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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 10/06/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 21-22, 34-39, 41, 45-48, 65-71 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/06/2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 3/23/2023, 10/20/2023, 1/06/2025 have been acknowledged and considered by the examiner. Initialed copies of supplied IDS(s) forms are included in this correspondence.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 11 includes a floating number 224a not connected to any component in the drawing. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“memory module” (means for memorizing) performing the function of determining and storing the pivot angle in claim 20.
“contact member” (means for contacting) performing the function of contacting in claim 24.
“support member” (means for support) performing the function of supporting the circuit board of claim 26.
“insertion part” (means for inserting) performing the function of being inserted into the second hole of claim 26.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 23-33, 43-44 are 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 limitation “contact member” in claim 24 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
Regarding the “contact member”, the specification recites that the contact member contacts a conductor and may conduct a measurable electrical current with said conductor, but gives no details as to the structure or materials performing the function of contact and conduction. For purposes of compact prosecution, examiner is interpreting this member to be anything which may conduct electricity.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the actuator" in the third line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This rejection could be overcome if “the actuator” is amended to say “an actuator”.
Claim 43 recites the limitation "the housing" in the second line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This rejection could be overcome if “the housing” is amended to say “a housing”.
Claim 44 recites the limitation "the sealing element" in the second to last line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This rejection could be overcome if “the sealing element” is amended to say “a sealing element”.
Regarding claim 44, claim states the limitation “secondarily fixed” in the last line of the claim. This limitation is unclear because what is meant by “secondarily fixed” is not specified. How can an object be secondarily fixed to another object? What does that mean in relation to the two? The support member is fixed to the memory gear as shown in Figure 11, so how is the way the support member is fixed different from the way the washer, sealing element, and contact member are fixed to the memory gear? Would secondarily fixed mean that the two elements contact each other but are fixed to other components? Due to this limitation, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be apprised as to the scope of the invention (MPEP §2173.05(b)). For purposes of compact prosecution, so long as the support member and memory gear contact each other, this limitation will be considered met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 20, 40, 42-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wen et. al CN 203637689 U (hereinafter “Wen”).
Regarding claim 20, Wen teaches a rear view device for a vehicle (Wen abstract), comprising:
a rear view element that is pivotable around a pivot axis (Wen abstract, see also para. 0004); and
a memory module (Wen fig. 2 – 12, see also para. 0014 and 0017) configured to determine a pivot angle of at least one of the rear view device or the rear view element, and store the determined pivot angle (Wen para. 0017).
Regarding claim 40, Wen teaches the rear view device of claim 20, and Wen further teaches wherein the rear view element includes a mirror element, display unit, and/or camera device (Wen abstract).
Regarding claim 42, Wen teaches the rear view device of claim 20, and Wen further teaches wherein the rear view device is provided in form of an external mirror (Wen abstract).
Regarding claim 43, Wen teaches the rear view device of claim 42, and Wen further teaches wherein the memory module (12) and an actuator (Wen fig. 2 - 8) are arranged in the housing (Wen fig. 2 – 12 and 8 are within base 1).
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.
Claims 23, 49-50, 63-64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wen as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Zheng et. al CN 209738943 (hereinafter “Zheng”).
Regarding claim 23, Wen teaches the rear view device of claim 20, and Wen further teaches further comprising:
a memory gear (Wen fig. 3 - 104), wherein the memory gear (104) is configured to engage with an auxiliary gear (Wen fig. 2 – 5) of the actuator (Wen fig. 2 – 8 which interacts with 6, then 7, then 5 which engages 104 as shown in the figure).
Wen does not specify that the memory gear includes a receiving region concavely formed and that defines a first hole.
In the same field of endeavor, Zheng teaches that the memory gear (Zheng fig. 1 – 5.3) includes a receiving region concavely formed and that defines a first hole (Zheng fig. 1 – 5.3 has a component in the center which para. 0031 states that 5.3 is disposed on the shaft of 5.2, and fig. 12 shows 5.3 mounted onto 5.2) for the purpose of having a compact structure and easy installation (Zheng para. 0012). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a memory gear with a hole as taught by Zheng in the rear view device of Wen in order to have a compact structure and easy installation (Zheng para. 0012).
Regarding claim 49, Wen teaches a memory module (Wen fig. 2 – 12, see also para. 0014 and 0017) for use with an actuator (Wen fig. 2 – 8) of a rear view device for a vehicle (Wen abstract), wherein the rear view device comprises a rear view element which is pivotable around a pivot axis (Wen abstract, see also para. 0004), the memory module (12) comprising:
a memory gear (Wen fig. 3 - 104),
wherein the memory gear (104) is configured to engage with an auxiliary gear (Wen fig. 2 – 5) of the actuator (Wen fig. 2 – 8 which interacts with 6, then 7, then 5 which engages 104 as shown in the figure).
wherein the memory module is configured to determine a pivot angle of at least one of the rear view device or the rear view element, and store the determined pivot angle (Wen para. 0017).
Wen does not specify that the memory gear includes a receiving region concavely formed and that defines a first hole.
In the same field of endeavor, Zheng teaches that the memory gear (Zheng fig. 1 – 5.3) includes a receiving region concavely formed and that defines a first hole (Zheng fig. 1 – 5.3 has a component in the center which para. 0031 states that 5.3 is disposed on the shaft of 5.2, and fig. 12 shows 5.3 mounted onto 5.2) for the purpose of having a compact structure and easy installation (Zheng para. 0012). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a memory gear with a hole as taught by Zheng in the rear view device of Wen in order to have a compact structure and easy installation (Zheng para. 0012).
Regarding claim 50, Wen and Zheng teach the memory module of claim 49, and Zheng further teaches wherein the memory module is further configured to control the actuator for adjusting the pivot position of at least one of the rear view device or the rear view element, read-out the stored pivot angle, and transmit the stored pivot angle to a control unit for controlling the actuator (Zheng para. 0004 – a potentiometer and sensor gear control the drive motor and transmission mechanism to drive an arc-shaped rack which is hinged to a floating mirror plate which rotates the mirror relative to the mirror housing and realizes the memory function).
Regarding claim 63, Wen and Zheng teach the memory module of claim 49, and Wen further teaches wherein the memory module (12) and an actuator (8) are arranged in a housing of the rear view device (Wen fig. 2 – 12 and 8 are housed on base 1).
Regarding claim 64, Wen and Zheng teach a vehicle that includes the memory module of claim 49 (Wen para. 0002; Zheng para. 0002).
Claims 24-27, 51-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wen and Zheng as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Forgacs et. al US Patent 5,187,464 (hereinafter “Forgacs”).
Regarding claim 24, Wen and Zheng teach the rear view device of claim 23.
Wen and Zheng do not teach a contact member that is disposed at the receiving region; and a circuit board that includes a conductor for being electrically in contact with the contact member, wherein the circuit board defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole.
In a similar field of endeavor, Forgacs teaches a contact member (Forgacs fig. 1 - 70) that is disposed at the receiving region (Forgacs fig. 2 – shows 70 in the receiving region 102); and
a circuit board (Forgacs fig. 1 – 86, 88) that includes a conductor (Forgacs fig. 1 - 86) for being electrically in contact with the contact member (Forgacs col. 5 lines 48-50), wherein the circuit board (86, 88) defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole (Forgacs fig. 1 – 88 defines a hole which is aligned with the hole 102 surrounds) for the purpose of passing a potentiometer signal through the device to suitable signal processing circuitry (Forgacs col. 5 lines 45-58). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a contact member and a circuit board including a conductor as taught by Forgacs in the rear view device of Wen and Zheng in order to pass a potentiometer signal through the device to suitable signal processing circuitry (Forgacs col. 5 lines 45-58).
Regarding claim 25, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the rear view device of claim 24, and Forgacs further teaches further comprising:
a washer (Forgacs fig. 1 - 94) that is disposed above the contact member (68) at the receiving region (Forgacs fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the rear view device of claim 24, and Forgacs further teaches further comprising:
a support member (Forgacs fig. 1 - 70, 74, 24) that provides an insertion part (70) inserting into the first hole (Forgacs fig. 6 – shows 70 within the first hole which is bounded on either side by 44) and supporting the circuit board (Forgacs fig. 6 – 24 supports 86 and 88).
Regarding claim 27, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the rear view device of claim 26, and Forgacs further teaches wherein the insertion part (70) is further inserted into the second hole (Forgacs fig. 6 – shows 70 within hole defined by 88).
Regarding claim 51, Wen and Zheng teach the memory module of claim 50.
Wen and Zheng do not teach a contact member that is disposed at the receiving region; and a circuit board that includes a conductor for being electrically in contact with the contact member, wherein the circuit board defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole.
In a similar field of endeavor, Forgacs teaches a contact member (Forgacs fig. 1 - 70) that is disposed at the receiving region (Forgacs fig. 2 – shows 70 in the receiving region 102); and
a circuit board (Forgacs fig. 1 – 86, 88) that includes a conductor (Forgacs fig. 1 - 86) for being electrically in contact with the contact member (Forgacs col. 5 lines 48-50), wherein the circuit board (86, 88) defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole (Forgacs fig. 1 – 88 defines a hole which is aligned with the hole 102 surrounds) for the purpose of passing a potentiometer signal through the device to suitable signal processing circuitry (Forgacs col. 5 lines 45-58). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a contact member and a circuit board including a conductor as taught by Forgacs in the memory module of Wen and Zheng in order to pass a potentiometer signal through the device to suitable signal processing circuitry (Forgacs col. 5 lines 45-58).
Regarding claim 52, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the memory module of claim 51, and Forgacs further teaches further comprising:
a washer (Forgacs fig. 1 - 94) that is disposed above the contact member (70) at the receiving region (Forgacs fig. 1).
Regarding claim 53, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the memory module of claim 52, and Forgacs further teaches further comprising:
a support member (Forgacs fig. 1 - 70, 74, 24) that provides an insertion part (70) inserting into the first hole (Forgacs fig. 6 – shows 70 within the first hole which is bounded on either side by 44) and supporting the circuit board (Forgacs fig. 6 – 24 supports 86 and 88).
Regarding claim 54, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the memory module of claim 53, and Forgacs further teaches wherein the insertion part (70) is further inserted into the second hole (Forgacs fig. 6 – shows 70 within hole defined by 88).
Claims 28-32, 44, 55-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs as applied to claims 24 and 53 above, and further in view of Schellenger US Patent 2,137,812 (hereinafter “Schellenger”).
Regarding claim 28, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the rear view device of claim 24.
Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs do not specify a sealing element disposed below the contact member in the receiving region.
In a similar field of endeavor, Schellenger teaches a sealing element (Schellenger fig. 4 - D) disposed below the contact member (Schellenger fig. 4 - 32) in the receiving region (Schellenger fig. 4 – D is disposed below 32 in the region that 26 and B define) for the purpose of supporting a low resistance flat contact-disk (Schellenger pg. 2, second col. Lines 24-26). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a sealing element disposed below the contact member in the receiving region as taught by Schellenger in the memory module of Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs in order to support a low resistance flat contact-disk (Schellenger pg. 2, second col. Lines 24-26).
Regarding claim 29, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the rear view device of claim 28, and Schellenger further teaches wherein the sealing element (D) is an O-ring (Schellenger fig. 4 – D is shown as an O-ring).
Regarding claim 30, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the rear view device of claim 26, and Zheng further teaches a forming part (see annotated Zheng fig. 7 below, the forming part is at one end of the insertion part) at one end of the insertion part (labeled below) is formed by welding.
PNG
media_image1.png
547
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 31, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the rear view device of claim 30, and Zheng further teaches wherein the forming part has a greater diameter than the first hole such that the insertion part is prevented from being separated from the first hole (as labeled in the annotated Zheng fig. 7 below, the labeled forming part at one end of the insertion part has a larger diameter than the hole the insertion part goes through so the gear may be fixed to the potentiometer, see also para. 0031).
PNG
media_image1.png
547
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 32, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the rear view device of claim 29, and Forgacs further teaches wherein the receiving region (102) comprises a first protrusion part (Forgacs fig. 1 – 55, 59) formed adjacent to the first hole and having a bent shape (Forgacs fig. 6 – 59 is shown to be adjacent to the first hole having a bent shape, since both are terminal ends 55 would have the same shape as shown in fig. 1).
Regarding claim 44, Wen teaches a rear view device for a vehicle, comprising:
a rear view element that is pivotable around a pivot axis (Wen abstract, see also para. 0004)a memory module (Wen fig. 2 – 12, see also para. 0014 and 0017) configured to determine a pivot angle of at least one of the rear view device or the rear view element, and store the determined pivot angle (Wen para. 0017);
a memory gear (Wen fig. 3 - 104), wherein the memory gear (104) is configured to engage with an auxiliary gear (Wen fig. 2 – 5) of the actuator (Wen fig. 2 – 8 which interacts with 6, then 7, then 5 which engages 104 as shown in the figure).
Wen does not specify that the memory gear includes a receiving region concavely formed and that defines a first hole.
In the same field of endeavor, Zheng teaches that the memory gear (Zheng fig. 1 – 5.3) includes a receiving region concavely formed and that defines a first hole (Zheng fig. 1 – 5.3 has a component in the center which para. 0031 states that 5.3 is disposed on the shaft of 5.2, and fig. 12 shows 5.3 mounted onto 5.2) for the purpose of having a compact structure and easy installation (Zheng para. 0012). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a memory gear with a hole as taught by Zheng in the rear view device of Wen in order to have a compact structure and easy installation (Zheng para. 0012).
Further, Wen and Zheng do not teach a contact member that is disposed at the receiving region; and a circuit board that includes a conductor for being electrically in contact with the contact member, wherein the circuit board defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole; a contact member that is disposed at the receiving region; a circuit board that includes a conductor for being electrically in contact with the contact member, wherein the circuit board defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole; a washer that is disposed above the contact member at the receiving region; and a support member that provides an insertion part inserting into the first hole and supporting the circuit board.
In a similar field of endeavor, Forgacs teaches a contact member (Forgacs fig. 1 - 70) that is disposed at the receiving region (Forgacs fig. 2 – shows 70 in the receiving region 102); and
a circuit board (Forgacs fig. 1 – 86, 88) that includes a conductor (Forgacs fig. 1 - 86) for being electrically in contact with the contact member (Forgacs col. 5 lines 48-50), wherein the circuit board (86, 88) defines a second hole that is aligned with the first hole (Forgacs fig. 1 – 88 defines a hole which is aligned with the hole 102 surrounds); a washer (Forgacs fig. 1 - 94) that is disposed above the contact member (70) at the receiving region (Forgacs fig. 1); a support member (Forgacs fig. 1 - 70, 74, 24) that provides an insertion part (70) inserting into the first hole (Forgacs fig. 6 – shows 70 within the first hole which is bounded on either side by 44) and supporting the circuit board (Forgacs fig. 6 – 24 supports 86 and 88) for the purpose of passing a potentiometer signal through the device to suitable signal processing circuitry (Forgacs col. 5 lines 45-58). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a contact member and a circuit board including a conductor as taught by Forgacs in the rear view device of Wen and Zheng in order to pass a potentiometer signal through the device to suitable signal processing circuitry (Forgacs col. 5 lines 45-58).
Finally, with the combination of Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger, they teach wherein the sealing element (D), the contact member (Schellenger fig. 4 - 32), and the washer (Schellenger fig. 4 - F) are primarily fixed to the memory gear (Schellenger fig. 4 – 26; Zheng fig. 7 – duplicate 5.3 gear shown), and the support member (Zheng fig. 7 – 5.13) is secondarily fixed to the memory gear (Zheng fig. 7 – 5.13 is fixed to 5.2 which supports 5.3).
Regarding claim 55, Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs teach the memory module of claim 53.
Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs do not specify a sealing element disposed below the contact member in the receiving region.
In a similar field of endeavor, Schellenger teaches a sealing element (Schellenger fig. 4 - D) disposed below the contact member (Schellenger fig. 4 - 32) in the receiving region (Schellenger fig. 4 – D is disposed below 32 in the region that 26 and B define) for the purpose of supporting a low resistance flat contact-disk (Schellenger pg. 2, second col. Lines 24-26). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a sealing element disposed below the contact member in the receiving region as taught by Schellenger in the memory module of Wen, Zheng, and Forgacs in order to support a low resistance flat contact-disk (Schellenger pg. 2, second col. Lines 24-26).
Regarding claim 56, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the memory module of claim 55, and they further teach wherein the sealing element (D), the contact member (Schellenger fig. 4 - 32), and the washer (Schellenger fig. 4 - F) are primarily fixed to the memory gear (Schellenger fig. 4 – 26; Zheng fig. 7 – duplicate 5.3 gear shown), and the support member (Zheng fig. 7 – 5.13) is secondarily fixed to the memory gear (Zheng fig. 7 – 5.13 is fixed to 5.2 which supports 5.3).
Regarding claim 57, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the memory module of claim 55, and Schellenger further teaches wherein the sealing element (D) is an O-ring (Schellenger fig. 4 – D is shown as an O-ring).
Regarding claim 58, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the memory module of claim 53, and Zheng further teaches a forming part (see annotated Zheng fig. 7 below, the forming part is at one end of the insertion part) at one end of the insertion part (labeled below) is formed by welding.
PNG
media_image1.png
547
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 59, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the memory module of claim 58, and Zheng further teaches wherein the forming part has a greater diameter than the first hole such that the insertion part is prevented from being separated from the first hole (as labeled in the annotated Zheng fig. 7 below, the labeled forming part at one end of the insertion part has a larger diameter than the hole the insertion part goes through so the gear may be fixed to the potentiometer, see also para. 0031).
PNG
media_image1.png
547
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 60, Wen, Zheng, Forgacs, and Schellenger teach the memory module of claim 57, and Forgacs further teaches wherein the receiving region (102) comprises a first protrusion part (Forgacs fig. 1 – 55, 59) formed adjacent to the first hole and having a bent shape (Forgacs fig. 6 – 59 is shown to be adjacent to the first hole having a bent shape, since both are terminal ends 55 would have the same shape as shown in fig. 1).
Claim 62 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wen and Zheng as applied to claim 50 above, and further in view of Imamura et. al US 20200070729 (hereinafter “Imamura”).
Regarding claim 62, Wen and Zheng teach the memory module of claim 50.
Wen and Zheng do not specify wherein the control unit includes a processor that is configured to control the memory module.
In a similar field of endeavor, Imamura teaches wherein the control unit includes a processor that is configured to control the memory module (Imamura para. 0061 – the display controller includes a processor and a memory, where the processor may execute a program stored in the memory) for the purpose of performing computer functions (Imamura para. 0061). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a control unit including a processor configured to control the memory module as taught by Imamura in the memory module of Wen and Zheng in order to perform computer functions (Imamura para. 0061).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 33 and 61 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 33, the prior art of record does not disclose nor teach “the rear view device of claim 32, and they further teach wherein the first protrusion part is configured to surround and/or cover at least a part of a first side part and a first upper part of the O-ring, at least a part of a second side part and a second upper part of the contact member, and at least part of a third side part and a third upper part of the washer” in combination with all the limitations of claims 20, 23, 24, 28, 29, and 32.
Regarding claim 61, the prior art of record does not disclose nor teach “the memory module of claim 60, wherein the first protrusion part is configured to surround and/or cover at least a part of a first side part and a first upper part of the O-ring, at least a part of a second side part and a second upper part of the contact member, and at least part of a third side part and a third upper part of the washer” in combination with all the limitations of claims 49-53, 55, 57, and 60.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shibuya et. al US Patent 5,210,651, teaches a similar exterior vehicle mirror to the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M HALL whose telephone number is (703)756-5795. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30 pm PST.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/ELIZABETH M HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872