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 .
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Ishi et al. (US 2022/0221310) or Saito et al. (Saito) (US 2022/0196380) or Saito et al. (Saito2) (US 2022/0170731) or Saito et al. (Saito3) (US 2022/0163317) or Osada et al. (Osada) (US 2022/0163318) or Osada (Osada2) (US 2022/0018690).
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Note: each of the applied references uses the same numbering and discloses the same figure and similar disclosure. As such, the following explanation is provided with regard to Ishi et al. (US 2022/0221310), with all cited figures and paragraphs from Ishi, but is clearly equally applicable to each of the above applied references, which are being combined for the purpose of brevity.
Also note that the instant claimed invention is directed towards the embodiment seen in Figures 21-25, and that each of the applied references discloses the same or substantially the same figures as applicant, thus clearly demonstrating that these references anticipate the claimed invention.
As to Claim 1,
Ishi or Satio or Saito2 or Saito3 or Osada or Osada2 discloses An absolute encoder comprising: a first drive gear (1d) configured to rotate in accordance with rotation of a main spindle (1) (Paragraph [0175]); a first magnet (9) provided on a top end side of the first drive gear (Figures 20,21) (Paragraph [0176]); a first angle sensor (40) configured to detect a first rotation angle of the first drive gear, in accordance with a change in magnetic flux generated from the first magnet (Figure 24), (Paragraph [0165]); an intermediate gear (2) having a perimeter about which a first driven gear (2a) is located (Figure 22), (Paragraph [0177]), a central axis of the first driven gear being perpendicular to a central axis of the first drive gear (Figure 22), and the first driven gear engaging with the first drive gear (Paragraph [0177]); a second drive gear (2b) coaxially provided with the first driven gear (Figure 22), (Paragraph [0180]), the second drive gear being configured to rotate in accordance with rotation of the first driven gear (Paragraph [0183]); a layshaft gear (5) having a perimeter about which a second driven gear (5a) is located (Paragraph [0183]), (Figure 22), a central axis of the second driven gear being perpendicular to the central axis of the first driven gear (Figure 22), and the second driven gear engaging with the second drive gear (Figure 22), (Paragraph [0183]); a second magnet (8) provided on a top end side of the second driven gear (Figures 21,25), (Paragraph ; and a second angle sensor (50) configured to detect a second rotation angle of the second driven gear, in accordance with a change in magnetic flux generated from the second magnet (Figure 25), (Paragraphs [0197],[0201]), wherein a first magnetization direction of the first magnet is parallel to a first axial direction of the first angle sensor (Figure 35), (Paragraph [0259] / note the DM magnetization direction is identical to that of applicant), and a second magnetization direction of the second magnet is perpendicular to a second axial direction of the second angle sensor (Figure 36 / note the magnetization will be parallel to the N and S poles, such as that seen in Figure 34), wherein a first tolerance of the first rotation angle detected by the first angle sensor is less than a second tolerance of the second rotation angle detected by the second angle sensor (Paragraph [0243] / note that while the prior art does not expressly disclose the tolerance feature, it does disclose the exact same structure, including the same rotation amounts of the gears, and thus must reasonably disclose this claim feature), and wherein the layshaft gear is disposed on an opposite side of the intermediate gear from the main spindle (Figure 20).
(Note: With regard to Osada2, applicant does not specify what an axial direction is for the first and second angle sensors, and thus any direction can be defined for each sensor that would allow the magnetization to be parallel or perpendicular to that axial direction).
As to Claim 2,
Ishi or Satio or Saito2 or Saito3 or Osada or Osada2 discloses at least one of the first magnet and the second magnet has a diameter of about 4 mm (Figure 21), (Paragraph [0179] / note that the motor sides are the same length of 25 mm as applicant, and the prior art and instant application show the exact same figures and their dimensional relationship between the components, and thus if the motor in both the prior art and instant application have the same 25 mm length sides, the prior art must disclose this feature).
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osada (JP 2019-015536) in view of Meyer et al. (Meyer) (US 20040007067).
Note that US 20200132507 is being used as an English translation of Osada, and any cited paragraphs come from this document. Also note that the cited paragraphs for Osamu come from the provided English machine translation.
As to Claim 1,
PNG
media_image1.png
450
620
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Osada discloses An absolute encoder comprising: a first drive gear (10) configured to rotate in accordance with rotation of a main spindle (1a) (Paragraphs [0035],[0045]); a first magnet (Mq) provided on a top end side of the first drive gear (Figures 7-9), (see above figure) (Paragraphs [0045],[0046]]); a first angle sensor (Sq) configured to detect a first rotation angle of the first drive gear, in accordance with a change in magnetic flux generated from the first magnet (Figure 7), (Paragraph [0046]); an intermediate gear (22) having a perimeter about which a first driven gear (12) is located (Figure 9), (Paragraphs [0073],[0081]), a central axis of the first driven gear being perpendicular to a central axis of the first drive gear (Figure 9), and the first driven gear engaging with the first drive gear (Paragraph [0071]); a second drive gear (2b) coaxially provided with the first driven gear (Figure 22), (Paragraph [0180]), the second drive gear (14) being configured to rotate in accordance with rotation of the first driven gear (Paragraph [0073]), (Figure 9); a layshaft gear (24) having a perimeter about which a second driven gear (16) is located (Paragraphs [0085],[0086]), (Figure 9), a central axis of the second driven gear being perpendicular to the central axis of the first driven gear (Figure 9), and the second driven gear engaging with the second drive gear (Figure 10), (Paragraph [0088]); a second magnet (Mp) provided on a top end side of the second driven gear (Figure 9), (Paragraph [0085]); and a second angle sensor (Sp) configured to detect a second rotation angle of the second driven gear, in accordance with a change in magnetic flux generated from the second magnet (Figure 10), (Paragraph [0109]), wherein a first magnetization direction of the first magnet is parallel to a first axial direction of the first angle sensor (Figures 4,9 / note that the claim does not define what axis the axial direction must be, and one can therefore be defined that is parallel to the magnetization direction), and a second magnetization direction of the second magnet is perpendicular to a second axial direction of the second angle sensor (Figures 4,9 / note that the claim does not define what axis the axial direction must be, and one can therefore be defined that is perpendicular to the magnetization direction), wherein a first tolerance of the first rotation angle detected by the first angle sensor is less than a second tolerance of the second rotation angle detected by the second angle sensor (Figures 7-9 / note that while the prior art does not expressly disclose the tolerance feature, it does disclose almost the same structure, and thus must reasonably disclose this claim feature).
Osada does not disclose the layshaft gear is disposed on an opposite side of the intermediate gear from the main spindle.
Meyer discloses the layshaft gear (26) is disposed on an opposite side of the intermediate gear (18) from the main spindle (20) (Figure 4), (Paragraphs [0020],[0021]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Osada to include the layshaft gear is disposed on an opposite side of the intermediate gear from the main spindle as taught by Meyer in order to advantageously utilize a configuration that prevents the intermediate gear’s shaft from becoming disengaged radially from the tooth mesh of the main spindle, and to prevent damage to the main spindle gear and prevent tooth skipping of the intermediate gear (Paragraph [0021]).
As to Claim 2,
Osada in view of Meyer does not disclose at least one of the first magnet and the second magnet has a diameter of about 4 mm.
However, Osada discloses a substantially similar device as evidenced by the figures in comparison to those of applicant, and expressly discloses that components can have increased or reduced dimensions for the encoder (Paragraphs [0004],[0005]), thus demonstrating that such a feature is a result effective variable.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Osada in view of Meyer to include optimizing the dimensions of the first and second magnet to therefore include at least one of the first magnet and the second magnet has a diameter of about 4 mm given the above disclosure and teaching of Osada in order to advantageously utilize a magnet that is large and strong enough to generate a detectable magnetic field while also be of a reduced size so as to allow for a more compact absolute encoder.
Conclusion
Note: No additional pertinent art is cited at this time as all reasonably pertinent references have been cited above, on an IDS, or in the parent application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID M. SCHINDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2112. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
DAVID M. SCHINDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/DAVID M SCHINDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights