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
Applicants election without traverse of the invention of Group I, Claims 1 through 15 and 17 through 20, in the reply filed on April 9, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 16 has been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 April 9, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities.
In Claim 7, “continous timpe” (line 3) should be changed to –continuous time--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 through 15 and 17 through 20 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.
In Claim 1, “the component shortage time and workable time data” (lines 14-15) lacks positive antecedent basis. Also, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “is not detected by the component shortage detection system” (lines 17-18). Claim 1 clearly implies that the “component shortage detection section” (lines 13-15) is necessary to replenish (i.e. replace) the manual feeders. Yet the above phrase is such a broad negative limitation that it contradicts needing a “component shortage detection section” at all. How does one replace one of the manual feeders (lines 18-19) if its not detected by the component shortage detection section? In other words, the phrase excludes the need for a component shortage detection section, which raises a great deal of confusion and uncertainty in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1 through 5, 9, 11 through 15 and 17 through 20, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2016/0353621 to Maezono et al (hereinafter “Maezono”).
Claim 1: Maezono discloses an automatic feeder arrangement support system including a component mounting device (e.g. Fig. 2) that includes feeders (e.g. 8) with component supply tapes having components (e.g. Fig. 4), and a mounting head (e.g. 11, Fig. 3) configured to mount the components on a substrate (e.g. 6), the automatic feeder arrangement support system comprising:
a component shortage time calculation section (e.g. 33a, 38a, Fig. 5, ST1, Fig. 7) configured to calculate component shortage time data based on production plan data and substrate data (e.g. ¶ [0069]); and
a component shortage detection section (e.g. 38b) configured to perform a simulation and detect whether component shortage occurs or not based on a component shortage time and workable time data for a replenishment work of the feeders (e.g. ¶¶ [0080], to [0082]),
wherein one of the feeders (e.g. 8) is defined as a target to be replaced with another one of the feeders such that component shortage is not detected by the component shortage detection section (e.g. ST13 - No, Fig. 8, ¶ [0084]) by replacing the one of the feeders with the another one of the automatic feeders (e.g. ST14, Fig. 8, ¶ [0081]).
Claim 2: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1, wherein when the component shortage detection section detects component shortage (e.g. for M1), the component shortage detection section performs a simulation again and detect whether component shortage occurs if the one of the feeders is replaced with the another one of the feeders (e.g. for each of M2, M3, or M4).
Claims 3 and 17: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the one of the feeders in which component shortage is detected by the component shortage detection section is defined as a target to be replaced with the another one of the feeders (e.g. ST15, ST16, Fig. 8).
Claims 4 and 18: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1 or 2, wherein another one of the feeders (e.g. for M2, M3 or M4) that is related to the one of feeders in which the component shortage is detected by the component shortage detection section is defined as a target that is to be replaced with another one of the feeders.
Claims 5 and 19: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the one of feeders (e.g. in M1) in which the component shortage is detected by the component shortage detection section and another one of the feeders (e.g. in M2, M3 or M4) that is related to the one of manual feeders are defined as targets that are to be replaced with the automatic feeders.
Claim 9: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system, wherein a combination of the feeders (e.g. in each of M1, M2, M3 and M4) that are to be replaced with the another one of the feeders is determined among the one of the feeders that are defined as targets to be replaced by operations repeatedly performed by the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1.
Claim 11: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1, wherein the one of the feeders to be replaced with the another one of the feeders is displayed on a display section (e.g. 27a, Fig. 13A).
Claim 12: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 11, wherein the display section displays the one of the feeders to be replaced with the another one of the feeders and a due date of replacement (e.g. Fig. 13A, “Component shortage time”, 51, 52, 53).
Claim 13: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1, wherein the component shortage detection section obtains information from the component mounting device during production (e.g. via 28, Fig. 5) and periodically performs a simulation to detect whether component shortage occurs (e.g. ¶ [0067]).
Claim 14: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1, wherein one of the feeders whose number of times to be used is equal to a setting value (e.g. number of components in one of the feeders) is defined as a target to be replaced.
Claim 15: Maezono discloses the automatic feeder arrangement support system according to claim 1, wherein, wherein a simulation is performed with using an actual remaining number of components in the replenishment (e.g. ¶ [0041]).
Maezono does not use the terms of “manual” or “automatic” in describing the feeders. However, each feeder has a dual purpose of being “manual” due to the ability of workers that can replace each of the feeders (e.g. ¶ [0053]), or being “automatic” due to the feeder automatically suppling the mounting head with tape (e.g. ¶ [0029]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the feeders being used (e.g. in carriage 15, Fig. 3) can be referred to as “manual feeders” and other feeders that are to replace the feeders being used (in the carriage) can be referred to as “automatic feeders”, being that each of the feeders can have a dual purpose. Moreover, the terms of “manual” and “automatic” do nothing to structurally distinguish one feeder from another.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 through 8, 10 and 20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Japanese Patent Publication, JP 2018-073966, discloses a component mounting device (e.g. Fig. 1) that includes replacement of automatic feeders (e.g. 16, Fig. 7) as a result of a component shortage (see SOLUTION).
b) Non-Patent Literature IEEE Publication to Liukkonen et al, entitled "A case study of SPC in circuit board assembly: statistical mounting process control", discloses a component mounting device with feeders (e.g. Fig. 1) including a display (e.g. Fig. 4, see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, THOMAS J. HONG can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights