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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minowa et al. (US 2019/0148095) in view of Tanaka et al. (US 2009/0322454).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Minowa discloses a switch comprising:
A contact case (53) made of resin (see para. [0072]);
a first fixed terminal (33) including a first fixed contact (33a) and held by the contact case (53);
a movable contact piece (49) including a first movable contact (49a) disposed to face the first fixed contact (33a);
a magnet holding member (35, 35a) that is spaced apart from the contact case (53); and
the magnet (36) that is positioned to generate a magnetic field within the contact case (53);
the magnet (36) being held by the magnet holding member (35, 35a); and being a spaced apart member from the contact case (53).
the elements 35 and 53 are "spaced apart" by element number "31 and 32", being in the middle of the elements 35 and 53. Elements 35 and 53 do not touch each other;
the magnet holding member (35, 35a) includes a first wall (35a) extending from an inner surface of the outer case (10) and
a second wall (35) extending from the inner surface of the outer case (10), and the magnet (36) is sandwiched between the first wall (35a) and the second wall (35),
an outer case (10) disposed outside the contact case (53),
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Minowa teaches the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the magnet holding member that is outside the contact case.
Tanaka discloses a relay comprising:
the magnet holding member (90, 92) that is outside the contact case (52, 50, Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the magnet holding member that is outside the contact case as taught by Tanaka with Minowa’s device for the purpose of protecting the power control circuitry and improving the device’s longevity.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Minowa discloses:
wherein the magnet holding member (90, 92) is fixed to the outer case (10).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Tanaka discloses:
the inner surface of the outer case (10) extends in an up-down direction, and
the first and second walls (see the drawing below) extend from the inner surface of the outer case (10) in a left-right direction such that the magnet (93) is sandwiched by the first and second walls (see the drawing below) in the up-down direction.
[AltContent: textbox (2nd wall)][AltContent: textbox (1st wall)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
360
345
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Minowa discloses:
the first wall (35a) is disposed between the first fixed terminal (33) and the magnet (36).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Minowa discloses:
the first movable contact (49a) is disposed to face the first fixed contact (33a) in a first direction, the first direction including a contact direction in which the first movable contact (49a) approaches the first fixed contact (33a) and
a separation direction in which the first movable contact (49a) moves away from the first fixed contact (33a), and the magnet (36) is sandwiched in the first direction by the first wall (35a) and the second wall (35).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Minowa and Tanaka teach the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fail to explicitly disclose the magnet holding member is integral with the outer case to form a single unitary piece.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the magnet holding member is integral with the outer case for to form a single unitary piece the purpose of suitability of the intended use, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893), and since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Minowa discloses:
the magnet holding member (35, 35a) is disposed apart from the contact case (53) and the first fixed terminal (33).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Minowa discloses:
a yoke (41) connected to the magnet (36),
wherein the yoke (41) is restricted in movement by the magnet holding member (35, 35a).
However, Minowa fails to explicitly disclose the yoke is arranged between the magnet and outer case in a left-right direction.
Tanaka discloses the yoke (21) is arranged between the magnet (93) and outer case (10) in a left-right direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the yoke (21) is arranged between the magnet (93) and outer case (10) in a left-right direction as taught by Tanaka with Minowa’s device for the purpose of suitability of the intended use, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Minowa discloses:
a second fixed terminal (33) disposed apart from the first fixed terminal (33), the second fixed terminal (33) including a second fixed contact (33a),
wherein the movable contact piece (49) further includes a second movable contact (49a) disposed to face the second fixed contact (33a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/25/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the REMARKS:
Page 9, second and third paragraphs, applicant argued that:
“there is nothing to teach or suggest that holder 35 or pocket portions 35a are fixed to the case 10. ---- Minowa, [[0013]. Thus, referring to Fig. 10 again, the magnet holding member 35, 35a is not fixed to case 10 because the case 10 is absent in Fig. 10 and the magnet holding member 35, 35a is surrounded by cover 53.”.
This argument is not found to be persuasive, because Figures 3 and 4 of Minowa clearly discloses the magnet holding member 35, 35a is indirectly fixed to case 10, and is surrounded by cover 53.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 should be directed to Lisa Homza whose telephone number is (571) 272-3592.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Shawki Ismail can be reached on (571) 272-3985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Lisa Nhung Homza/
Patent Examiner - Art Unit 2837
March 11, 2026
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights