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 .
ART REJECTION:
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 (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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 67-73, and 83-84 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mantini(USPat. 5,959,365) in view of .
-- In considering claims 67,83, and 84, the claimed subject matter that is met by Mantini et al(Mantini) includes:
1) a vehicle having a wheel-end assembly mounted to an axle is met by the monitoring device for detecting problems associated with wheels, including processor that monitors changes in heat, noise and vibration of the wheels and bearings, and mounted on the vehicle axis(see: Mantini, column 1, lines 56-67)
2) a thermocouple sensor comprising:
i) a first subunit including a sensor head connected through an electrical lead to a base, the base being configured for securing the first subunit to said axle through a hole formed in said axle, the base further including a mount facing the exterior of the axle when the base is secured to the axle, the mount being configured for removably coupling a second subunit thereto, the second subunit, the second subunit comprising at least one of a thermocouple reference junction, a voltmeter, and a battery is met by the sensor(29) including a thermally conductive housing(70) which is mounted a temperature transducer to monitor the temperature of the wheel bearings.
Although a specific thermocouple including sensor head connected through an electrical lead to a base is not taught by Mantini, use of electrical leads connected to a base is well known, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since this would have been necessary in order to provide connection of components in the system so as to effectively perform the sensing functions.
-- With regards to claim 68,
1) the first subunit further comprising a connector configured for mounting the sensing head to a spindle of the axle near the wheel end assembly the sensor head being in a heat exchange relationship with one or more bearings of the wheel-end assembly is met by the sensor secured by screws(78A) to a block(78) and adapted to be welded to the axle(41).
-- With regards to claim 69,
1) the sensor head being disposed adjacent the centerline of an outer spindle end of said spindle is met by the sensors being aligned adjacent the axle as seen in figures 5A-5B.
-- With regards to claims 70-73, Mantini does not teach:
1) the connector comprising a ring eyelet
2) the connector comprising threads
3) the base comprising threads configured for engagement with the hole formed in the axle, the hole being a tapped hole formed in a wall of the axle
4) the mount comprising a threaded rim.
The examiner takes official notice that in the sensor art, use of connectors which include ring eyelet, connector threads, base comprising threads configured for engagement with the hole formed in an axle, and a mount comprising a threaded rim are well known components of an axle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the above stated components into the system of Mantini, since this would have provided a well known and reliable means of securely connecting components in the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 74-82 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARYL C POPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2959. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/DARYL C POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights