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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 08/17/2023. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Response to Amendment
The cancelation of Claims 1-29 and addition of Claim(s) 30-49, filed 09/10/2025, are acknowledged and accepted.
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 42 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 42 states “wherein a remaining portion of the housing is anodized or oxidized.” The limitation “a remaining portion of the housing” is not defined by the claim. For examination purposes, “a remaining portion of the housing” will be taken as a portion of the housing.
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.
Claim(s) 30-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record.
With respect to Claim 30, Komi discloses a liquid lens device, comprising: a liquid lens (2, Figure 2) that comprises: first (101, Figure 8) and second (102, Figure 8) immiscible fluids defining an interface (105, Figure 8) moveable by electrowetting (¶[0007]), a cap portion (one of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), a base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), a gasket (103, Figure 8) positioned between the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), an upper window (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) positioned within the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), and a lower window (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) positioned within the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), wherein the windows (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) are facing and substantially parallel to each other (see Figure 8) and the fluids (101 and 102, Figure 8) are sealed within the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), gasket (103, Figure 8) and windows (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]); a flexible printed circuit (FPC) (9, Figure 1) or a printed circuit board (PCB) comprising a top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) and a bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) in electrical contact (where 95a contacts 21, Figure 3) with the respective cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2); and a spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprising a substantially circular-shaped body (see 50, Figure 2), wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is configured to apply a clamping force (50 is a lens pushing part, which implies force, Figure 2) between (a) the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) and the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2), and (b) the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2), and further wherein the clamping force of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is from about 1 N to about 10 N (0.2 kg=2N, ¶[0051]).
With respect to Claim 31, Komi further discloses a housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) in contact with the FPC (9, Figure 1) or PCB, wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is also configured to secure the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) to the one or both of the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2).
With respect to Claim 32, Komi further discloses wherein the PCB is further configured as a housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) in contact with one or both of the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2), and further wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is also configured to secure (¶[0037]) the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) to the one or both of the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2).
With respect to Claim 33, Komi further discloses wherein the clamping force of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is from about 1 N to about 7 N (0.2 kg=2N, ¶[0051]).
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) 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record, as applied to Claims 30 and 38, above, in further view of Goellner (US 3,187,573).
With respect to Claim 34, Komi teaches the device according to claim 30, wherein the body of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a plurality of waves in a thickness direction (inherent of spring washers).
Komi fails to teach wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer is at least three (3) waves spaced equidistantly from one another.
Goellner teaches a liquid level gauge (title and abstract) wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer (55 is a wavy spring washer, Figure 3) is at least three (3) waves spaced equidistantly from one another (column 3, lines 48-53).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi having the device with the teachings of Goellner having the equidistant waves on the spring washer for the purpose of evenly distributing forces, (column 3, lines 48-53).
With respect to Claim 35, Komi teaches the device according to claim 34, and the plurality of waves of the spring washer (50, Figure 2); wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises a pre-compression and post-compression amplitude in the thickness direction (inherent of spring washers).
Komi fails to teach wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises the pre-compression amplitude from about 0.4 mm to about 1.4 mm, and wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises the post-compression amplitude from about 0.1 mm to about 0.5 mm.
Goellner teaches a liquid level gauge (title and abstract) wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer (55 is a wavy spring washer, Figure 3); wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer (55 is a wavy spring washer, Figure 3) comprises a pre-compression amplitude from about 0.4 mm to about 1.4 mm (0.25 to 0.30 inch is equivalent to 0.635 to 0.762 mm, column 3, lines 67-71; this occurs during compressing, which means it would achieve this amplitude before full compression is complete), and wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a post-compression amplitude from about 0.1 mm to about 0.5 mm (0.25 to 0.30 inch is equivalent to 0.635 to 0.762 mm, column 3, lines 67-71; this occurs during compressing, which means it would reach the 0.1 to 0.5mm when compression is complete).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi having the device with the teachings of Goellner having the compression amplitudes for the purpose of sealing the area around the washer, column 3, lines 58-63.
With respect to Claim 36, Komi further teaches wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) further comprises a plurality of lugs (plurality of 52, Figure 2), each lug spaced between two of the waves, wherein the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) comprises a plurality of tabs (plurality of 52a, Figure 2), and further wherein each of the plurality of lugs (plurality of 52, Figure 2) is snapped onto a corresponding tab of the plurality of tabs (plurality of 52a, Figure 2) to secure the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) to the one or both of the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]).
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record, in further view of Hamanaka et al., (hereafter Hamanaka) (JP-2007105752-A).
With respect to Claim 37, Komi teaches the device according to claim 30, and the spring washer (50, Figure 2).
Komi fails to teach comprises a stainless steel alloy having a Vickers hardness of greater than 300 HV and an elongation of at least 20%.
Hamanaka teaches a manufacturing method of high strength washers (title and abstract) comprising a stainless steel alloy (¶[0006]) having a Vickers hardness of greater than 300 HV (200-400 Hv, ¶[0006]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi having the device with the teachings of Hamanaka having a washer comprised of stainless steel alloy having a Vickers hardness of greater than 300 HV for the purpose of increased rigidity, ¶[0012].
The limitation “the spring washer comprises a cold-worked, stainless steel alloy” is a product-by-process limitation. Moreover, the further limitations of claim 37 are directed to method steps of making the device, and it could have been made using an alternative method such as stamping or metal dies. The method limitations are not germane to patentability pursuant to MPEP §2112.02, since it has been held that “'[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) (citations omitted).
Claim(s) 38-41 and 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record, in further view of Craig (US 2019/0214198 A1).
With respect to Claim 38, Komi teaches a liquid lens device, comprising: a liquid lens (2, Figure 2) that comprises: first (101, Figure 8) and second (102, Figure 8) immiscible fluids defining an interface (105, Figure 8) moveable by electrowetting (¶[0007]), a cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), a base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), a gasket (103, Figure 8) positioned between the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), an upper window (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) positioned within the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), and a lower window (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) positioned within the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), wherein the windows (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) are facing and substantially parallel to each other and the fluids (101 and 102, Figure 8) are sealed within the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), gasket (103, Figure 8) and windows (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]); a flexible printed circuit (FPC) (9, Figure 1) comprising a top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) and a bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A), wherein the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) is in contact with the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2); a housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) in contact with one or both of the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2), wherein the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) of the FPC (9, Figure 1) is in contact with a top electrode contact portion of the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1); and a spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprising a substantially circular-shaped body (see 50, Figure 2), wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is configured to apply a clamping force (50 is a lens pushing part, which implies force, Figure 2) between (a) the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) and the top electrode contact portion of the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1), and (b) the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2), wherein the clamping force of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is from about 1 N to about 10 N (0.2 kg=2N, ¶[0051]), and further wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is also configured to secure the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) to the one or both of the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2) and maintain an electrical connection between the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2) and the top electrode contact portion of the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1).
Komi fails to teach the spring washer made from an electrically conductive material.
Craig teaches a capacitor assembly (title and abstract) comprising the spring washer made from an electrically conductive material (spring washer 66 is made of an electrically conductive material, such as stainless steel and steel, ¶[0068]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi having the device with the teachings of Craig having the spring washer made from an electrically conductive material for the purpose of reducing the number of components, ¶[0068].
With respect to Claim 39, Komi further teaches wherein the FPC (9, Figure 1) comprises an upper face and a lower face (see annotated Figure 5A) that opposes the upper face, wherein the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) is on the upper face and the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) is on the lower face.
PNG
media_image1.png
680
366
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 40, Komi further teaches wherein the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) is made from an electrically conductive material (7 is a CMOS substrate, which is electrically conductive, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 41, Komi further teaches wherein the top electrode contact portion of the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) is electrically conductive (7 is a CMOS substrate, which is electrically conductive, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 43, Komi further teaches wherein the clamping force of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is from about 1 N to about 7 N (0.2 kg=2N, ¶[0051]).
Claim(s) 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record, in further view of Craig (US 2019/0214198 A1), as applied to Claim 41 above, and in further in view of McMahon et al., (hereafter McMahon) (US 2014/0218793 A1), as best understood.
With respect to Claim 42, Komi in view of Craig teach the device according to claim 41 and the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1, of Komi).
Komi in view of Craig teach wherein a portion of the housing is anodized or oxidized.
McMahon teaches an apparatus for microscopic detection of hardness (title and abstract) wherein a portion of the housing (206, Figure 15) is anodized or oxidized (a housing 206 formed of an electrically insulative material, e.g., plastic or hard anodized aluminum, ¶[0067]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi in view of Craig having the device with the teachings of McMahon having a portion of the housing is anodized or oxidized for the purpose of electrical insulation, ¶[0067].
Claim(s) 44, 45, and 47-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record, in further view of Craig (US 2019/0214198 A1), as applied to Claim 38, above, in further view of Goellner (US 3,187,573).
With respect to Claim 44, Komi in view of Craig teach the device according to claim 38, wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer is at least three (3) waves (inherent of spring washers); further wherein the body of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a plurality of waves in a thickness direction (inherent of spring washers); wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises a pre-compression amplitude in the thickness direction (inherent of spring washers).
Komi in view of Craig fail to teach wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer are spaced equidistantly from one another, wherein the pre-compression amplitude is from about 0.4 mm to about 1.4 mm, and wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises a post-compression amplitude in the thickness direction, and further wherein the post-compression amplitude is from about 0.1 mm to about 0.5 mm.
Goellner teaches a liquid level gauge (title and abstract) wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer (55 is a wavy spring washer, Figure 3) are spaced equidistantly from one another (column 3, lines 48-53), wherein the pre-compression amplitude is from about 0.4 mm to about 1.4 mm (0.25 to 0.30 inch is equivalent to 0.635 to 0.762 mm, column 3, lines 67-71; this occurs during compressing, which means it would achieve this amplitude before full compression is complete), and wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a post-compression amplitude is from about 0.1 mm to about 0.5 mm (0.25 to 0.30 inch is equivalent to 0.635 to 0.762 mm, column 3, lines 67-71; this occurs during compressing, which means it would reach the 0.1 to 0.5mm when compression is complete).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi in view of Craig having the device with the teachings of Goellner having the compression amplitudes for the purpose of sealing the area around the washer when compressed, column 3, lines 58-63.
With respect to Claim 45, Komi teaches a liquid lens device, comprising: a liquid lens (2, Figure 2) that comprises: first (101, Figure 8) and second (102, Figure 8) immiscible fluids defining an interface (105, Figure 8) moveable by electrowetting (¶[0007]), a cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), a base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), a gasket (103, Figure 8) positioned between the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), an upper window (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) positioned within the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), and a lower window (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) positioned within the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), wherein the windows (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]) are facing and substantially parallel to each other and the fluids (101 and 102, Figure 8) are sealed within the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]), gasket (103, Figure 8) and windows (each surface has a light-permeable transparent window, ¶[0007]); a flexible printed circuit (FPC) (9, Figure 1) comprising a top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) and a bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A), wherein the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) is in contact with the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2); a housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) in contact with one or both of the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2); and a spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprising a substantially circular-shaped body (see Figure 2), wherein the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) of the FPC (9, Figure 1) is in contact with the spring washer (50, Figure 2), wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is configured to apply a clamping force (50 is a lens pushing part, which implies force, Figure 2) between (a) the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) and the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1), and (b) the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2), wherein the clamping force of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is from about 1 N to about 10 N (0.2 kg=2N, ¶[0051]), and further wherein the spring washer (50, Figure 2) is also configured to secure the housing (4, 40, and 7, Figure 1) to the one or both of the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) and the base portion (second of the two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2) and maintain an electrical connection between the cap portion (two opposed surfaces; ¶[0007]) of the liquid lens (2, Figure 2) and the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A) of the FPC (9, Figure 1).
Komi fails to teach a spring washer made from an electrically conductive material.
Craig teaches a capacitor assembly (title and abstract) comprising the spring washer made from an electrically conductive material (spring washer 66 is made of an electrically conductive material, such as stainless steel and steel, ¶[0068]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi having the device with the teachings of Craig having the spring washer made from an electrically conductive material for the purpose of reducing the number of components, ¶[0068].
With respect to Claim 47, Komi in view of Craig further teach wherein the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A, of Komi) of the FPC (9, Figure 1, of Komi) comprises a plurality of tabs (plurality of 52a, Figure 2, of Komi) and the spring washer (50, Figure 2, of Komi) further comprises a plurality of lugs (plurality of 52, Figure 2, of Komi), and further wherein each of the plurality of lugs (plurality of 52, Figure 2, of Komi) is snapped onto a corresponding tab of the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A, of Komi) of the FPC (9, Figure 1, of Komi) to maintain an electrical connection between the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A, of Komi) of the FPC (9, Figure 1, of Komi) and the spring washer (50, Figure 2, of Komi).
With respect to Claim 48, Komi in view of Craig further teach the device according to claim 45, wherein the clamping force of the spring washer (50, Figure 2, of Komi) is from about 1 N to about 7 N (0.2 kg=2N, ¶[0051], of Komi).
With respect to Claim 49, Komi in view of Craig teach the device according to claim 45, wherein the body of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a plurality of waves in a thickness direction (inherent of spring washers) and at least three (3) waves spaced equidistantly from one another (inherent of spring washers), wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer is wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a pre-and post- compression amplitude in the thickness direction (inherent of spring washers).
Komi in view of Craig fail to teach wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer is wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises a pre-compression amplitude in the thickness direction from about 0.4 mm to about 1.4 mm, and wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer comprises a post-compression amplitude in the thickness direction from about 0.1 mm to about 0.5 mm.
Goellner teaches a liquid level gauge (title and abstract) wherein the plurality of waves of the body of the spring washer (55 is a wavy spring washer, Figure 3) is at least three (3) waves spaced equidistantly from one another (column 3, lines 48-53); wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer (55 is a wavy spring washer, Figure 3) comprises a pre-compression amplitude from about 0.4 mm to about 1.4 mm (0.25 to 0.30 inch is equivalent to 0.635 to 0.762 mm, column 3, lines 67-71; this occurs during compressing, which means it would achieve this amplitude before full compression is complete), and wherein the plurality of waves of the spring washer (50, Figure 2) comprises a post-compression amplitude from about 0.1 mm to about 0.5 mm (0.25 to 0.30 inch is equivalent to 0.635 to 0.762 mm, column 3, lines 67-71; this occurs during compressing, which means it would reach the 0.1 to 0.5mm when compression is complete).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi in view of Craig having the device with the teachings of Goellner having the compression amplitudes for the purpose of sealing the area around the washer, column 3, lines 58-63.
Claim(s) 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komi (US 2012/0024954 A1), of record, in view of Craig (US 2019/0214198 A1) and Goellner (US 3,187,573), as applied to Claim 45, above, in further view of McMahon et al., (hereafter McMahon) (US 2014/0218793 A1).
With respect to Claim 46, Komi in view of Craig and Goellner teach the device according to claim 45, wherein the FPC (9, Figure 1, of Komi) comprises an upper face and a lower face that opposes the upper face, wherein each of the bottom electrode (95b, Figure 5A, of Komi) and the top electrode (95a, Figure 5A, of Komi) is on the upper face.
Komi in view of Craig and Goellner fail to teach wherein the housing is made from an electrically insulating material.
McMahon teaches an apparatus for microscopic detection of hardness (title and abstract) wherein the housing (206, Figure 15) is made from an electrically insulating material (a housing 206 formed of an electrically insulative material, ¶[0067]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Komi in view of Craig having the device with the teachings of McMahon having a portion of the housing is made from an electrically insulating material for the purpose of protection of the inner elements of the device, ¶[0067].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872