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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "3" (“first display area”) and "6" ( “ transparent cover plate ” as per the specification ) have both been used to designate a “ transparent cover plate ” as noted in the specification . The distinction in fig. 1 is unclear to the examiner, as in fig. 3, element 3 points to what appears to be a transparent cover plate, and element 6 points to a battery cover. Additionally, in fig. 4 the label for element 6 points not at a transparent cover plate, but at what appears to be the diffuser plate containing the first display area (element 3 in the specification) and the second display area (element 4 in the specification). The drawings are further objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "7" (fig. 2) and "6" (fig. 3) have both been used to designate a “battery” as denoted in the specification. Element 7, as shown in fig. 2, indicates a battery . The same battery is also referenced by the element label 6 in fig. 3 as discussed above. T he reference element (fig. 3, element 6) require s correction. Additionally, the overview drawing of circuitry (fig. 5) is mostly illegible even at extreme magnification. However, the labels for the individual subsections of fig. 5 are mostly legible and appear to indicate that fig. 5 is a compilation of the subsequent figures 7-13 . Thus figures 1-5 must be corrected to rectify the above errors . A thorough review of the drawings may be necessary to ensure correct labeling of the components according to the specification. 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. 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the “second lamp beads” are referred to in the specification as both reference element 14 and 15 (pg. 9, ln 18), which affects claims 1, 8, and 10 . This appears to be a simple typo graphical error . This objection may be easily overcome by replacing the second reference to the second lamp beads on line 18 with the element number 14. This change would not introduce new matter. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 8 , which recites the limitation “ obtains the rotation control data of the encoder ... ” on line 1 of “ Step S1 ”. There is insufficient antecedent basis in the claims for this limitation. This objection may be overcome by rephrasing this limitation to provide antecedent basis. One possible rephrasing would be “obtains rotation control data from the encoder ...” which provides antecedent basis for subsequent uses of the phrase “ the rotation control data ” without introducing new matter. Claim 8 also recites the limitation “ the current timing setup ” in Step S1 on line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This objection may be overcome by replacing the phrase “ the current timing setup ” with the phrase “a current timing setup” in Step S1 of claim 8. This modification provides antecedent basis for subsequent uses of the phrase “ the current timing setup ” without introducing new matter. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation Regarding claim 1 , the part referred to as a “ bezel ” in claims 1-3 appears to refer to the component placed in front of an LED emitter(s) to soften the light and obscure the individual LED ( s ) . Although the applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. The structure being referred to by the term “bezel” is commonly referred to as a “ diffuser structure ” . The term bezel has a specific meaning in the field of horology, namely “ A ring that secures the crystal of a watch or chronometer, often rotatable and marked so as to allow timekeeping functions. ”. Additionally, the final line of claim 1 recites the limitation “ to display digitals ”. It appears to the examiner that this is a typo and that the phrase should read “to display digits”. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the term “ bezel ” in the claims will be interpreted as “diffuser structure” and “ to display digitals ” will be interpreted as “to display digits” . Regarding claim 5, although the specification teaches a “driver circuit” comprising two driver chips described in the specification (as a model CA1302 or similar) the prior art fails to provide any teaching as to what the actual device comprises. Thus the “driver circuit” is considered under broadest reasonable interpretation ( BRI ) to be any driver circuit capable of performing the function described . Regarding claim 6 , which recites the limitation “ and the twenty-third pin of the main control chip is connected to the battery ”. The specification states “ the model of said main control chip U1 is preferably DCT026, or other chips of the same type ”, however thorough searching across numerous internal and external data sources found no conclusive evidence of a specific chip designated a “DCT026” . Further search was conducted on the label “S238” in fig. 7 in an attempt to correlate to a known IC with similar results. As no particular “main control chip” is definitively reference d in the specification or drawings , any processor s , collection s of circuits, microcontroller s , ASICs, etc. which ha ve the ability to perform the functions of the “main control chip” for a device comprising a timer applies to the instant application . Based on review of the drawings, i t appears that the main control chip as claimed has a 24 pin configuration . H owever the 24 pin package is common, and the pin functions on individual 24-pin IC packages varies from type to type. Thus, which pin on a 24-pin IC package is the power in (V DD as per the drawings) is unknown . For these reasons, the examiner is interpreting the phrase “ the twenty-third pin of the main control chip is connected to the battery ” as having the meaning “the power input (V DD ) of the main control chip is connected to the battery”. Regarding claim 7 , the claim uses terminology applicable to both physical switches ( the term ‘pole’) and transistors (the terms ‘collector’ and ‘base’) in reference to the reminder switch, creating confusion as to the actual form of the reminder switch. Specifically the phrase “ the negative pole of the reminder device is connected to the collector of the reminder switch, and the base pole of the reminder switch is connected to the third pin of the main control chip ” creates confusion. After referring to the schematics provided for the circuit (fig. 10), the examiner sees that the intended component is an NPN transistor with the designation 8050 used in conjunction with the main control chip as a reminder switching circuit . Further, similar to claim 6 above, claim 7 recites the limitation “ the base pole of the reminder switch is connected to the third pin of the main control chip ”. This is a connection to a specific pin of a “main control chip” which is no t definitively referenced in the specification and thus has an unknown pin numbering scheme , as described above with reference to claim 6 . Thus, the phrase “ the base pole of the reminder switch is connected to the third pin of the main control chip ” is being interpreted as having the meaning “ the reminder output of the main control chip. ” A suggested rewording of the claim to improve the clarity is as follows: “ The dual display timer of Claim 6, wherein the reminder circuit comprises the reminder device and a reminder switch circuit, the positive lead of the reminder device is connected to the battery, the negative lead of the reminder device is connected to the collector lead of the reminder switch circuit, and the base lead of the reminder switch circuit is connected to the reminder output pin of the main control chip. ” The claims are read in light of the overall specification. In particular there are two terms that have less detail than stated in the specification. Regarding claims 6 and 7 , a lthough the specification teaches a “main control chip” described in the specification (as a model DCT026 or similar) the prior art fails to provide any teaching as to what the actual device comprises. Thus , the “main control chip” is considered under BRI to be any control chip. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim s 6 and 7 , as discussed above in claim interpretation , the specification offers insufficient written support for the “main control chip” as described . No definitive IC package (chip) was found to be supported by the specification. Lacking a definite, identifiable IC chip and associated pin-out information, a pin numbering scheme cannot be determined. Claim 6 relies upon “ the twenty-third pin of the main control chip ” as being connected to the power supply circuit. As no identifiable “main control chip” is supported by the specification claim 6 fails to comply with the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112(a). Claim 7, which depends on claim 6, fails to remedy the above issue and thus fails to comply with the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112(a). Regarding claim 7 , as with claim 6, the specification fails to convey an adequate written description of the invention as described by the specification . Claim 7 relies upon the connection between the reminder circuit and the main control chip, stating “ the reminder switch is connected to the third pin of the main control chip ”. No “main control chip” is supported by the specification, and thus, claim 7 fails to comply with the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112(a). 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 appl icant regards as his invention. The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. Claim s 1 - 10 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. Regarding claim 1 , there are several idiomatic and grammatical errors which render the claim indefinite. F or instance, in claim 1 the section referring to “ a first display area ” the claim recites “ the first display area is disposed on front face of the main body ” where the “on front face” requires an article (a or the) to conform with idiomatic English . This also impacts all subsequent claims which rely on antecedent basis in reference to the front face of the device. Further, o n ln. 8 the claim recites “ arranged to circling the encoder ” which is idiomatically incorrect, but appears to be a simple machine translation error. Also, on ln. 9-10 “ is disposed on the control circuit board and makes every the first lamp bead emit light outward through corresponding the through-hole ” . Regarding ln. 9-10, a more idiomatically correct phrasing would be “ is disposed on the control circuit board and allows each of the first lamp beads to emit light outward through the corresponding through-hole”. A s imilar construction occurs on ln. 17-18 of pg. 1 of the claims. Please note, this is not an exhaustive listing of the idiomatic and grammatical issues in claim 1 and the subsequent claims, simply a few examples which illustrate the linguistic issues with the claims. A thorough review and correction of each of the claims is necessary to overcome this rejection. No new matter may be entered . Additionally, w here applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp. , 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “ bezel ” in claim 1 is used by the claim to mean “ diffuser structure ” while the accepted meaning is “ A ring that secures the crystal of a watch or chronometer, often rotatable and marked so as to allow timekeeping functions. ” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. Thus, as none of the claims depending from claim 1 remedy the above issues, independent claim 1 and the dependent claims 2-10 are rejected under 35 USC § 112(b) for the above stated reasons. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the term “bezel” as used in the instant application will be interpreted to mean “di ffuser structure ” as discussed above in claim interpretation , and the instant application will be examined as if the above change had been made . Regarding claim 2 , the claim also uses the un-redefined term bezel as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the term “bezel” as used in claim 2 of the instant application will be interpreted to mean “diffuser structure” as discussed above in claim interpretation. Regarding claim 3 , which recites the limitation “ the front end ” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 refers to the structure as the “front face”. This rejection may be easily overcome by rectifying the lack of require d article as discussed above and replacing the word “end” with the word “face” in claim 3. Claim 3 also uses the term bezel as discussed above. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the term “bezel” as used in claim 3 of the instant application will be interpreted to mean “diffuser structure” as discussed above in claim interpretation and the term “the front end” will be interpreted to mean “the front face” . Regarding claim s 6 and 7 , the limitation “ the twenty-third pin of the main control chip is connected to the battery ” is indefinite as the reference to the 23 rd pin of the control chip is not adequately supported by the specification . That lack of adequate disclosure of a specific main control chip and associated pin-out means the reference to a “23 rd pin” could refer to any pin of any chip capable of performing the functions claimed . Lacking the identification of a specific “main control chip” creates a situation where , a lthough a conventional number ing of pins would imply that a 23rd pin would most likely require a minimum of 2 4 pins, a n 8 pin device could have a pin labeled 23 on the pin-out ( to designate side 2 , pin 3 for example ) since the label 23 is simply a label. Thus claim 6 is rendered indefinite under 35 USC § 112(b). Thus any reference to the pin-out of the indefinite “main control chip” is thereby also indefinite. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the phrase “ the twenty-third pin of the main control chip is connected to the battery ” will be interpreted as having the meaning “the power input (V DD ) of the main control chip is connected to the battery” as discussed above in claim interpretation and as determined by the reading of fig. 7 . As there is not support for a “main control chip” in the specification, the same situation applies to claim 7 as well. T he limitation “ the reminder switch is connected to the third pin of the main control chip ” is indefinite as the reference to the 3 rd pin of the control chip is referring to the label of an arbitrary pin on an unknown chip with an indeterminate pin-out schema as discussed with regards to claim 6 . For the purposes of compact prosecution, the phrase “ the reminder switch is connected to the third pin of the main control chip ” is being interpreted as having the meaning “ the reminder switch is connected to the reminder output of the main control chip.” as discussed in claim interpretation above. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the application will be examined as if the above changes to claims 1-3 , 6, and 7 have been made. 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. Claim s 1, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, (CN 208141133, hereinafter Zhang), DuaneDegn (DuaneDegn NPL captured from https://forum.arduino.cc/t/suggestions-for-using-many-pots-vs-rotary-encoders/355964/14 , hereinafter DuaneDegn) , and Murakami (JP H11304967, hereinafter Murakami) . Regarding claim 1 , Zhang teaches a timer “ comprising: a main body (para. [0032], “upper cover” and “lower cover”; fig 1, elements 100 and 400 respectively) and in which there are a control circuit board (para. [0032], “control circuit board”; fog 1 element 200) and a reminder device (para. [0032], “a buzzer”; not illustrated) ; the reminder device and the control circuit board are electrically connected (para. [0032], “The encoder and the buzzer are electrically connected to the main control chip”) , ... the encoder is disposed on the control circuit board (para. [0032], “The control circuit board 200 is provided with a main control chip, an encoder and a buzzer”)” Specifically, Zhang teaches “As shown in Figures 1 and 2, this embodiment provides a multi-function timer, including: an upper cover 100, a control circuit board 200, a rotating wheel 300 and a lower cover 400. The control circuit board 200 and the rotating wheel 300 are arranged between the upper cover 100 and the lower cover 400. The control circuit board 200 is provided with a main control chip, an encoder and a buzzer. The encoder and the buzzer are electrically connected to the main control chip respectively. The encoder is provided with a rotating gear 221, and the rotating gear 221 is engaged with the inner circumference of the center 3240616 SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1 - Detail from Zhang, figure 3 0 SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1 - Detail from Zhang, figure 3 center 579544 0 0 rotatin g wheel 300.” Zhang fails to teach “ a first display area, the first display area is disposed on front face of the main body, and the first display area further comprises an encoder, a plurality of first lamp beads and a first bezel; ... a plurality of the first lamp beads are arranged to circling the encoder on the control circuit board; the first bezel has a plurality of through-holes arranged in a circling way, and the first bezel is disposed on the control circuit board and makes every the first lamp bead emit light outward through corresponding the through-hole; a second display area, the second display area is disposed on front face of the main body, the second display area comprises a plurality of second lamp beads and a second bezel; a plurality of the second lamp beads is arranged on the control circuit board in the style of digital tubes; on the second display area there are a plurality of slots corresponding to the second lamp beads one by one; the second bezel is disposed on the control circuit board and makes every second lamp bead emit light outward through corresponding the slots to display digitals. ”. DuaneDegn in an Arduino.cc forum post from January 2016 (screenshot below marked to show the relevant features) demonstrates “ a first display area, the first display area is disposed on front face of the main body, and the first display area further comprises an encoder, a plurality of first lamp beads ... a plurality of the first lamp beads are arranged to circling the encoder on the control circuit board; ” and “ a second display area, the second display area is disposed on front face of the main body , the second display area comprises a plurality of second lamp beads ... in the style of digital tubes ; on the second display area there are a plurality of slots corresponding to the second lamp beads one by one; ” 2 - https://forum.arduino.cc/t/suggestions-for-using-many-pots-vs-rotary-encoders/355964/14 As can be seen from the above image, in the second display area the device uses a common commercially available 7-segment LED module which consists of a spacer with slots “ in the style of digital tubes ” allowing the light from the LEDs on the circuit board at the back of the module to shine outwardly. Between the user and the spacer arranged on a circuit board is a diffuser sheet to soften the harsh point sources provided by the individual LEDs, thereby making them legible as digits. However, DuaneDegn fails to teach or demonstrate “ a first bezel; ... a plurality of the first lamp beads are arranged to circling the encoder on the control circuit board; the first bezel has a plurality of through-holes arranged in a circling way, and the first bezel is disposed on the control circuit board and makes every the first lamp bead emit light outward through corresponding the through-hole; ”, that “ a plurality of the second lamp beads is arranged on the control circuit board ”, or that “ the second bezel is disposed on the control circuit board ”. Murakami teaches “ a plurality of first lamp beads ( para. [0020], “LED chip; fig. 1, element 11 ) and a first bezel ( para. [0020] “spacer”; fig. 1, element 19 ) ; ... the first bezel has a plurality of through-holes arranged in a circling way, and the first bezel is disposed on the control circuit board ( fig. 1, element 19 in contact with the circuit board, element 12 ) and makes every the first lamp bead emit light outward through corresponding the through-hole ” and “ a second bezel ; a plurality of the second lamp beads is arranged on the control circuit board ( para. [0020], “LED chip; fig. 1, element 11 ) ... on the second display area there are a plurality of slots (para. [0020], “ shielding plate ”; fig. 2, slots in element 21) corresponding to the second lamp beads one by one ( fig. 3 (device shown without the shielding plate), element 1 ) ; the second bezel is disposed on the control circuit board (fig. 1, element 19 in contact with the circuit board, element 12) and makes every second lamp bead emit light outward through corresponding the slots ”. Murakami (para. [0011]) teaches that the device is “characterized by having a circuit board on which multiple LED chips are mounted, a spacer that acts as a wall to limit the range in which one LED chip on the circuit board emits light, a diffusion plate that is a member for uniformly diffusing the light from one LED chip within the light-emitting range limited by the spacer, and a shielding plate that acts as a mask to process the light uniformly diffused by the diffusion plate into any display shape.” Murakami elaborates in para. [0020], disclosing “ Adjacent to the circuit board (1) 13, a spacer 19 that acts as a wall to limit the area illuminated by one LED chip 11 on the circuit board (2) 12, a diffusion plate 20 that is a component for uniformly diffusing the light of one LED chip 11 within the light-emitting area limited by the spacer 19, and a shielding plate 21 that acts as a mask to process the light uniformly diffused by the diffusion plate 20 into any display shape are stacked in a cross-sectional manner. ” Th us th e display structure (spacer and diffusion plate) taught by Murakami is equivalent in function and design to the display diffuser structure referred to as a “ bezel ” in the instant application and designated by elements 12 and 15 in the illustrations. As the intent of Murakami’s disclosure is to provide for LEDs mounted directly on a circuit board which can be made to display in arbitrary shapes, the instant application’s lamp beads of the first and second display areas combined with the diffuser structure are an equivalent structure as taught by of Murakami. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the timer of Zhang with the ring of LEDs and numeric digital display arranged in a first and second display area coupled with a rotary encoder demonstrated by DuaneDegn and the diffuser structure of Murakami according to known methods to achieve the predict able result of a timer with both digital and intuitive visual displays. This method for improving the timer of Zhang with the rotary input and display of DuaneDegn and the diffuser of Murakami was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the teachings of DuaneDegn . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami to obtain the invention as claimed in claim 1 . Regarding claim 2 , DuaneDegn, Murakami, and Zhang make obvious the device according to claim 1 wherein Zhang teaches a timer, DuaneDegn teaches the rotary encoder, and Murakami teaches the diffuser structure. Zhang teaches that the upper and lower covers are manufactured as separate pieces and then combined mechanically to create a single case. This is equivalent to the claim limitation “ the first bezel and the second bezel are integrally connected as a whole piece ” . Th e examiner’s position is further supported by the following text in the specification of the instant application which states on pg. 7, para. 3 “ In the embodiments of the invention, unless otherwise expressly specified and explained, the terms "install", "connected", "connect", "fix" shall be understood in a broad sense. For example, to be connected can be connected in a fixed way, or connected in a removable way, or connected as a whole piece; and such connection can be mechanical or electrical, direct or indirect via an intermediate medium; and the connection can also means that two elements have internal connection or the two elements have a relationship of interaction. For a person of ordinary skills in the art, the particular meaning of aforesaid terms in the embodiments of the invention can be understood depending on a particular context. ” The examiner takes note that the manufacture of the first and second diffuser structures as a single piece or, alternatively, as two or more separate pieces then melded together by heat, adhesive, or mechanical means to create a single structure is well known in the art s of design and manufacturing, as well as in horology . As such, one having ordinary skill in the art would understand that the diffuser structure, once connected by any of the above mentioned means constitutes “ connected as a whole piece ”. Thus the combined art of Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami make obvious the invention according to claim 2. Regarding claim 4 , the combined art of Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami make obvious the invention according to claim 1 wherein Zhang teaches a timer, DuaneDegn teaches the rotary encoder, and Murakami teaches the diffuser structure. Zhang further teaches “ the main body contains a battery, and the battery connects to the control circuit board. ” Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rogers (US 20210208543, hereinafter Rogers) . Regarding claim 3, Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami make obvious the invention according to claim 1 above, wherein Zhang teaches a timer with circuit board and reminder, DuaneDegn teaches the rotary encoder with LED ring and digital display, and Murakami teaches the diffuser structure. However, Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami fail to teach a rotary encoder wherein “ the front end of the main body is disposed with a transparent cover plate, and the transparent cover plate covers the first display area and second display area; the encoder's rotary axis sticks out through the first bezel and the transparent cover plate. ” Rogers teaches a timer in which “ the front end of the main body is disposed with a transparent cover plate (para. [0009], “lens”; fig. 3, un-numbered clear plate with circular opening) , and the transparent cover plate covers the first display area (para. (16), “ circular-shaped colored disk ”; fig. 3, element 28) and second display area ( para . ( 14 ) , “background member” having numerical indicia; fig. 3 element 30 ) ; the encoder's rotary axis sticks out through the first bezel ( fig. 3, element 30 ) and the transparent cover plate (fig. 3, circular opening in the “lens”) ” . specifically, Rogers (para. (17)) teaches “ In front of the rotatable colored disk 28 is the background member 30 secured in the recess 20 of the generally rectangular front tray 14. The background member 30 has a slit 50 extending outwardly from a central opening 52. The central opening 52 is sized to allow the rotatable shaft 36 of the control module 34 to pass through it; but is not shaped to latch onto the rotatable shaft 36. Therefore, the background member 30 remains stationary and does not rotate with the rotatable shaft 36. The slit 50 is sized to allow a portion of the rotatable colored disk 28 to pass in front of the background member 30 to become visible and indicate elapsed or remaining time. ” As both Rogers and the instant application are devices acting as timers with two methods of displaying remaining time (visual and numerical ) and being set by means of a rotatable shaft protruding through an opening provided in the case, the arts are considered by the examiner to be analogous. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the timer of Zheng, the displays of DuaneDegn and the LED diffuser structure of Murakami with the transparent front c over with hole for the shaft of the rotary setting means of Rogers according to known methods with the expected result of creating a timer with better protection form accidental intrusion of liquids into the timer display. This method for improving the timer of Zhang, DuaneDegn, and Murakami with the transparent cover plate with hole allowing passage of a rotary setting means of Rogers was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the teachings of Rogers . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zhang, DuaneDegn, Murakami, and Rogers to obtain the invention as claimed in claim 3 . Thus the combined art of Zhang, DuaneDegn, Murakami, and Rogers makes obvious the invention according to claim 3. Allowable Subject Matter Regarding c laims 8-10 , these claims are currently rejected under 35 USC 112(b) as depending upon the rejection of independent claim 1. If the 112(b) rejection of claim 1 is overcome in a manner as to not altering the scope of the claims , the features of claims 8-10 when considering the full set of limitations including their parent claims are not anticipate d or or made obvious by the prior art . The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of novelty : Although the device itself can be shown to be obvious based upon the examiner’s rationale stated above, no art was found which anticipated or made obvious the method of controlling the complex assembly of components to perform the functions as claimed in the instant application. Specifically, no art was found which showed the method for controlling the ring of LEDs and the digital display simultaneously via a rotary encoder in a manner such as claimed in the instant application. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Ho – US 20060119542 – LED Display Apparatus – Discloses another variation of an LED diffuser structure for circuit board mounted LEDs Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MICHAEL J WALKER whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7599 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT from 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM ET Monday through Friday . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Regis Betsch can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-7101 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MICHAEL JAMES WALKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2844 /REGIS J BETSCH/ SPE, Art Unit