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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 15 recites the phrase “The fishing reel according to claim 15” which is rendered unclear as whether the claim is a dependent of itself or a dependent of another claim. For the purposes of examination, “according to claim 15” is being interpreted as ---according to claim 14---.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the prescribed parameters" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS. —Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 14 recites the phrase “operation unit receives the electric power supplied by the power supply unit, the operation unit performs the operations corresponding to the prescribed functions”, which describes all of the same elements from the limitation of claim 3, “operation unit configured to receive the electric power supplied by the power supply unit, and configured to perform operations corresponding to prescribed functions”, which does not constitute a further limitation.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuta (US20040140163A1,) in view of Lee (KR20160144173A), and in further view of Niitsuma (CN104054673B).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 12, Ikuta discloses a fishing reel, comprising: a reel body (1; Figures 1-3); a detachable unit (13, 70) detachable from the reel body (1), the detachable unit (13, 70) including a cover (wall 13a, cylindrical portion of 13, and bearing portion 14, provide cover for interior components) cable of covering an interior of the reel body (1); and a power supply unit (57; Figure 14A) disposed in the detachable unit (13, 70), the power supply unit (57) configured to supply the received electric power to an electrical device (55, 41) disposed in the reel body (1), but fails to teach the power supply unit configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device; wherein the power supply unit comprises a power-receiving unit configured to receive the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device; and the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources.
Lee teaches a similar wireless power transmission apparatus for any type of device including fishing gear and further teaches the power supply unit (200; Figure 1) configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device (100); wherein the power supply unit (200) comprises a power-receiving unit (210) configured to receive the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device (100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the power supply unit receiving power from an external wireless power supply device as taught by Lee in order to continuously supply power and provide charge to the power sources in the fishing reel for continuous operation and to prevent removal and replacement of depleted power sources.
Niitsuma teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches the power supply unit (31; Figure 5) being one of two power supply sources (31a, 31b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the two power supply sources as taught by Niitsuma in order to provide a power source backup directly on the reel for continuous power to the reel in case one power supply source fails or is depleted of power.
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel and further teaches an operation unit (55; Figure 7; ¶0097) disposed in the reel body (1), the operation unit (55) configured to receive the electric power supplied by the power supply unit (57), and configured to perform operations corresponding to prescribed functions (¶0105; Step S3, brake mode selection; Figure 8).
Regarding claim 4, Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel, but fails to teach wherein the operation unit is configured to operate when the power supply unit is receiving the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device.
Lee teaches a similar wireless power transmission apparatus for any type of device including fishing gear and further teaches wherein the operation unit (microprocessor; page 11, last paragraph) is configured to operate when the power supply unit (200) is receiving the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device (100; page 11, last paragraph – page 12, first paragraph, during power transfer in charging state, the microprocessor on the electronic device may display charging completion time; wireless power receiver 200 may detect change in operating state of the electronic device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the operation unit as taught by Lee in order to continuously operate the fishing reel of Ikuta without stopping or shutting down.
Regarding claim 13, modified Ikuta discloses wherein both of the two power supply sources (31a, 31b of Niitsuma) are configured to supply electric power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the two power supply sources as taught by Niitsuma in order to provide a power source backup directly on the reel for continuous power to the reel in case one power supply source fails or is depleted of power.
Claim(s) 5-6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuta, in view of Lee, in view of Niitsuma, and in further view of Nakagawa (JP2005270017A).
Regarding claims 5-6, modified Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel, but fails to teach wherein the operation unit has a communication unit configured to communicate with an external communication device; wherein the communication unit is configured to communicate wirelessly with the external communication device.
Nakagawa teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches wherein the operation unit (73, 74, 77, 78; Figure 8) a communication unit (74) configured to communicate with an external communication device (80); wherein the communication unit (74) is configured to communicate wirelessly with the external communication device (80). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the communication unit as taught by Nakagawa in order to allow a navigator to watch the fishing information display and communicate with the fishing reel away from the angler.
Regarding claim 8, modified Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel, but fails to teach wherein the operation unit has a data transmission control unit configured to cause the external communication device connected to the communication unit by communication to transmit data to be stored in a storage unit.
Nakagawa teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches wherein the operation unit (73, 74, 77, 78) has a data transmission control unit (78, 73; Figure 8) configured to cause the external communication device (80) connected to the communication unit (74) by communication to transmit data to be stored in a storage unit (78; page 10-11, the external communication device 80,90 sends/receives data to and from the reel storage unit through the communication units). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the data transmission control unit as taught by Nakagawa in order to allow the user to control and store parameters into the reel from a distance.
Regarding claim 9, modified Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel and further teaches wherein the detachable unit (13, 70) includes the operation unit (55) in a watertight structure (¶0018). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include wherein the detachable unit includes the communication unit 74 of Nakagawa, since the communication unit of Nakagawa is provided within the second body part, in order to allow for quick and easy maintenance without having to disassemble main components of the fishing reel.
Regarding claim 10, Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel and further teaches the reel body (1) includes a first body part (9; Figure 2) configured to hold a first end of a spool shaft (20) so as to be rotatable and to which a handle shaft (30) is attached, and a second body part (8) configured to hold a second end of the spool shaft (20) so as to be rotatable, and the detachable unit (13, 70) is disposed in the second body part (8).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuta, in view of Lee, in view of Niitsuma, in view of Nakagawa, and in further view of Kitajima (JP2014161240A).
Regarding claim 7, modified Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel, but fails to teach wherein the operation unit includes a parameter setting unit configured to acquire parameter setting information indicating contents of parameter settings transmitted from an external communication device communicatively connected to the communication unit and set prescribed parameters for the fishing reel based on the acquired parameter setting information.
Kitajima teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches wherein the operation unit (20, 24, 19b; Figure 2) includes a parameter setting unit (19b, 24) configured to acquire parameter setting information indicating contents of parameter settings transmitted from an external communication device (4) communicatively connected to the communication unit (28) and set prescribed parameters for the fishing reel (1) based on the acquired parameter setting information (page 7, lines 16-22, switching between speed mode and tension mode can be performed by predetermined operation of the operation key unit 42 of the external communication device 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the parameter setting unit as taught by Kitajima in order to allow the user to select a preference of settings and reel operation to improve the fishing experience.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuta, in view of Lee, in view of Nakagawa, and in further view of Niitsuma.
Regarding claim 11, Ikuta discloses a detachable unit (13) of a fishing reel configured to be attached to/detached from a reel body (1) of a fishing reel, comprising: a watertight housing (6, 8, 13; Figures 1 and 3; ¶0018) and a cover (wall 13a, cylindrical portion of 13, and bearing portion 14, provide cover for interior components) covering an interior of the reel body (1); and including a power supply unit (57; Figure 14A) disposed in the water tight housing (6, 8, 13), the power supply unit (57) configured to receive electric power (¶0097; electric generation from the brake unit 40), an operation unit (55; Figure 7; ¶0097) configured to receive the electric power supplied from the power supply unit (57) and perform operations corresponding to prescribed functions (¶0105; Step S3, brake mode selection; Figure 8), but fails to teach the power supply unit configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device and a communication unit configured to communicate with an external communication device, and the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources.
Lee teaches a similar wireless power transmission apparatus for any type of device including fishing gear and further teaches the power supply unit (200; Figure 1) configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device (100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the power supply unit receiving power from an external wireless power supply device as taught by Lee in order to continuously supply power and provide charge to the power sources in the fishing reel for continuous operation and to prevent removal and replacement of depleted power sources.
Nakagawa teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches a communication unit (74; Figure 8) configured to communicate with an external communication device (80). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the communication unit as taught by Nakagawa in order to allow a navigator to watch the fishing information display and communicate with the fishing reel away from the angler.
Niitsuma teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches the power supply unit (31; Figure 5) being one of two power supply sources (31a, 31b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the two power supply sources as taught by Niitsuma in order to provide a power source backup directly on the reel for continuous power to the reel in case one power supply source fails or is depleted of power.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuta, in view of Lee, in view of Niitsuma, and in further view of Kitajima.
Regarding claim 15, modified Ikuta discloses the above fishing reel, but fails to teach wherein the operation unit is configured to perform operations to set the prescribed parameters for the fishing reel based on the acquired parameter setting information.
Kitajima teaches a similar fishing reel and further teaches wherein the operation unit (20, 24, 19b; Figure 2) is configured to perform operations to set the prescribed parameters for the fishing reel (1) based on the acquired parameter setting information (page 7, lines 16-22, switching between speed mode and tension mode can be performed by predetermined operation of the operation key unit 42 of the external communication device 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fishing reel of Ikuta to include the operation unit as taught by Kitajima in order to allow the user to select a preference of settings and reel operation to improve the fishing experience.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/04/2026 with respect to claims 1 and 11-12 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 11-12, in the last three paragraphs of page 6 and in pages 7-8, the applicant argued that the disclosure of Ikuta, Lee, Nakagawa, and Kitajima fail to teach a power supply unit disposed in the detachable unit (water tight housing), the power supply unit configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device, and configured to supply the received electric power, the power supply unit comprising a power-receiving unit configured to receive the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device, and the power supply unit configured to supply power to an electrical device disposed in the reel body, a communication unit configured to communicate with an external communication device, the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources.
The examiner construed that the disclosure of Ikuta teaches a power supply unit disposed in the detachable unit (water tight housing). However, the examiner agrees that Ikuta fails to teach the power supply unit configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device, and configured to supply the received electric power, the power supply unit comprising a power-receiving unit configured to receive the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device, and the power supply unit configured to supply power to an electrical device disposed in the reel body, a communication unit configured to communicate with an external communication device, the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources.
The examiner construed that the disclosure of Lee teaches a similar wireless power transmission apparatus than can be applied to any electrical device including a fishing reel and further teaches the power supply unit configured to receive electric power wirelessly transmitted from an external wireless power supply device, and configured to supply the received electric power, the power supply unit comprising a power-receiving unit configured to receive the electric power wirelessly transmitted from the external wireless power supply device, and the power supply unit configured to supply power to an electrical device disposed in the reel body.
Although the examiner agrees that the disclosure of Lee fails to teach a communication unit configured to communicate with an external communication device, the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources, the examiner construed that the disclosure of Nakagawa teaches a communication unit configured to communicate with an external communication device, the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources.
The examiner agrees that the disclosures of Ikuta, Lee, Nakagawa, and Kitajima fail to teach the power supply unit being one of two power supply sources. However, the examiner construed that the disclosure of Niitsuma teaches the limitation, as described above. Thus, contradicting to applicant’s assertions, such amendment does not overcome the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references listed on form PTO-892 are cited for their relevance to the disclosed invention and demonstration of the state of the art.
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 HENRIX SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-5394. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
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, VICTORIA AUGUSTINE can be reached at (313)446-4858. 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.
/H.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/Victoria P Augustine/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights