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.
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 19 is 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 19 recites the limitation "The roller shutter equipment" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 9, 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Knight et al. (US 2012/0080968 A1).
RE claim 1, Knight teaches a brake device 40 (see Figs.2-6), which is used for braking a motor rotor 30 (Fig.2 and ¶ 32), characterized in that the brake device 40 comprises a permanent magnet 60 and a magnetic conductor 42, wherein one of the permanent magnet and the magnetic conductor 42 is configured to connect the motor rotor 30 (¶ 39 and Fig.2), and the other one (magnet) 60 is configured to connect a motor stator 32 (Fig.4 and ¶ 50), the permanent magnet comprises N magnetic poles (4 poles, see Fig.4), the magnetic conductor 42 comprises N slots (4 slots, see Fig.5) arranged at circumferential interval, the brake device forms a N poles N slots structure, where N is an integer greater than 1 (N=4).
RE claim 9/1, Knight teaches the brake device is a N-poles N-slots structure (4 poles, 4 slot structure, see Fig.5), where N is an integer greater than 2, the permanent magnet 60 is fixed on the motor stator 32 (Fig.5), including N magnetic poles arranged on the circumference, the magnetic conductor comprises a connection part fixed on a rotating shaft 46 of the motor rotor 30 and N magnetic conductive elements 42 extending from the connection part, and the N magnetic conductive elements are arranged at circumferential interval to form N slots (Fig.5).
RE claim 12/1, Knight teaches the magnetic conductor 42 is made of an entire piece of magnetic conductive material (¶ 45) or a plurality of silicon steel sheets.
RE claim 16/1, Knight teaches a motor 28 (Fig.6), comprises a motor stator 32 (¶32) and a motor rotor 30 (¶ 32) rotated relative to the motor stator 30, characterized in that the motor 28 comprises the brake device 40 according to claim 1 (Figs.2-6).
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.
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 201290044 Y) in view of Knight et al. (US 2012/0080968 A1).
RE claim 1, Wang teaches a brake device, which is used for braking a motor rotor (see abstract), characterized in that the brake device comprises a magnet 3 and a magnetic conductor 4, wherein one of the magnet 3 and the magnetic conductor 4 is configured to connect the motor rotor (see translation page 3 for magnetic ring 3 fixed to the motor output shaft ), and the other one is configured to connect a motor stator (see translation page 4 for magnetic ring 4 fixed with the power of the shell, i.e. stator), the magnet 3 comprises N magnetic poles (see claim 1 and Fig.1), the magnetic conductor 4 comprises N slots (see claim 6 and translation page 4, 1st ¶ for number of teeth/boss can be 2, 4, 6 or 8. Therefore the number of slots can be 2, 4, 6 and 8) arranged at circumferential interval, the brake device forms a N poles N slots structure, where N is an integer greater than 1 (2 pole, 2 slot, N=2 which is greater than 1, see Fig.1).
Wang does not teach said magnet 3 is permanent magnet.
Knight suggested that permanent magnet with various field strength can be utilized in magnetic brake device (¶ 52). The permanent magnet required no coils, wiring or excitation circuit which can provide a simple structure, low cost and easy assembly.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang by having said magnet to be permanent magnet, as taught by Knight, for the same reasons as discussed above.
RE claim 2/1, Wang teaches that the permanent magnet 3 is used to connect the motor rotor (see translation page 3 for magnetic ring 3 fixed to the motor output shaft), the magnetic conductor 4 is used to connect the motor stator (see translation page 4 for magnetic ring 4 fixed with the power of the shell, i.e. stator), and the magnetic conductor 4 surrounds the permanent magnet 3.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knight et al. (US 2012/0080968 A1).
RE claim 10/9, Knight has been discussed above. Knight further teaches each of the magnetic conductive elements 42 is in shape of strip extending radially from the connection part, and the slots are in shape of fan ring (Fig.5).
Knight does not teach the brake device is a 3-poles 3-slots structure.
However, Knight suggests that the number of magnetic conductive element and pole are result effective variable (see ¶ 41, 51) whose number can be adjusted to optimize amount of force that need to generate to prevent the armature from rotating with respect to the motor enclosure when power is not applied to the electric motor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Knight by having the brake device is a 3-poles 3-slots structure, or any suitable number, as suggested by Knight, for the same reasons as discussed above.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Knight as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Carrasco et al. (US 2015/0171675 A1).
RE claim 15/2, Wang in view of Knight has been discussed above. Wang further teaches the permanent magnet 2 is annular (Fig.1) wherein the motor rotor comprises a rotating shaft (see claim 1).
Wang does not teach the permanent magnet is annular arranged on a sleeve and the sleeve is fixed on the rotating shaft.
Carrasco teaches the permanent magnet 22 is annular arranged on a sleeve 21 and the sleeve 21 is fixed on the rotating shaft 1 (Figs.1-4), doing so provided easy in-situ magnetization of the magnet ring assembly and facilitating the assembly and machining of magnets 22 that are not yet magnetized. In particular, the risks of damage during transport of the assemblies are reduced (¶ 62, 63).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang in view of Knight by having the permanent magnet is annular arranged on a sleeve and the sleeve is fixed on the rotating shaft, as taught by Carrasco, for the same reasons as discussed above.
Claims 1, 9, 12 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thumerel et al. (WO 2021/250044 A1) in view of Knight et al. (US 2012/0080968 A1).
RE claim 1, Thumerel teaches a brake device 10 (Fig.1), which is used for braking a motor rotor (of motor 18a, 18b).
Thumerel does not teach the brake device comprises a permanent magnet and a magnetic conductor, wherein one of the permanent magnet and the magnetic conductor is configured to connect the motor rotor, and the other one is configured to connect a motor stator, the permanent magnet comprises N magnetic poles, the magnetic conductor comprises N slots arranged at circumferential interval, the brake device forms a N poles N slots structure, where N is an integer greater than 1.
Knight teaches a magnetic brake device wherein a brake device 40 (see Figs.2-6), which is used for braking a motor rotor 30 (Fig.2 and ¶ 32), characterized in that the brake device 40 comprises a permanent magnet 60 and a magnetic conductor 42, wherein one of the permanent magnet and the magnetic conductor 42 is configured to connect the motor rotor 30 (¶ 39 and Fig.2), and the other one (magnet) 60 is configured to connect a motor stator 32 (Fig.4 and ¶ 50), the permanent magnet comprises N magnetic poles (4 poles, see Fig.4), the magnetic conductor 42 comprises N slots (4 slots, see Fig.5) arranged at circumferential interval, the brake device forms a N poles N slots structure, where N is an integer greater than 1 (N=4).
Knight suggests that such magnetic brake system can be utilized in any applicable application (¶ 91-94) and such brake holds a wound cover against back-driving without any applied power (¶ 12, 35) which avoid the complexity, physical engagement and wear of the electrical actuated and friction type brake (¶ 13, 62) and does not impair motor operation (¶ 35).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the magnetic brake, disclosed by Knight, for the same reasons as discussed above.
RE claim 9/1, as discussed above, Knight teaches the brake device is a N-poles N-slots structure (4 poles, 4 slot structure, see Fig.5), where N is an integer greater than 2, the permanent magnet 60 is fixed on the motor stator 32 (Fig.5), including N magnetic poles arranged on the circumference, the magnetic conductor comprises a connection part fixed on a rotating shaft 46 of the motor rotor 30 and N magnetic conductive elements 42 extending from the connection part, and the N magnetic conductive elements are arranged at circumferential interval to form N slots (Fig.5).
RE claim 12/1, as discussed above, Knight teaches the magnetic conductor 42 is made of an entire piece of magnetic conductive material (¶ 45) or a plurality of silicon steel sheets.
RE claim 16/1, as discussed above, Thumerel in view of Knight teaches a motor 18a (Fig.4), comprises a motor stator 32 and a motor rotor rotated relative to the motor stator, characterized in that the motor comprises the brake device according to claim 1 (discussed above).
RE claim 17/16, Thumerel in view of Knight has been discussed above. Thumerel further teaches the motor rotor comprises at least one positioning magnetic ring 39 (Figs.3, 3), the positioning magnetic ring 39 and the brake device 10 are arranged at the opposite end of the motor rotor (of motor 18a, see Fig.4).
RE claim 18/17, Thumerel in view of Knight has been discussed above. Thumerel further teaches a roller shutter equipment (Fig.1) comprises a cover shell (17a, 17b), a motor arranged on the cover shell and a curtain 2 driven by the motor according to claim 17 (Fig.1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8, 11, 13 and 14 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.
RE claim 3/2, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the brake device is a 2-poles 2-slots structure, a space of long strip is defined within the magnetic conductor, the permanent magnet is installed in the middle of the space, two ends of the space define two slots.
Claims 4-6 and 13 are allowable for their dependency on claim 3.
RE claim 7/2, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the brake device is a 2-poles 2-slots structure, the magnetic conductor comprises two magnetic conductive elements symmetrically arranged on opposite sides of the permanent magnet, each of the magnetic conductive elements is cylindrical, the motor rotor comprises a rotating shaft, and the axis of the magnetic conductive elements are parallel to the rotating shaft of the motor rotor.
RE claim 8/1, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the permanent magnet is used to connect motor stator, the magnetic conductor is used to connect motor rotor, the brake device is a 2-poles 2-slots structure, the permanent magnet comprises two permanent magnet elements symmetrically arranged on opposite sides of the magnetic conductor, each of the permanent magnet element is cylindrical, the motor rotor comprises a rotating shaft , and the axis of each the permanent magnet elements is parallel to the rotating shaft of the motor rotor.
RE claim 11/9, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the brake device is a 4-poles 4-slots structure, the magnetic conductive element are fan-shaped, and the slots are U-shaped.
RE claim 14/2, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the brake device comprises a shell seat used to install the magnetic conductor, the shell seat and the motor stator are fixed, the connection position of shell seat and the motor stator is staggered with the connection position of the shell seat and the magnetic conductor.
Claim 19 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.
RE claim 19/16, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the roller shutter equipment according to claim 16, characterized in that the motor is a tubular motor and the self-locking frequency of the brake device is less than 200Hz.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM EST.
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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270-5112. 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.
/THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights