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 .
Amendment filed 7/17/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-17 remain pending in the present application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “undulating uneven surface facing the slot” in claim 7 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “into slots of fist clamping mechanisms” should read “into the sots of the first clamping mechanisms”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 4, and 6-17 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 claim(s) 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. Re. Cl. 1, the limitations “the slot has a width progressively decreasing from the outer side surface of the first mounting member toward the first mounting hole” and “a top wall of the slot extends from the first mounting hole to the opening of the slot along a direction inclined toward a bottom wall of the slot” constitutes new matter in the Examiner’s position. Re. Cl. 11, the limitation “is not greater than 46:1” constitutes new matter in the Examiner’s position. Re. Cl. 17, the limitation “the slot has a triangular cross-sectional shape in the lateral direction” constitutes new matter in the Examiner’s position. Applicant’s originally filed specification and claims make no mention of these limitations so it appears the Applicant is relying solely on the drawings for support of these limitations. However, it is the Examiner’s position that the drawings as filed do not provide adequate support for these limitation. MPEP 2125 when referring to proportions of drawings indicates that the drawings are not evidence of actual proportions when drawings are not to scale. Applicant does not disclose that the drawings are to scale and it is the Examiner’s position that these limitations are not abundantly clear in view of the specific drawings. Re. Cl. 1, Applicant alleges that Fig. 3 provides support for the decreasing width of the slot and the top wall inclined towards the bottom wall. However, Fig. 3, appears to be a an isometric view of the slot (101) where the device is at an angle relative to the viewer or the viewer is above the slot (101). It is the Examiner’s position that it cannot be conclusively said that the width of the slot progressively decreases and the top wall is inclined downward. For instance, the slot width could be constant throughout with the side walls remaining parallel to one another and the appearance of the inclined angle of the top wall could be distorted due to the isometric view of Fig. 3. Re. Cl. 11, the specific ration was not disclosed in the specification and since the drawings are not indicated as to scale, it cannot be reasonable asserted that the figures provide support for such a ratio. As discussed in the Non-Final Rejection, a ratio is typically expressed as two comparative numbers, a percentage, etc.. There is no evidence to support that the Applicant intended it to be 46:1 as now claimed and therefore the limitation constitutes new matter in the Examiners position. Re. Cl. 17, it is the Examiner’s position that the triangular cross-sectional shape of the slot was not supported in the original disclosure. As discussed above in reference to the limitations in claim 1, Fig. 3 does not show the interior surfaces of the slot in a manner which supports the triangular configuration thereby rendering the limitation new matter in the Examiner’s position. In summary, it is the Examiner’s position that the application as originally filed does not provide sufficient evidence to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8-10-14, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raschilla US 2016/0183394 (hereinafter Raschilla) in view of Shoji US 2011/0011998 (hereinafter Shoji).
PNG
media_image1.png
460
774
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re. Cl. 1, Raschilla discloses: A fixing and shock-absorbing protective device (40, Fig. 1), comprising a first mounting member (40, Fig. 2) provided with a first clamping mechanism (see Fig. annotated figure 2) for fixation, wherein a deformation amount of the first mounting member after being stressed is 0.015 mm to 9.30 mm (see Paragraph 0026, the materials listed are capable of being deformed within the claimed range so long as they are subject to particular forces to stress the material within the claimed range); the first mounting member is provided with a first mounting hole (54, Fig. 2) for mounting a body structure of the first mounting member (see Fig. 1, via 36) the first mounting hole is disposed along a height direction of the first mounting member (see 54, Fig. 2); the first clamping mechanism has a slot disposed along a lateral direction perpendicular to the height direction (see Fig. 2, between 48 and 52, Fig. 2), and an opening of the slot is located on an outer side surface of the first mounting member (see Fig. 2, outer surface which faces 16), wherein the slot has a width progressively decreasing from the outer side surface of the first mounting member toward the first mounting hole (see Fig. 2, walls 42 converge toward one another at the corner, thus decreasing the slot width progressively).
Re. Cl. 2, Raschilla discloses: the first mounting member is a flexible rubber body (Paragraph 0026).
Re. Cl. 4, Raschilla discloses: a bearing seat is provided on a bottom of the first mounting member (see Fig. 1, bottom of 42 which sits on 18 as shown schematically in Fig. 1); and the bearing seat and the body structure of the first mounting member are formed as an integral structure (see Fig. 1-2), with the first mounting hole penetrating through the bearing seat (see Fig. 1-2, so that 40 is attached to 12 via 36s).
Re. Cl. 8, Raschilla discloses: a height of the first mounting member is not greater than 95 mm (see Fig. 2, height between 50 and 48 at the corners 52 to receive PCB 16; the Examiner notes that this height would be equal to the height of the PCB since 50 and 48 contact the PCB as discussed in Paragraph 0027; further the Examiner notes that the thickness of PCBS are not greater than 95mm as supported in the NPL evidentiary cited on PTO-892).
Re. Cl. 9, Raschilla discloses: a material of the first mounting member at least comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a thermoplastic material, a thermosetting material, a rubber elastomer and a composite material (see Paragraph 0026).
Re. Cl. 10, Raschilla discloses: the flexible rubber body comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of natural rubber, styrene-butadiene rubber, nitrile rubber, silicone butadiene rubber, isoprene rubber, ethylene-propylene rubber (see Paragraph 0026), chloroprene rubber, butyl rubber, fluororubber, polyurethane rubber, polyacrylate rubber, chlorosulfonated polyethylene rubber, epichlorohydrin rubber, chlorinated polyene rubber, chlorosulfide rubber, styrene butadiene rubber, butadiene rubber, hydrogenated Buna-N rubber, and polysulfide rubber.
Re. Cl. 12, Raschilla discloses: A charging device (Fig. 1), comprising a housing (12, Fig. 1) and the fixing and shock-absorbing protective device according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above, 40) mounted in the housing (see Fig. 1).
Re. Cl. 13, Raschilla discloses: a material of the housing at least comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a thermoplastic material, a thermosetting material, a rubber elastomer and a composite material (see Paragraph 0021, glass filled polyamide is a composite material in the examiner’s position).
Re. Cl. 14, Raschilla discloses: the material of the housing comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of polyamide (see Paragraph 0021), polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene, polymethyl methacrylate, polyvinyl chloride, ethylene propylene Preliminary Amendment diene monomer, nylon, polycarbonate, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyethylene glycol terephthalate, polyformaldehyde and polyvinyl chloride.
Re. Cl. 16, Raschilla discloses: the body structure of the first mounting member comprises a top seat (see top surface of 52, Fig. 2) and a bearing seat (bottom of 42, Fig. 2) arranged along the lateral direction, respectively, and the top seat and the bearing seat are spaced apart in the height direction (see Fig. 2); the body structure further comprises connecting walls (42, Fig. 2) extending along the height direction, respectively, and the connecting walls are spaced apart around the first mounting hole (see Fig. 2, hole 54 is inward from 42s); and the slot is located between two adjacent connecting walls (see Fig. 2), the top wall of the slot is located between the top seat and the bearing seat in the height direction (see Fig. 2), and a portion of a top surface of the bearing seat serves as the bottom wall of the slot (see Fig. 2).
Re. Cl. 17, Raschilla discloses: the slot has a triangular cross-sectional shape in the lateral direction (see Fig. 2, due to the shape of sidewalls 42 which meet at the corner where the slot is, the slot would have a triangular cross-sectional shape).
Re. Cl. 1, Raschilla does not disclose a top wall of the slot extends from the first mounting hole to the opening of the slot along a direction inclined toward a bottom wall of the slot. Shoji discloses a vibration absorbing mounting device (Fig. 8b) which includes a first clamping mechanism (see Fig. 8b) which includes a slot (between 34 and 33, which receives 1) where the top wall (34, Fig. 8b) extends from the first mounting hole (see left 6, Fig. 8a) to the opening of the slot (see Fig. 8b, where the ends of 34 and 33 are) along a direction inclined toward a bottom wall of the slot (see Fig. 8b, the horizontal portion of 34 is inclined towards the horizontal portion of 33).
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 Raschilla device to have its top wall inclined towards the bottom wall as disclosed by Shoji with reasonable expectation of success since Shoji states that such a modification sandwiches the substrate (Paragraph 0053). Such a modification would provide a more secure gripping of the circuit board in Raschilla.
Re. Cl. 11, the combination of Raschilla in view of Shoji discloses there is a ratio of a projection area of the first clamping mechanism along the height direction of the first mounting member (height of the annotated clamping mechanism) to an area of a contact region between the first clamping mechanism and a fixed object that inserts into the slot (see Fig. 1-3, there is inherently a ratio of the height dimension of the mounting member to a contact region of the slot since 26 fits within the slot as shown in Fig. 3); the projection area is an area of an orthogonal projection of the entire first clamping mechanism in the height direction (see Fig. 2, walls 52 and 48); and the contact region is a portion of the top wall or the bottom wall of the slot of the first clamping mechanism that contacts the fixed object (see Fig. 2, surface of the wall 52 or 48 which contacts 16 at the corners). However, the combination does not specifically disclose the ratio is not greater than 46:1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Raschilla in view of Shoji by making the length ratio of less than 46:1 as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raschilla in view of Shoji as applied above, and further in view of Connor US 243513 (hereinafter Connor).
Re. Cl. 7, the combination of Raschilla in view of Shoji does not disclose the first clamping mechanism has an undulating uneven surface facing the slot. Connor discloses a vibration suppression clamping mechanism (Fig. 1) which includes a slot to clamp an object (see Fig. 1-2, between A and A’) that have undulating uneven surfaces facing the slot (see inner surfaces of A and A’).
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 clamping mechanism of Raschilla to have undulating surfaces as disclosed by Connor with reasonable expectation of success since Connor states that such a modification intercepts vibrations of the object, better clamps the object and holds the object more firmly in place (Lines 89-96).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raschilla in view of Shoji as applied above, and further in view of Lu US 2009/0122505 (hereinafter Lu).
Re. Cl. 15, Raschilla discloses wherein the charging device further comprises a circuit board (16, Fig. 1) mounted inside the housing (see Fig. 1, within 12), and the fixing and shock-absorbing protective device comprises four first mounting members (see annotated figure 2) that are mounted at four corners of the circuit board respectively (see Fig. 3); and the four corners of the circuit board are respectively inserted into slots of first clamping mechanisms of the four first mounting members (see Fig. 2-3), and are each clamped between the top wall and the bottom wall of each of the slots (see Fig. 2-3). However, as seen in Fig. 2, Raschilla does not disclose that the mounting members are independent. Lu discloses mounting members (160, Fig. 1) which are four independent mounting members (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify mounting members of Raschilla in view of Shoji device to be independent as disclosed by Lu with reasonable expectation of success to provide localized vibration suppression which would not necessarily transmit vibrations from one part of the circuit board to others.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4, and 6-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the references as applied in the prior rejection of record for rendering Applicant’s claimed invention obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oliver US 7471509, Lu US 2009/0122505, and Harmon US 2002/0044416 disclose other known shock absorbing devices which are presented to the Applicant for their consideration.
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 CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at (571)272-4797. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights