Detailed Action begins on Page 3
Table of Contents
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 3
Response to Amendment 3
Response to Arguments 3
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 3
Claims 1-7, 10, 12-18, 20-24, and 26-27 3
Allowable Subject Matter 11
Conclusion 12
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments to claims 1, 12, and 20, cancellation of claim 11, and addition of claims 21-27 are acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7, 10, 12-18, 20-24, and 26-27
Claims 1-7, 10, 12-18, 20-24, and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gygax et al. (EP 2945028 A1, hereinafter “Gygax”).
Regarding Claim 1, Gygax discloses a horological assembly comprising:
- a first horological component (20),
- a second horological component (1), and
- a ring (10) mechanically connecting the first horology component to the second horology component [fig. 1], wherein the ring comprises:
- at least one first elastic arm (17, 19) arranged and/or configured so as to press against the first horology component [fig. 1] [0021]; and
- at least one second elastic arm (13) arranged and/or configured so as to press against the second horology component [0031] [figs. 1 and 2],
wherein the first horology component is mounted with the ability to move relative to the ring about an axis [0020-0021] (held elastically not fixed to the point of not allowing movement, therefore allowing the ability of some movement and also meant for bearing which rotates),
wherein the at least one second elastic arm comprises a first portion extending substantially radially to a main axis of the ring and a second portion (13) extending substantially orthoradially to the main axis of the ring [fig. 2] (elastic arms extend out radially from the felloe 11 and then extend orthoradially).
Regarding Claim 2, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the ring has an axis [fig. 1] and wherein the at least one first elastic arm is arranged and/or configured so as:
- to be stressed essentially in bending as a result of the pressing of the at least one first elastic arm against the first horology component and/or to extend substantially orthoradially relative to the axis, or
- to be stressed essentially in compression as a result of the pressing of the first elastic arm against the first horology component and/or to extend substantially radially relative to the axis [0021] (“Each of the arms 17 is elastically deformable in axial and radial directions with reference to the axis of the bearing.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the ring has an axis and wherein the at least one second elastic arm is arranged and/or configured so as:
- to be stressed essentially in bending as a result of its pressing against the second horology component and/or to extend substantially orthoradially relative to the axis, or
- to be stressed essentially in compression as a result of its pressing against the second horology component and/or to extend substantially radially relative to the axis [0031] (“rotation of the elastic member 10 causes the introduction and deformation of the elastic fingers 13 in the housing 3 and the pressure pads 14 against the side wall of the housing 3.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the ring comprises a felloe (11) [fig. 2], the at least one first elastic arm extending from the felloe and/or the at least one second elastic arm extending from the felloe and/or the at least one second elastic arm being comprised in the felloe.
Regarding Claim 5, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the ring has an axis (axis where orientation lines cross) [fig 2],
wherein the at least one first elastic arm is arranged and/or configured so as to substantially orthoradially relative to the axis [fig. 2], wherein the at least one second elastic arm is arranged and/or configured so as to extend substantially orthoradially relative to the axis [fig. 2], and
wherein the at least one first elastic arm and the at least one second elastic arm extend substantially in a same direction [0031] (second elastic arms may be oriented in opposite directions, in which case one of the second elastic arms would extend in a substantially same direction as the first elastic arms).
Regarding Claim 6, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the ring has an axis (axis where orientation lines cross) [fig. 2], wherein the at least one first elastic arm (17, 19) is arranged and/or configured so as to extend substantially orthoradially relative to the axis [fig. 2], wherein the at least one second elastic arm (13) is arranged and/or configured so as to extend substantially orthoradially relative to the axis [fig. 2], and wherein the at least one first elastic arm and the at least one second elastic arm extend in substantially opposite directions [fig. 2].
Regarding Claim 7, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, however Gygax does not disclose a manufacturing method for the ring of claim 1 and thus does not disclose that the ring is produced by implementing a micromanufacturing action, but does disclose that the ring may be made from a crystalline material substantially without a plastic regime such as monocrystalline or polycrystalline silicon-based material, based on sapphire, diamond-based, corundum-based, ruby-based, or the like (par. 0015). Claim 7 presents a product by process claim by requiring the ring be produced by implementing a micromanufacturing action. As such, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
Despite not explosivity disclosing a micromanufacturing action, the product of Gygax is the same as the resultant product of claim 7 particularly because it describes a product without a plastic regime such as monocrystalline or polycrystalline silicon-based material and the micromanufacturing action of claim 7 is provided with context in the specification that “implementing a micromanufacture step such as, for example, a step of deep reactive ion etching (usually designated by its English acronym "DRIE") in the case of a component notably containing silicon”. There is nothing to indicate or suggest that the resulting product from the micromanufacturing step having the same resulting material as Gygax is in any way different because of a micromanufacturing action. Because the determination of patentability of a product by process claim is based on the product itself, Gygax discloses the ring as required by Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 10, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the second horology component is fixed relative to a frame [0020].
Regarding Claim 12, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
Regarding Claim 13, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein an axial force of retention of the first horology component in the connecting ring is less than 0.8 times an axial force of retention of the connecting ring in the second horology component [fig. 1, fig. 2] (first elastic arms are shown with much more elasticity and room to deform than the second elastic arm, at least meeting this claim limitation).
Regarding Claim 14, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein a torque of retention of the first horology component in the connecting ring is less than 10-3 times a torque of retention of the connecting ring in the second horology component [0027] (variant disclosed where the second horology component is riveted to the ring, while the first horology component is still coupled with a bayonet coupling mechanism .
Regarding Claim 15, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses a timepiece comprising a horological assembly as claimed in claim 1 [abstract] [claim 16].
Regarding Claim 16, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 7, however Gygax does not disclose a manufacturing method for the ring of claim 1 and thus does not disclose that the ring is produced by implementing a micromanufacturing action which is a deep reactive ion etching or a UV-LIGA production action, but does disclose that the ring may be made from a crystalline material substantially without a plastic regime such as monocrystalline or polycrystalline silicon-based material, based on sapphire, diamond-based, corundum-based, ruby-based, or the like (par. 0015). Claim 16 presents a product by process claim by requiring the ring be produced by implementing a micromanufacturing action which is a deep reactive ion etching or a UV-LIGA production action. As such, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
Despite not explosivity disclosing a micromanufacturing action, the product of Gygax is the same as the resultant product of claim 16 particularly because it describes a product without a plastic regime such as monocrystalline or polycrystalline silicon-based material and the micromanufacturing action of claim 16 is provided with context in the specification that “implementing a micromanufacture step such as, for example, a step of deep reactive ion etching (usually designated by its English acronym "DRIE") in the case of a component notably containing silicon”. There is nothing to indicate or suggest that the resulting product from the micromanufacturing step having the same resulting material as Gygax is in any way different because of it having undergone a specific micromanufacturing action. Because the determination of patentability of a product by process claim is based on the product itself, Gygax discloses the ring as required by Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 17, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the first horology component is a foot of a dial or a staff of a wheel [fig. 1] (kitten for bearing/staff for wheel) [0020-0022].
Regarding Claim 18, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the second horology component is mobile relative to a frame [not claimed that this is a frame of the same timepiece of the second horology component, or even a frame of a timepiece, and because the horology assembly can be moved and this movement would be in relation to any other frame this claim is met due the incredibly broad BRI of the term “a frame”].
Regarding Claim 20, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 12, and further discloses wherein the first horology component and the second horology component are braked in translation along the axis [fig. 1] (second horology component holds ring above and below, therefore the movement of the first horology component along the axis would result in braking by the ring).
Regarding Claim 21, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 12, and further discloses wherein the first horology component and the second horology component are braked in rotation about the axis (figs. 1 and 2) [0031].
Regarding Claim 22, Gygax discloses a horological assembly comprising:
- a first horological component (20),
- a second horological component (1), and
- a ring mechanically (10) connecting the first horology component to the second horology component [figs. 1 and 2], wherein the ring comprises:
- at least one first elastic arm (17, 19) arranged and/or configured so as to press against the first horology component [fig. 1] [0021];
- at least one second elastic arm (13) arranged and/or configured so as to press against the second horology component [fig. 1] [0031],
wherein the first horology component is fixed to the second horology component by the ring [0025, 0031] (the elastic arms are clipped or rotated with gripping tabs to fix the components together)
wherein the at least one first elastic arm is arranged and/or configured so as to extend substantially orthoradially relative to a main axis of the ring [fig. 2], and
wherein the at least one second elastic arm is arranged and/or configured so as to extend substantially orthoradially relative to the main axis [fig. 2].
Regarding Claim 23, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 21, and further discloses wherein the at least one first elastic arm and the at least one second elastic arm extend substantially in a same direction [0031] (second elastic arms may be oriented in opposite directions, in which case one of the second elastic arms would extend in a substantially same direction as the first elastic arms).
Regarding Claim 24, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 21, and further discloses wherein the at least one first elastic arm and the at least one second elastic arm extend in substantially opposite directions [fig. 2].
Regarding Claim 26, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 22, and further discloses wherein the first horology component is a dial or a wheel [fig. 1] (kitten wheel for bearing).
Regarding Claim 27, Gygax discloses the horological assembly according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the first horology component is a dial or a wheel [fig. 1] (kitten wheel for bearing).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 25 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 19, prior art does not disclose a horological assembly meeting all of the limitation of claim 18 and further including the claimed feature the second horology component is a rocker or a lever, particularly in addition to the required limitation of claim 1 that the first horology component be mounted with the ability to move relative to the ring about an axis.
Regarding Claim 25, prior art does not disclose a horological assembly meeting all of the limitation of claim 22 and further including the claimed feature that the first horological component is a foot of a dial. While some elastic elements have been provided for attaching feet of dials, there is not a prior art disclosure including all of the features of the ring of claim 22 or even obvious in combination with additional prior art to combine disclosures for the application to the foot of a dial.
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 KEVIN A JOHNSTON whose telephone number is (571)272-4353. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10 a.m. - 7p.m. ET.
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, Regis Betsch can be reached at (571) 270-7101. 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.
/KEVIN ANDREW JOHNSTON/Examiner, Art Unit 2844
/REGIS J BETSCH/SPE, Art Unit 2844