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 . Claims 1-6 are cancelled. Claims 7-12 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/30/2026 and 01/13/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
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 11 and 12 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 11 and 12 recites “a locking apparatus” twice as first recitation. Clarification is required, examiner will assume it is same, and second one is “the locking apparatus”
Claim 12 recites “A vehicle having an electric motor drive unit comprising: an electric motor drive unit, configures to drive a vehicle having a locking apparatus, comprising: an electric motor of the electric motor drive unit; a locking apparatus” all highlighted words are repeated as first recitation which is confusing, clarification is needed.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirohito (WO 2015033776 hereinafter “Hirohito”) in view of Adachi (US PG Pub 20070029143 hereinafter “Adachi”).
Re-claim 7, Hirohito discloses locking apparatus (53,66) for an electric motor drive unit (101, Fig.1, P0032), comprising: a lockable shaft (24a) of the electric motor drive unit (101); a locking mechanism (53,66,24aa,53a,66a) configured to lock the lockable shaft (24a); an electric drive (67) configured to actuate the locking mechanism (66,53,66a,53a); a contacting element (4) having at least sliding brushes (4, slip ring is electrically connected to 71 via brushes) for remote excitation of a rotor (10,20), which is connected to the lockable shaft (24a), of a synchronous machine (1) of the electric motor drive unit (101); and a housing (Fig.1, VA, all inside housing) of the locking apparatus in which the electric drive, the contacting element, and the locking mechanism are received (all inside VA).
Hirohito fails to explicitly show that two sliding brushes.
However, Adachi teaches two sliding brushes (54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the Hirohito device wherein the brushes are at least two sliding brushes as suggested by Adachi exerting friction and to generate current as is a function of brushes brush mounted to caliper which reduces number of components (Adachi, P[0012-0013]).
PNG
media_image1.png
560
767
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
476
414
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
631
407
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 8, Hirohito discloses the locking apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the electric drive (67) is arranged transversely relative to the lockable shaft (24a, they are transversally connected).
Re-claim 9, Hirohito discloses the Hlocking apparatus as claimed in claim 7.
Hirohito fails to explicitly show wherein the at least two sliding brushes are arranged radially with respect to the lockable shaft.
However, Adachi teaches the at least two sliding brushes (54) are arranged radially with respect to the lockable shaft (47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the Hirohito device wherein the wherein the at least two sliding brushes are arranged radially with respect to the lockable shaft as suggested by Adachi exerting friction and to generate current as is a function of brushes brush mounted to caliper which reduces number of components (Adachi, P[0012-0013]).
Re-claim 10, Hirohito discloses the Hlocking apparatus as claimed in claim 7.
Hirohito fails to explicitly show wherein the at least two sliding brushes are contacted in a resiliently pretensioned manner with respect to an associated sliding ring of the contacting element
.
However, Adachi teaches the wherein the at least two sliding brushes (54) are contacted in a resiliently pretensioned manner with respect to an associated sliding ring of the contacting element
(50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the Hirohito device wherein the at least two sliding brushes are contacted in a resiliently pretensioned manner with respect to an associated sliding ring of the contacting element as suggested by Adachi exerting friction and to generate current as is a function of brushes brush mounted to caliper which reduces number of components (Adachi, P[0012-0013]).
Re-claim 11, Hirohito discloses an electric motor drive unit (101), configured to drive a vehicle (Description, hybrid vehicles) having a locking apparatus (53,66), comprising: an electric motor of the electric motor drive unit (101), a lockable apparatus (53,66) for the electric motor drive unit (101), comprising: a lockable shaft (24a) of the electric motor drive unit (101); a locking mechanism (53,66) configured to lock the lockable shaft (24a); an electric drive (67) configured to actuate the locking mechanism (66,53); a contacting element (4) having at least sliding brushes (4, slip ring is electrically connected to 71 via brushes) for remote excitation of a rotor (10,20), which is connected to the lockable shaft (24a), of a synchronous machine (1) of the electric motor drive unit (101); and a housing (Fig.1, VA, all inside housing) of the locking apparatus in which the electric drive, the contacting element, and the locking mechanism are received (all inside VA), and a housing (67 in fig.1 is housed in fig.1) of an electric motor (67) of the electric motor drive unit (101) to which the locking apparatus is fitted (66,53 is part of 101).
Hirohito fails to explicitly show that two sliding brushes.
However, Adachi teaches two sliding brushes (54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the Hirohito device wherein the brushes are at least two sliding brushes as suggested by Adachi exerting friction and to generate current as is a function of brushes brush mounted to caliper which reduces number of components (Adachi, P[0012-0013]).
Re-claim 12, Hirohito discloses a vehicle (Description, hybrid vehicles) having an electric motor drive unit (101); comprising: an electric motor drive unit, (101) configures to drive a vehicle (Description: Hybrid Vehicles) having a locking apparatus (53,66), comprising: an electric motor of the electric motor drive unit (101), the lockable apparatus (53,66) for the electric motor drive unit (101), comprising: a lockable shaft (24a) of the electric motor drive unit (101); a locking mechanism (53,66) configured to lock the lockable shaft (24a); an electric drive (67) configured to actuate the locking mechanism (66,53); a contacting element (4) having at least sliding brushes (4, slip ring is electrically connected to 71 via brushes) for remote excitation of a rotor (10,20), which is connected to the lockable shaft (24a), of a synchronous machine (1) of the electric motor drive unit (101); and a housing (Fig.1, VA, all inside housing) of the locking apparatus in which the electric drive, the contacting element, and the locking mechanism are received (all inside VA), and a housing (67 in fig.1 is housed in fig.1) of an electric motor (67) of the electric motor drive unit (101) to which the locking apparatus is fitted (66,53 is part of 101).
Hirohito fails to explicitly show that two sliding brushes.
However, Adachi teaches two sliding brushes (54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the Hirohito device wherein the brushes are at least two sliding brushes as suggested by Adachi exerting friction and to generate current as is a function of brushes brush mounted to caliper which reduces number of components (Adachi, P[0012-0013]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights