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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 12 and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Togawa et al. (US 20190391656 A1, hereinafter Togawa) in view of Lisseman et al. (US 20180190449 A1, hereinafter Lisseman), Yazawa et al. (US 20230152168 A1, hereinafter Yazawa), Degner et al. (US 20100079404 A1, hereinafter Degner), Sato et al. (US 20150241287 A1, hereinafter Sato) and Campbell et al. (US 20170299448 A1, hereinafter Campbell).
As to claim 1, Togawa teaches a switch assembly comprising:
[AltContent: textbox (6X)][AltContent: textbox (PL)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (CH)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (GY)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (26eX)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
541
799
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a housing 6X (fig. 2 above) having one or more walls that define a chamber CH (fig. 2 above), the one of more walls comprising at least one base wall 60 and at least one side wall 61;
a first printed circuit board (PCB) 9 (fig. 1 shows the PCB 9 arranged between elements 6-7; ¶38 teaches that the PCB 9 is between protrusions 60a, 72; accordingly one of skill in the art would understand that the unlabeled planar element sandwiched between protrusions 60a, 72 in fig. 2 is the PCB 9), the first PCB having a first surface (lower) that faces in a first axial direction (down in fig. 2) and a second surface (upper) that faces in a second axial direction (up in fig. 2), the second axial direction being opposite from the first axial direction;
one or more force sensors 5, wherein the one or more force sensors can detect forces in a range from a minimum force to a defined threshold force (the force sensor inherently has a detection range with a minimum force and defined threshold force), and wherein forces greater than the defined threshold force can damage at least one of the one or more force sensor (it is inherent that very extreme forces can damage the force sensor);
a force transfer plate 26a (¶28) comprising a main body (the portion of plate 26a not including the protrusion recited next) and a protrusion 26eX (fig. 2 above) extending radially outwardly from the main body, the force transfer plate having a first surface (lower) that faces in the first axial direction and a second surface (upper) that faces in the second axial direction;
wherein:
the at least one side wall defines a platform PL (fig. 2 above; element PL is the flat upper surface of the at least one sidewall 61), and the at least one side wall comprises a distal edge (e.g. at the edge of platform PL) axially spaced apart from the at least one base wall, and the platform is defined by the at least one side wall;
the protrusion extends over the platform;
wherein a gap GY (fig. 2 above) is defined by a space between the protrusion and the platform, said gap is eliminated and the protrusion abuts the platform when a force is applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction (see fig. 4 and ¶40); and
an elastically deformable pad 4 (¶34 teaches that pad 4 is rubber) disposed between the force transfer plate first surface and the one or more force sensors, the elastically deformable pad having a first surface (lower) that faces in the first axial direction and a second surface (upper) that faces in the second axial direction, said second surface of the elastically deformable pad coupled (at least indirectly) to the first surface of the force transfer plate, and wherein the elastically deformable pad absorbs force applied to the force transfer plate (fig. 4, ¶40 and ¶47).
Togawa does not teach that the PCB is disposed within the chamber,
the one or more force sensors 5 are disposed on the PCB second surface,
wherein each of the one or more force sensors further comprises a force concentrator,
the platform is defined by the at least one side wall axially between the at least one base wall and the distal edge of the at least one side wall,
said gap is eliminated and the protrusion abuts the platform when a force at or above the defined threshold force is applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction preventing damage to the at least one of the one or more force sensors,
a steel interface plate disposed between the force transfer plate first surface and the one or more force sensors,
the steel interface plate having a first surface (lower) that faces in the first axial direction and a second surface (upper) that faces in the second axial direction,
said elastically deformable pad disposed between the first surface of the force transfer plate and the second surface of the steel interface plate, said steel interface plate disposed between the elastically deformable pad first surface and the one or more force sensors, wherein the second surface of the steel interface plate is coupled to the first surface of the elastically deformable pad, and wherein the first surface of the steel interface plate maintains contact with the force concentrator of each of the one or more force sensors,
wherein the elastically deformable pad absorbs force applied to the force transfer plate to prevent damaging the one or more force sensors.
Lisseman teaches a switch assembly comprising one or more force sensors 140 disposed on the second surface (upper surface) of a PCB 112 within a single chamber (formed by walls 104, 106 (¶39; fig. 3) of a housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa such that the one or more force sensors is disposed on the PCB second surface, and wherein the PCB is disposed in the chamber of the housing, wherein the housing has a single chamber, as taught by Lisseman so as to simplify the design of the switch (in the modified Togawa, there is one chamber instead of two, and the sensor is in the same chamber as the PCB, which avoids the need for providing a connection across two separate chambers as described in ¶38 of Togawa).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (21X)][AltContent: textbox (20X)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
470
688
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yazawa teaches a load sensing apparatus comprising a force transfer plate 50, a force sensor 10, and at least one side wall 20X (fig. 5C above) comprising a platform 21X (fig. 5C above), wherein the platform 21X of the housing 20 functions as a stopper, wherein when the pressing member 30 is pushed to bring the plate 50 into contact with the platform 21X of the housing 20, wherein the pushing stops and the stroke of the pressing member 30 stops, so that the output value does not increase, and therefore an overload on the load sensing element 10 is prevented (see ¶93; accordingly, the gap is eliminated and the platform 21X is engaged when a force at or above a defined threshold force is applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction preventing damage to the at least one of the one or more force sensors),
wherein the gap (between force transfer plate 50 and platform 21X) is eliminated when a force at or above the defined threshold force is applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction preventing damage to the at least one of the one or more force sensors (as described above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified such that the elimination of the gap occurs when a force at or above a defined threshold force is applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction preventing damage to the at least one of the one or more force sensors, wherein the gap is eliminated when a force at or above the defined threshold force is applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction preventing damage to the at least one of the one or more force sensors, as taught by Yazawa so as to prevent overloads (¶93 of Yazawa).
Togawa as modified still does not teach the platform is axially between the at least one base wall and the distal edge of the at least one side wall.
While Togawa teaches that the protrusion 26eX is hooked downward instead of extending only in the horizontal direction of fig. 2, it has been held that such a difference would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as explained next. It has been held that a simple change in shape is an alteration that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art {the court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)}. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B). In this case, Togawa’s protrusion 26eX abuts with the platform and also receives a peripheral wall 20b (¶28). Protrusion 26eX could perform these functions equally well if shaped to extend only horizontally in fig. 2 of Togawa. In the instant application, the protrusion has a planar shape to engage with the platform, which is a function that Togawa’s protrusion would perform whether having a hooked shape or planar shape. Accordingly, modifying Togawa’s protrusion to extend only horizontally instead of in a hooked manner would have been an obvious change in shape to one of ordinary skill in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified such that the protrusion(s) (fig. 2 of Togawa shows protrusions on at least two sides of the device) extend only horizontally since such a modification would be a mere change in the shape of the protrusion(s) for the predictable result that overloading is still successfully prevented.
Regarding the limitation of the platform being between the at least one base wall and the distal edge,
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (PF)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (DE)][AltContent: textbox (SW)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (BW)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
440
734
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Degner teaches a device with a movable input mechanism 72 (trackpad; see abstract), comprising a housing comprising at least one base wall BW (fig. 5 above) and at least one side wall SW (fig. 5 above) having a platform PF (fig. 5 above; extending horizontally from the side wall wherein the sidewall extends above and below the platform) and a distal edge DE (fig. 5 above) axially (vertically) spaced from the at least one base wall,
wherein the platform is axially between the at least one base wall and the distal edge of the at least one side wall (the Examiner notes that ¶77 and fig. 6 teach that the platform engages with and limits the downward motion of the trackpad when a downward force is applied to the trackpad).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified such that each of the platform(s) (fig. 2 of Togawa shows at least one platform on each side of the device) is provided in the form of a platform that extends horizontally from a sidewall that extends above and below the respective platform, wherein the platform is axially between the at least one base wall and the distal edge of the at least one side wall, as taught by Degner, since such modifications would be simple substitutions of one method of providing a platform for another for the predictable result that overloading is still successfully prevented.
Sato teaches a force sensor 20 (title) comprising pressure receiving part 23 (when the modified Togawa is modified in view of Sato, the result is that the modified Togawa has a force sensor that comprises the force receiving part 23 from Sato), wherein the sensor 20 is bonded in place with adhesive (¶42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified to have the force sensor of Sato that is bonded in place as taught by Sato since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one force sensor and attachment method therefor for another for the predictable result that force is still successfully detected and the sensor is securely held in place by the adhesive.
[AltContent: textbox (101X)]
PNG
media_image4.png
428
454
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As to the claimed interface plate,
Campbell teaches a force sensing assembly comprising a force transfer element 201, an elastic pad 202 transferring force from the force transfer element 201, an actuator element 300 (fig. 3; ¶20 and ¶29 teach that the actuator device 300 is another example of the actuator device 100 from figs. 1-2) with an interface plate 101X (fig. 3 above) comprising a deformable surface 101 that receives the force from the elastic pad (¶29), wherein the actuator device comprises a force concentrator 102 (¶29) and is held in place by an attachment layer 106 (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified to include an actuator device held in place by an attachment layer as taught by Campbell so as to beneficially concentrate force onto the force sensor (¶29 of Campbell; additionally or alternatively, the force concentrator more effectively transfers force to the force sensor).
Campbell teaches, in a further embodiment (fig. 6), an actuator device 600 that is made of metal (¶33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified such that the actuator device is metal as taught by the further embodiment of Campbell for the benefit that metal is durable for good longevity.
As to the limitation that the interface plate is made of steel,
Yazawa further teaches a load sensing apparatus comprising a steel plate 32 (¶79) for transferring a pressing force to a force sensor 10 (¶81, fig. 1B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified such that the interface plate is made of steel as taught by Yazawa (meaning that the actuator device of Campbell is modified to be made of steel) since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one metal force transfer device material for another for the predictable result that pressing forces are still successfully detected (additionally or alternatively, steel has good durability for good longevity, and/or is common and relatively inexpensive).
Togawa as modified teaches wherein each of the one or more force sensors further comprises a force concentrator 23 (Sato),
a steel (in light of Yazawa) interface plate 101X (Campbell) disposed between the force transfer plate first surface and the one or more force sensors 20 (Sato),
the steel interface plate having a first surface (lower) that faces in the first axial direction and a second surface (upper) that faces in the second axial direction,
said elastically deformable pad 4 (Togawa) is disposed between the first surface of the force transfer plate and the second surface of the steel interface plate (in Campbell, the interface plate 101X is between a deformable pad and the force sensor, and this would similarly be the case in the modified Togawa), said steel interface plate disposed between the elastically deformable pad first surface and the one or more force sensors, wherein the second surface of the steel interface plate is coupled (at least directly or indirectly) to the first surface of the elastically deformable pad, and wherein the first surface of the steel interface plate maintains contact with the force concentrator of each of the one or more force sensors (at least while a detectable force is being applied),
wherein the elastically deformable pad absorbs force applied to the force transfer plate to prevent damaging the one or more force sensors (in light of Yazawa, the switch assembly has overload protection; accordingly, the deformation of the deformable pad absorbs downward force to prevent damage to the sensor to at least some degree when the force transfer plate can no longer move downward).
As to claim 2, Togawa as modified teaches wherein the force applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction is transferred through the force transfer plate to the one or more force sensors (¶31 and ¶40; fig. 4).
As to claim 12, Togawa teaches wherein the gap GY (fig. 2 above) exists between the protrusion of the force transfer plate and a floor of the platform prior to the force being applied to the force transfer plate second surface in the first axial direction (¶40).
As to claim 20, Togawa teaches wherein each of the one or more force sensors 5 have a first surface (lower) that faces in the first axial direction toward the PCB second surface (upper) and a second surface (upper surface of the force sensor 5) that faces in the second axial direction (up).
As to claim 21, Togawa teaches wherein the platform extends radially inwardly to the chamber (see fig. 6 of Degner).
Claim(s) 4, 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Togawa in view of Lisseman, Yazawa, Degner, Sato and Campbell as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Fyfe et al. (US 20200182715 A1, hereinafter Fyfe).
As to claim 4, Togawa teaches wherein the elastically deformable pad is comprised of rubber (¶34).
Togawa as modified does not teach wherein the pad is silicone.
Fyfe teaches a sensing pod (title) comprising a sensor element 118 and a silicon pad configured to transfer a pressing force to the sensor element (¶42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa as modified such that the pad is made of silicone as taught by Fyfe, since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one pad material for another for the predictable result that a pressing force is still successfully detected.
As to claim 8, Togawa as modified teaches wherein the elastically deformable pad second surface is connected (broadly) to the force transfer plate first surface and wherein the interface plate second surface is connected (broadly) to the energy absorbing pad first surface.
Togawa as modified does explicitly teach wherein the elastically deformable pad second surface is adhered to the force transfer plate first surface and wherein the interface plate second surface is adhered to the energy absorbing pad first surface (this is because Togawa does not teach how the pad is held in place).
Fyfe teaches a sensing pod (title) comprising a sensor element 118 and a silicon pad configured to transfer a pressing force to the sensor element (¶42), wherein the silicon pad is held in place by adhering (¶43).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adhere the deformable pad, of the modified Togawa, in place as taught by Fyfe so as to provide a “secure” attachment (¶43 - Fyfe).
Togawa as modified teaches wherein the elastically deformable pad second surface is adhered to the force transfer plate first surface (¶24 of Togawa teaches wherein the movable part 2 includes element 26 that has the force transfer plate 26a; ¶32 of Togawa teaches that support 3 supports the movable part 2 via support components 8; ¶37 teaches that support 3 and housing 6 are attached to each other by snap fits 33, 63; additionally, the deformable pad is “adhered” to the housing as taught by Fyfe; www.dictionary.com defines “adhere” as “to stay attached”; accordingly, Togawa as modified teaches “wherein the elastically deformable pad second surface is adhered to the force transfer plate first surface”) and wherein the interface plate second surface is adhered to the energy absorbing pad first surface (in view Campbell, the interface plate is adhered with an attachment layer 106 to the housing of Togawa; as discussed above, the pad is adhered to the housing in the modified Togawa; accordingly, the interface plate second surface is adhered to the energy absorbing pad first surface).
As to claim 10, Togawa as modified teaches wherein each of the one or more force concentrators 23 (Sato) are affixed (at least by the adhesive of Sato that fixes the sensor in place, and by the attachment layer 106 of Campbell that fixes the interface plate in place) to the interface plate 101X (Campbell).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Togawa in view of Lisseman, Yazawa, Degner, Sato and Campbell as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Rajamani et al. (US 20130238257 A1, hereinafter Rajamani).
As to claim 16, Togawa as modified teaches the limitations of the claim except wherein the defined threshold force is 120 N.
Rajamani teaches a force sensor measuring in the range of 10 N to 120 N (¶46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Togawa such that the sensor measures in the range of 10 N to 120 N, as taught by Rajamani so as to measure a relatively wide range of forces.
Togawa as modified teaches wherein the defined threshold force is 120 N (in light of Rajamani).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/11/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pg. 15 that Yazawa does not teach wherein metal plate 32 maintains contact with load sensing element 10, or even the pressure sensing portion 11 of the load sensing element 10.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Campbell was relied on for the feature of a metal plate maintaining contact with a force concentrator of a sensor.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to the prior art rejections have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) for rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUBEN C PARCO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1968. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM 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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/R.C.P./ Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853