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
Applicant filed a response, amended claims 1, 2, 12, and 13, and added new claim 20 on 11/13/2025.
Response to Arguments
Arguments are primarily drawn to amendments. The revised rejection below addresses the amended claims.
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.
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 1-3, 5-7, 9-11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (PG-PUB 2009/0038471) in view of Craft (US 5,820,118), Le Gal (US 10,243,232), and Wang (English Translation of CN211009373).
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka teaches a device for holding a first and second object in a compressive clamping relationship, comprising:
a body defined by a housing with a first and second end plate (Figure 1, items 4 and 5 and [0021]);
a shaft, arranged to move axially in the body and to rotate about an axis thereof, the shaft having a first end positioned in the housing and a second end positioned outside of the housing beyond the second end plate, the second end adapted to cause an arm to bear against the second object in a first condition of the device and to cause the arm to disengage the second object in a second condition of the device in which the second end of the shaft is lifted away from the body and rotated relative to the axis (Figure 1 and 2, item 11 and [0022]), and
a piston disposed in the housing near the first end plate when the device is in the first condition, and arranged to move axially when a pressurized motive fluid is applied to the piston (Figure 2, item 17 and [0022], [0025]).
Tanaka teaches a double-acting pneumatic clamp, wherein pressurized fluid is supplied into a rod-side cylinder or head-side cylinder to put the clamp in the first and second conditions [0025]-[0026].
Tanaka teaches clamping a generic work article [0006]. It would naturally flow that the device of Tanaka would be fixed to a first object in order to hold the clamp in position for proper function. Accordingly, the device of Tanaka would be capable of attachment to a first body and engaging with a second body.
Tanaka does not teach (1) a spring, disposed in the housing for applying a compressive spring force on the shaft in the first condition to engage the first and second objects in the compressive clamping relationship, wherein the piston is coaxial beneath the spring and shaft and (2) when the pressurized motive fluid is applied to the piston, a space in the housing above the piston is maintained at ambient pressure.
As to (1), Craft teaches a hydraulically-operated swing clamps for holding and clamping a workpiece to a fixture (Figure 1 and col 2, ln 66-Col 3, ln 23). Craft teaches a double-acting clamp comprising a pair of hydraulic ports for supplying or discharging from the cylinder body for selectively controlling the shift of the piston (Col 3, ln 29-40). Craft teaches a double-acting clamp may be converted to a single-acting clamp by replacing one of the hydraulic ports 32, 34 with a spring or other biasing means (Col 3, ln 29-60).
Le Gal teaches a clamping cylinder comprising a spring in compression positioned in the receiving chamber of the body of the cylinder (Figure 1t and Col 6, ln 9-25). Le Gal teaches a spring in the receiving chamber, wherein the piston is coaxial beneath the spring and shaft (Figure 1, item 108 and Col 3, ln 26-36). Le Gal teaches to move the mobile assembly from the clamping position to the release position, the cylinder comprises an air inlet in the lower part of the body and in fluid communication with the receiving chamber of the body, sending a flow of compressed air into the chamber, which pushes on a stop surface of the piston normal to the axis of displacement (Col 3, ln 26-36). Le Gal teaches the thrust of the air on the stop surface combats the action of the spring and moves the piston from the clamping position to the release position.
Both Tanaka and Le Gal are drawn to the same field of endeavor pertaining to clamps. Based on the teachings of Craft, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized a double-acting clamp can be converted to a single-acting clamp comprising a spring disposed in a chamber, to yield the predictable result of providing a functional equivalent swinging clamp. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka from a double-acting cylinder to single-acting cylinder utilizing an internal, coaxial spring as taught by Le Gal, a known suitable mechanism to return an actuated cylinder to a relaxed position to yield the predictable result of providing a controlled clamp as taught by Craft.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Tanaka with a spring coaxial with the piston disposed in the upper chamber of the cylinder with an air inlet to allow for a breathing passageway, or a vent for the chamber to be open to atmosphere pressure to allow for movement of air caused by the compression and release of the spring enclosed in the chamber, as taught by Le Gal.
As to (2), Wang teaches a hydraulic oil cylinder comprising a ventilation hole in the cylinder such that when the piston reciprocated, it discharges air out the end or sucks and filters air to protect the safety of the seal (Page 1 and 3), wherein the ventilation hole is provided in the chamber housing the shaft (Figure 1). Wang teaches the respirator is a copper sintered filter screen (Page 3).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the device of Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal would require a mechanism to control the air pressure in the chamber housing the spring when the clamp is activated by venting air to allow for actuation of the piston. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal with a vent hole coupled with a sintered filter as taught by Wang for the benefit of providing a mechanism for venting air in the chamber such that the piston and seal operates properly and a mechanism for filtering such that contaminates in the air do not damage the device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the vent hole of Wang in the upper chamber of the housing of Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal, in the same manner as taught by Wang, to yield the benefits as taught by Wang.
Accordingly, due to the vent in the housing above the piston, the chamber would be maintained at ambient pressure when pressurized motive fluid is applied against the piston.
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 1, further comprising an inlet port, passing through the first end plate for introducing a pressurized motive fluid into the housing below the piston to move the piston against the spring force as along as the motive fluid is presented in the housing (Tanaka, [0024]-[0025]); and
a breather element, positioned in an upper position of the housing to maintain a space above the piston at ambient pressure (Wang, Page 1 and 3, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 1, wherein the spring is a spiral spring (Le Gal, Figure 1, item 108).
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 1, further comprising an arm having a proximal end rigidly affixed to the shaft at or near the second end and extending radially away to a distance end that is adapted to bear against the second object in the first condition (Tanaka, Figure 1 and 3, item 12 and [0025]).
Regarding claim 6, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 5, wherein the distal end of the arm is capable of adjusting a compressive force applied to the second object when the device is in the first condition (Tanaka, Figure 1 and 3 and [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 4, wherein while in the second condition, the arm rotates about the axis of the shaft in the of 30 degrees and 90 degrees (Tanaka, Figure 3 and [0024]-[0025]).
Given that Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the arm rotation range within the claimed range, the claimed range would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 9, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 2, wherein the motive fluid is exhausted through the inlet port when a source of the motive fluid is removed from the inlet port (Tanaka, [0025]-[0026]).
Regarding claim 10, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 9, wherein the motivate fluid is fluid (Tanaka, [0024]-[0025]).
Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not teach the motive fluid is compressed air.
Le Gal teaches to move the mobile assembly from the clamping position to the release position, the cylinder comprises an air inlet in the lower part of the body and in fluid communication with the receiving chamber of the body, sending a flow of compressed air into the chamber, which pushes on a stop surface of the piston normal to the axis of displacement (Le Gal, Col 6, ln 26-46).
Both Tanaka and Le Gal are drawn to the same field of endeavor pertaining to clamp actuated by a motive fluid. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the liquid of Tanaka with the compressed air as taught by Le Gal, a known suitable motive fluid for operating the cylinder of a clamp, to yield the predictable result of controlling the clamp through injecting fluid.
Regarding claim 11, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 1.
Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not explicitly teach the spring is in a compressed condition when the device is in the first condition and in a further compressed condition when the device is in the second condition.
However, given that the device and orientation of the angled cam groove of Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang are identical to the instant claimed device, the device of Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang would also be capable of compressing in a first condition and further compressing in a second condition.
Regarding claim 20, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 2, wherein the breather element is located at a threaded hole in the housing and includes a filter (Figure 1 and Page 1 and 3; “The respirator 1 and the respirator seat 2 are connected in a spiral manner.”).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (PG-PUB 2009/0038471) in view of Craft (US 5,820,118), Le Gal (US 10,243,232), and Wang (English Translation of CN211009373), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Kudome (English Translation of JPH1148254).
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 1.
Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not teach the body is linked to an attachment plate configured to allow attachment of the device to the first object.
Kudome teaches a mold comprising a plurality of clamps, wherein the clamps are fixed to the mold using brackets (i.e., attachment plates) (Figures 1, 9 and 10) such that the clamps can properly engage a first object and second object [0012]-[0013]. Kudome teaches the clamping devices are pressure cylinders coupled to a swinging lever (Figures 5-7 and [0012]-[0013]).
While Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal teaches clamping a generic work article [0006] and would naturally be fixed to a first object in order to hold the clamp in position for clamping, Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal does not explicitly disclose the mechanism for fixing the device, prompting one of ordinary skill in the art to look elsewhere in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang with brackets as taught by Kudome, a known suitable mechanism for fixing clamps against a surface, to yield the predictable result of stabilizing the clamps for proper functioning.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (PG-PUB 2009/0038471) in view of Craft (US 5,820,118), Le Gal (US 10,243,232), and Wang (English Translation of CN211009373), as applied to claim 1, in further view of McIntosh (PG-PUB 2016/0008936).
Regarding claim 8, Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 1.
Tanaka in view of Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not teach a plurality of rods, each extending between the first and second end plates.
McIntosh teaches a pin clamp for clamping a workpiece including a housing, actuator, and a locating pin extending through the housing (Figures 1 and 2 and [0029]). McIntosh teaches a plurality of fasteners (i.e., a plurality of rods) disposed in the length of the housing in order to attach the actuator to the housing (Figures 2 and 3, item 62 and [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka with fasteners of McIntosh, a known suitable fastener mechanism for attaching an actuator to a housing, to yield the predictable result of providing a housed actuator.
Claims 12-14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usine (Video, see screenshots provided, publicly available in 2012) in view of Tanaka (PG-PUB 2009/0038471), Craft (US 5,820,118), Le Gal (US 10,243,232), and Wang (English Translation of CN211009373).
Regarding claim 12, Usine teaches a device for rotation molding, comprising:
a rotational mold having a first mold portion and a second mold portion such that each mold portion has a flange registrable with a corresponding flange on the other mold portion to form the rotation mold (see screenshots at timestamp 0:52 and 0:56),
at least one clamping device that requires operators to unclamp and clamp (see screenshots at timestamp 0:52 and 0:56).
Usine does not teach at least one clamping device, comprising:
a body, configured for attachment to the first mold portion, the body defined by a housing with a first and a second end plate;
a shaft, arranged to move axially in the body and to rotate about an axis thereof, the shaft having a first end that remains in the housing and a second end that remains outside of the housing beyond the second end plate, the second end adapted to bear against the second mold portion in a first condition of the device and to disengage from the second mold portion in a second condition of the device in which the second end of the shaft is lifted away from the body, and rotated relative to the axis;
a spring, disposed in the housing for applying a compressive spring force on the shaft in the first condition to engage the first and second objects in the compressive clamping relationship; and
a piston, coaxial beneath spring and shaft, disposed in the housing near the first end plate when the device is in the first condition, and arranged to move axially against the spring force to move the shaft while in the second condition when a pressurized motive fluid is applied to the piston; and
wherein when the pressurized motive fluid is applied to the piston, a space in the housing above the piston is maintained at ambient pressure.
Tanaka teaches a rotary clamp cylinder for holding a first and second object in a compressive clamping relationship, comprising:
a body arranged for attachment to the first object, the body defined by a housing with a first and second end plate (Figure 1, items 4 and 5 and [0021]);
a shaft, arranged to move axially in the body and to rotate about an axis thereof, the shaft having a first end that remains in the housing and a second end that remains outside of the housing beyond the second end plate, the second end adapted to bear against the second object in a first condition of the device and to disengage the second object in a second condition of the device in which the second end of the shaft is lifted away from the body and rotated relative to the axis (Figure 1 and 2, item 11 and [0022]), and
a piston, dispose din the housing near the first end plate when the device is in the first condition, and arranged to move axially (Figure 2, item 17 and [0022], [0025]).
Tanaka teaches a double-acting pneumatic clamp, wherein pressurized fluid is supplied into a rod-side cylinder or head-side cylinder to put the clamp in the first and second conditions [0025]-[0026].
Tanaka teaches clamping a generic work article [0006]. It would naturally flow that the device of Tanaka would be fixed to a first object in order to hold the clamp in position for proper function. Accordingly, the device of Tanaka would be capable of attachment to a first body and engaging with a second body.
Tanaka teaches the rotary clamp cylinder provides an increase in operation speed of clamping and unclamping [0004]-[0005].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Usine by replacing the clamp mechanism of Usine with the clamping device of Tanaka, a known suitable device for clamping an article, for the benefit of providing a mechanism to automate clamping/unclamping and improve operation speed.
Tanaka does not teach (1) a spring, disposed in the housing for applying a compressive spring force on the shaft in the first condition to engage the first and second objects in the compressive clamping relationship, wherein the piston is coaxial beneath the spring and shaft and (2) when the pressurized motive fluid is applied to the piston, a space in the housing above the piston is maintained at ambient pressure.
As to (1), Craft teaches a hydraulically-operated swing clamps for holding and clamping a workpiece to a fixture (Figure 1 and col 2, ln 66-Col 3, ln 23). Craft teaches a double-acting clamp comprising a pair of hydraulic ports for supplying or discharging from the cylinder body for selectively controlling the shift of the piston (Col 3, ln 29-40). Craft teaches a double-acting clamp may be converted to a single-acting clamp by replacing one of the hydraulic ports 32, 34 with a spring or other biasing means (Col 3, ln 29-60).
Le Gal teaches a clamping cylinder comprising a spring in compression positioned in the receiving chamber of the body of the cylinder (Figure 1t and Col 6, ln 9-25). Le Gal teaches a spring in the receiving chamber, wherein the piston is coaxial beneath the spring and shaft (Figure 1, item 108 and Col 3, ln 26-36). Le Gal teaches to move the mobile assembly from the clamping position to the release position, the cylinder comprises an air inlet in the lower part of the body and in fluid communication with the receiving chamber of the body, sending a flow of compressed air into the chamber, which pushes on a stop surface of the piston normal to the axis of displacement (Col 3, ln 26-36). Le Gal teaches the thrust of the air on the stop surface combats the action of the spring and moves the piston from the clamping position to the release position.
Both Tanaka and Le Gal are drawn to the same field of endeavor pertaining to clamps. Based on the teachings of Craft, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized a double-acting clamp can be converted to a single-acting clamp comprising a spring disposed in a chamber, to yield the predictable result of providing a functional equivalent swinging clamp. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka from a double-acting cylinder to single-acting cylinder utilizing an internal, coaxial spring as taught by Le Gal, a known suitable mechanism to return an actuated cylinder to a relaxed position to yield the predictable result of providing a controlled clamp as taught by Craft.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Tanaka with a spring coaxial with the piston disposed in the upper chamber of the cylinder with an air inlet to allow for a breathing passageway, or a vent for the chamber to be open to atmosphere pressure to allow for movement of air caused by the compression and release of the spring enclosed in the chamber, as taught by Le Gal.
As to (2), Wang teaches a hydraulic oil cylinder comprising a ventilation hole in the cylinder such that when the piston reciprocated, it discharges air out the end or sucks and filters air to protect the safety of the seal (Page 1 and 3), wherein the ventilation hole is provided in the chamber housing the shaft (Figure 1). Wang teaches the respirator is a copper sintered filter screen (Page 3).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the device of Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal would require a mechanism to control the air pressure in the chamber housing the spring when the clamp is activated by venting air to allow for actuation of the piston. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal with a vent hole coupled with a sintered filter as taught by Wang for the benefit of providing a mechanism for venting air in the chamber such that the piston and seal operates properly and a mechanism for filtering such that contaminates in the air do not damage the device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the vent hole of Wang in the upper chamber of the housing of Tanaka in view of Craft and Le Gal, in the same manner as taught by Wang, to yield the benefits as taught by Wang.
Accordingly, due to the vent in the housing above the piston, the chamber would be maintained at ambient pressure when pressurized motive fluid is applied against the piston.
Regarding claim 13, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 12, further comprising an inlet port, passing through the first end plate for introducing a pressurized motive fluid into the housing below the piston to move the piston against the spring force as along as the motive fluid is presented in the housing (Tanaka, [0024]-[0025]); and
a breather element, positioned in an upper position of the housing to maintain a space above the piston at ambient pressure (Wang, Page 1 and 3, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 12, wherein the spring is a spiral spring (Le Gal, Figures 1).
Regarding claim 16, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 12, further comprising an arm having a proximal end rigidly affixed to the shaft at or near the second end and extending radially away to a distance end that is adapted to bear against the second object in the first condition (Tanaka, Figure 1 and 3, item 12 and [0025]).
Regarding claim 17, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 16, wherein the distal end of the arm is capable of adjusting a compressive force applied to the second object when the device is in the first condition (Tanaka, Figure 1 and 3 and [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding claim 18, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 16, wherein while in the second condition, the arm rotates about the axis of the shaft in the of 30 degrees and 90 degrees (Tanaka, Figure 3 and [0024]-[0025]).
Given that Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the arm rotation range within the claimed range, the claimed range would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usine (Video, see screenshots provided, publicly available in 2012) in view of Tanaka (PG-PUB 2009/0038471), Craft (US 5,820,118), Le Gal (US 10,243,232), and Wang (English Translation of CN211009373), as applied to claim 12, in further view of Kudome (English Translation of JPH1148254).
Regarding claim 15, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 12.
Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not teach the body is linked to an attachment plate configured to allow attachment of the device to the first mold portion.
Kudome teaches a mold comprising a plurality of clamps, wherein the clamps are fixed to the mold using brackets (i.e., attachment plates) (Figures 1, 9 and 10) such that the clamps can properly engage a first object and second object [0012]-[0013]. Kudome teaches the clamping devices are pressure cylinders coupled to a swinging lever (Figures 5-7 and [0012]-[0013]).
While Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches clamping a generic work article [0006] and would naturally be fixed to a first object in order to hold the clamp in position for clamping, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not explicitly disclose the mechanism for fixing the device, prompting one of ordinary skill in the art to look elsewhere in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the modified device of Usine with brackets as taught by Kudome, a known suitable mechanism for fixing clamps against a surface, to yield the predictable result of stabilizing the clamps for proper functioning.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usine (Video, see screenshots provided, publicly available in 2012) in view of Tanaka (PG-PUB 2009/0038471), Craft (US 5,820,118), Le Gal (US 10,243,232), and Wang (English Translation of CN211009373), as applied to claim 12, in further view of McIntosh (PG-PUB 2016/0008936).
Regarding claim 19, Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang teaches the device as applied to claim 12.
Usine in view of Tanaka, Craft, Le Gal, and Wang does not a plurality of rods, each extending between the first and second plates.
McIntosh teaches a pin clamp for clamping a workpiece including a housing, actuator, and a locating pin extending through the housing (Figures 1 and 2 and [0029]). McIntosh teaches a plurality of fasteners (i.e., a plurality of rods) disposed in the length of the housing in order to attach the actuator to the housing (Figures 2 and 3, item 62 and [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tanaka with fasteners of McIntosh, a known suitable fastener mechanism for coupling an actuator to a housing, to yield the predictable result of providing a housed actuator.
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 HANA C PAGE whose telephone number is (571)272-1578. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00-5:30.
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, Phillip Tucker can be reached on 5712721095. 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.
/HANA C PAGE/Examiner, Art Unit 1745 /MICHAEL A TOLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745