamata teaches a method for assembling a drive device (Figure 1; transmission for a motorcycle), the method comprising: providing a first assembly 11, 30, having a first gear element 11 for a redirecting gearbox and a first housing element (crankcase 30) for a housing; providing a second assembly (transmission 60, 40, 41) having a second gear element 41 for the redirecting gearbox and a second housing element (gear case 60) for the housing; connecting the two assemblies (shown in Figure 1), wherein the first housing element and the second housing element are interconnected (see Figure 1 case 60 is mounted to case 30); coupling the first gear element and the second gear element for torque transmission (Figure 1 shows the first and second gears intermeshed); and, arranging a spacer element (shim 70) between two housing surfaces 30a, 60a, of the two housing elements in order to define a minimum distance between the two housing surfaces; wherein the first gear element 11 is coupled to the first housing element 30 (at bearings 20) and the second gear element 41 is coupled to the second housing element 60 (at bearings 50, 55) such that a maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element is set by a defined minimum distance (see abstract).
Regarding claim 30, Kamata teaches that, after connecting the housing elements, the first gear element 11 is rotatable about a first axis and the second gear element 41 is rotatable about a second axis extending at an angle to the first axis (Figure 1 shows the axes to be perpendicular); and, when connecting the two assemblies: the first assembly 11, 30, is moved towards the second assembly 41, 60, in an axial direction parallel to the first axis (horizontal direction, as seen in Figure 1) and, the spacer element (shim 70) is arranged axially between the housing surfaces 30a. 60a, in relation to the first axis.
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) 17-21, 27, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (USPN 6,230,586) in view of Kamata (JP3-117761).
Regarding claim 17, Chang teaches a drive device for an electric bicycle (see title), the drive device comprising: a first housing element (left portion of bottom bracket 60, as seen in Figure 1) defining a first housing surface (outer ring of rightward facing wall of the first housing element); a second housing element (remaining portion of bottom bracket shell 60, shown in Figure 1) defining a second housing surface (rightward facing wall of the second housing element) and being connected to said first housing element for a housing of the drive device (a horizontal bolt is shown in Figure 1 connecting the housing elements of bracket 60); a shaft 10; a redirecting gearbox (bevel gearing) for coupling with an electric motor 51 and said shaft 10 so that a torque is transmittable from the electric motor via said redirecting gearbox to said shaft; said redirecting gearbox having a first gear element 11 rotatable about a first axis (horizontal axis, as seen in Figure 1) and a second gear element 54coupled to said first gear element, said second gear element being rotatable about a second axis running at an angle to the first axis (second axis of gear 54 is vertical, as seen in Figure 1); wherein said first housing surface and said second housing surface face each other, said first gear element and said second gear element being coupled to said first housing element and said second housing element such that a maximum clearance between said first gear element and said second gear element is set by a defined minimum distance between said first housing surface and said second housing surface.
Chang lacks a spacer element; said spacer element being arranged between said first housing surface and said second housing surface to define a minimum distance between said first housing surface and said second housing surface.
Kamata teaches a drive device for a motorcycle having a first assembly 11, 30, having a first gear element 11 for a redirecting gearbox and a first housing element (crankcase 30) for a housing; providing a second assembly (transmission 60, 40, 41) having a second gear element 41 for the redirecting gearbox and a second housing element (gear case 60) for the housing; connecting the two assemblies (shown in Figure 1), wherein the first housing element and the second housing element are interconnected (see Figure 1 case 60 is mounted to case 30); coupling the first gear element and the second gear element for torque transmission (Figure 1 shows the first and second gears intermeshed); and, arranging a spacer element (shim 70) between two housing surfaces 30a, 60a, of the two housing elements in order to define a minimum distance between the two housing surfaces; wherein the first gear element 11 is coupled to the first housing element 30 (at bearings 20) and the second gear element 41 is coupled to the second housing element 60 (at bearings 50, 55) such that a maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element is set by a defined minimum distance (see abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the drive device of Chang so that a spacer element between said first housing surface and said second housing surface defines a minimum distance between said first housing surface and said second housing surface, in view of Kamata, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to adjust provide a simple, mechanical adjustment between the bevel gear elements to compensate for tolerances and to adjust the gear positioning over time.
Regarding claim 18, the first housing element (left side of bottom bracket 60) radially surrounds at least one of said first gear element and said shaft in relation to the first axis (shaft 10 is surrounded, as seen in Figure 1 of Chang); said second housing element (other parts of housing 60) radially surrounds said second gear element 54 in relation to the second axis; said second gear element 54 is arranged downstream (to the right, as seen in Figure of Chang 1) of said first gear element 11 in a first axial direction, parallel to the first axis (axis of shaft 10); and, said second housing surface is arranged downstream of said first housing surface in the first axial direction (see Figure 1 of Chang).
Regarding claim 19, said first housing element and said first gear element 11 are assigned to a first assembly; said second housing element and said second gear element 54 are assigned to a second assembly; and, said first assembly and said second assembly are releasably connected to each other (by as horizontal bolt, as seen in Figure 1) such that: to release the connection, said first assembly is moved in a second axial direction, parallel to the first axis, away from said second assembly (housing portions move horizontally relative to each other to be connected and disconnected).
Regarding claim 20, said first housing element and said second housing element are connected to each other via a screw connection (a horizontal holt is shown). The first housing element (right side of housing 60) has a thread engaged by the bolt, but the second housing element does not appear to have a threade. However, it would have been an obvious design modification to thread the bolt into both housing elements, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide more secure engagement and less likelihood of rattle between the housing elements.
Regarding claim 21, said first housing element has at least one projection projecting radially outwards in relation to the first axis and said first housing surface is formed at said at least one projection (Figure 1 shows the first housing element, on the left side of housing 60, to have a vertical projection, radiating outward, at its top end forming a surface that abuts the second housing element).
Regarding claim 27, Chang teaches: said redirecting gearbox is a bevel gearbox in which said first gear element is a ring gear and the second gear element is a bevel pinion and the shaft is a chainwheel shaft (chain wheels 24 mounted to shaft 10; Figure 1).
Regarding claim 28, the combination teaches an electric bicycle comprising the drive device structure, as discussed with respect to claim 17.
Claim(s) 22-25, 31, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang and Kamata as applied to claims 17-21, 27, and 28 above, and further in view of Wolf (USN 1,493,175).
Regarding claims 22-25, the combination is silent regarding the spacer element being ring-shaped or ring-segment-shaped or that is separable from the housing without completely releasing the connection between the housing elements to replace the spacer element.
Wolf teaches a drive device in Figure 3, having a first housing element 11’ carrying a first gear 23 and second housing element 10’ carrying a second gear 7, where the first and second housing elements have mutually engaging surfaces at 26’ and 33 and a spacer element (shims 34) that defines the clearance between the housing elements which then defines the clearance between the gears. Each spacer 34 is ring- sector-shaped (see Figure 8, page 3, lines 4-8), accessible from outside the housing elements and separable from the housing elements without completely releasing the connection between the housing elements (the spacer/shim is formed from multiple pieces 34 that allows the shim to be accessed and removed from outside the housing elements and allows removal of each shim part without disconnecting all of the connectors between the housing elements; see Figure 3; page 1, lines 17-29; page 3, lines 4-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the spacer of the combination as ring-segment shaped that is accessible from outside the housing and removable therefrom without completely disconnecting the connectors between the housing elements, in view of Wolf, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide support around the shaft and provide clearance at the annular space between the first and second housing elements and allow the spacer to be moved between in position and out of position between the housing elements, and all the spacer to be replaced without completely disconnecting the housing elements.
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Chang and Kamata teaches a method for adjusting a drive device (Kamada, col. 1, lines 17-28 discuss a drive arrangement allowing “proper adjustments” of the gearing) having a first housing element 30, a second housing element 60, a spacer element (shim 70), a shaft (gear 11 is mounted to a shaft that is not separately numbers, but shown in Figure 1), and a redirecting gearbox 30, 60, the first housing element 30 defining a first housing surface 30a, the second housing element 60 defining a second housing surface 60a and being connected to the first housing element for a housing of the drive device (Figure 1), the redirecting gearbox being for coupling with an electric motor and the shaft so that a torque is transmittable from the electric motor via the redirecting gearbox to the shaft, the redirecting gearbox having a first gear element rotatable about a first axis and a second gear element coupled to the first gear element, the second gear element being rotatable about a second axis running at an angle to the first axis, wherein the first housing surface and the second housing surface face each other, the spacer element being arranged between the first housing surface and the second housing surface to define a minimum distance between the first housing surface and the second housing surface; and, the first gear element and the second gear element being coupled to the first housing element and the second housing element such that a maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element is set by a defined minimum distance between the first housing surface and the second housing surface.
Chang and Kamata do not specifically teach checking whether the maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element set by the spacer element meets specified requirements and, if it does not, replacing the spacer element by another spacer element, via which a different minimum distance between the two housing surfaces is defined and a different maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element is set accordingly.
Wolf teaches checking whether the maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element set by the spacer element meets specified requirements and, if not, replacing the spacer element by another spacer element, via which a different minimum distance between the two housing surfaces is defined and a different maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element is set accordingly (Wolf discusses, on page 3, lines 11-54, checking that a spacer 34 provides an appropriate clearance between the gear segments and replacing the spacer as appropriate).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to check whether the maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element set by the spacer element meets specified requirements and, if it does not, replacing the spacer element by another spacer element, via which a different minimum distance between the two housing surfaces is defined and a different maximum clearance between the first gear element and the second gear element is set accordingly, in view of Wolf, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to ensure that the selected spacer are appropriately sized before all of the connectors are put in place and ensuring the spacer is the best fit for the present condition of the gears.
Regarding claim 32, the combination teaches the spacer element is freely accessible from outside the first housing element and the second housing element (see Wolf, as discussed above); the drive device is configured such that the spacer element is separable from the first housing element and the second housing element without completely releasing a connection between the first housing element and the second housing element in order to enable the spacer element to be replaced; and, the connection between the first housing element and the second housing element is not released to replace the spacer element (also taught by Wolf, as discussed above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Happ is applicant’s co-pending application publication.
Izumi, Chen, and Ziech teach bevel gearing having spacers/shims for maintaining clearance for the gears.
Wang, Liu, Sun, and Rizzeto teach electric bicycles using bevel gearing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ab/
Prosecution Insights