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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 09/10/2025. The previous objections to the drawings and specification have been withdrawn. Furthermore, the previous 35 USC 112 claim interpretations have also been withdrawn. Claims 1 and 4-22 remain pending for consideration.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4-22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the phrase “an inside of the outer shell case comprises a case disposing part” lacks antecedent basis and for examination purposes will be interpreted as -- the inside of the outer shell case comprises a case disposing part --
Regarding claim 1, the phrase “an fitting direction of the terminal with the connection part” is understood to be a typographical error and for examination purposes will be interpreted as -- a fitting direction of the terminal with the connection part --
Regarding claim 4, the phrase “the stopper part is abutted with the board case when the board case is slid on the case disposing part in an insertion direction of the terminal” lacks antecedent basis and for examination purposes will be interpreted as -- the stopper part is abutted with the board case when the board case is slid on the case disposing part in the insertion direction of the terminal --
Regarding claim 5, the phrase “the snap-fit structures are fitted to each other by sliding the board case on the case disposing part in an insertion direction of the terminal” lacks antecedent basis and for examination purposes will be interpreted as -- the snap-fit structures are fitted to each other by sliding the board case on the case disposing part in the insertion direction of the terminal --
Regarding claim 8, the phrase “the connection part is invisible in a direction other than an insertion direction of the terminal” lacks antecedent basis and for examination purposes will be interpreted as -- the connection part is invisible in a direction other than the insertion direction of the terminal --
Regarding claim 15, the phrase “an inner case which is disposed in an inside of the outer shell case” lacks antecedent basis and for examination purposes will be interpreted as -- an inner case which is disposed in the inside of the outer shell case --
Claims 6-7, 9-14, and 16-22 are also objected to due to dependency.
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 16 and 22 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 16, the claim recites “a connection part mechanically connecting with the gear and the ice making tray” which renders the claim indefinite. It is not entirely clear which structure the disclosed “connection part” is referring to. More clarity is requested.
For examination purposes, the disclosed “connection part” will be interpreted as referring to ice making tray fitting shaft 42 Fig. 11A and paragraph [0081] of the specification.
Regarding claim 22, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This term renders claim 22 indefinite because it is unclear what “the first wall of the board case is substantially abutted with the rib” is. Thus, as used to qualify the position of the board case’s wall relative to the rib, this term renders the same indeterminate and the claim (and all claims depending therefrom) indefinite with regard to the scope of protection sought thereby.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Saito (US 20190068032 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Saito teaches an ice making device (ice making device 1 Fig. 2) comprising: an ice making tray (ice tray 2 Fig. 2); an outer shell case (frame 4 Fig. 2) which is a case body (Fig. 1) structuring an outer shape of the device (Fig. 1); and a board case (second case member 72 Fig. 5) which accommodates a circuit board (first circuit board 51 Fig. 6); wherein the board case is disposed in an inside of the outer shell case (Figs. 1-2).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 20190068032 A1) in view of Amonett et al. (US 20090255282 A1, herein after referred to as Amonett).
Regarding claim 1, Saito teaches an ice making device (ice making device 1 Fig. 2) comprising: an ice making tray (ice tray 2 Fig. 2); an outer shell case (frame 4 Fig. 2) which is a case body (Figs. 1-2) structuring an outer shape of the device (Figs. 1 and 3); and a board case (second case member 72 Fig. 7) which accommodates a circuit board (motor circuit board 340 Fig. 7); wherein the board case is disposed in an inside of the outer shell case (Figs. 2-3), wherein the circuit board comprises a terminal (terminals 550 Fig. 14) which electrically connects the circuit board with another component (first circuit board 51 Fig. 13), the board case is provided with a terminal port (penetration part 74 Fig. 15) which is an opening (Figs. 15-16) for exposing the terminal outside of the board case (Fig. 11), the terminal is a male terminal (Fig. 11) which is capable of being fitted to and removed from a connection part of the another component (terminal holes 515 Fig. 10 and paragraph [0099] where the removal of the terminal is understood to be achieved by a desoldering process), the inside of the outer shell case comprises a case disposing part (the combination of first case member 71 and third case member 73 Figs. 2 and 5) to which the board case is attached (Figs. 5-6), the board case and the case disposing part respectively comprise slide fitting parts (see below annotated Fig. 5 of Saito), wherein the slide fitting parts of the board case include a slide plate (see below annotated Fig. 5 of Saito), and the slide fitting parts of the case disposing part include a slide guide (frame-shaped protruded parts 791 and 792 Figs 5-6), the slide fitting parts are fitted to each other by sliding the board case on the case disposing part (referring to Figs 5-6, a person skilled in the art would recognize that the protrusions provided on both sides of second case member 72 will slide into position in the holes provided in frame-shaped protruded parts 791 and 792) in a fitting direction of the terminal with the connection part (First direction “X” Figs. 5-6), and wherein the fitting direction of the terminal is parallel to a fitting direction of the slide plate with the slide guide (Figs. 5-6 where the fitting direction of the slide plate with the slide guide and the fitting direction of the terminal with the connection part are both in the same first direction “X”).
PNG
media_image1.png
477
664
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
580
544
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Saito teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the terminal of the circuit board is connected with the connection part of the another component by attaching the board case to the case disposing part”.
However, Amonett teaches a terminal (parts 156 Fig. 5A and paragraph [0087] correspond to the terminal of Saito) of a circuit board (insert molded circuit board 40 Fig. 3A corresponds to the circuit board of Saito) is connected with a connection part (heater-contacts 30 Fig. 3B and paragraph [0087] correspond to the connection part of Saito) of another component (heater 31 Fig. 3 corresponds to the other component of Saito) by attaching a board case (Figs. 1-3 where ice maker control module 10 corresponds to the board case of Saito) to a case disposing part (control housing 12 Figs. 2-3 corresponds to the case disposing part of Saito) to provide easy assembly as well as disassembly (paragraph [0105]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Saito to include “the terminal of the circuit board is connected with the connection part of the another component by attaching the board case to the case disposing par” in view of the teachings of Amonett to provide easy assembly as well as disassembly.
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach the case disposing part comprises a stopper part (first pillar shaped part 751 Figs. 4 and 8 Of Saito), and the stopper part is abutted with the board case when the board case is slid on the case disposing part (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0069] of Saito) in the insertion direction of the terminal (Figs. 4-6 of Saito) to determine a moving limit of the board case (referring to paragraph [0069] of Saito, a person skilled in the art would recognize that second case member 72 will be prevented from moving further in the first direction X when first and second pillar shaped parts 751 and 752 are connected) in the insertion direction.
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach wherein the board case and the case disposing part respectively comprise snap-fit structures (frame-shaped protruded parts 791and 792 Figs. 5-6 of Saito and see also below annotated Fig. 6 of Saito), and the snap-fit structures are fitted to each other by sliding the board case on the case disposing part (see Figs. 5-6 of Saito) in the insertion direction of the terminal (see Figs. 5-6 of Saito).
PNG
media_image3.png
540
682
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach wherein the case disposing part is provided with an insertion port (see below annotated Fig. 11A of Amonett) which is an opening (see below annotated Fig. 11 of Amonett), the connection part of the another component is disposed on a rear side (see below annotated Fig. 11 of Amonett) with respect to the insertion port (see below annotated Fig. 11 of Amonett), and the connection part is invisible in a direction (height direction Fig. 2 of Amonett) other than the insertion direction of the terminal (see below annotated Fig. 2 of Amonett).
PNG
media_image4.png
660
649
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
526
709
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the terminal is inserted into the opening”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having the terminal inserted into the opening instead of the connection part of the other component does anything more than produce the predictable result of connecting the circuit board to another component of the ice maker. Since it has been held that a reversal of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. A, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings and meet the claimed limitations in order to provide the predictable results of connecting the circuit board to another component of the ice maker.
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach wherein the board case comprises a terminal housing (terminal holder 55 Fig. 14 of Saito) which surrounds the terminal in a tube shape (Fig. 14 of Saito).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito and Amonett as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Laible et al. (US 20180100681 A1, herein after referred to as Laible).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach wherein the outer shell case comprises a cover part (mounting part 40 Fig. 2 of Saito), an inner face of the cover part (inner surface of upper plate part 45 Fig. 2 of Saito) is contacted with an opposing face (top side of second case member 72 Figs. 2-3 of Saito) which is an outer face of the board case (Figs. 2-3 of Saito), and the inner face of the cover part is formed with: a rib (part numbers 455 Fig. 2-3 of Saito) which is fitted to a periphery (periphery of second case member 72 Figs. 2-3 of Saito) of the opposing face of the board case (Figs. 2-3 of Saito).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the cover part is capable of being attached and detached”.
However, Liable teaches a cover part (front plate 40 Fig. 6) that is capable of being attached and detached (Figs. 5-6) to provide an easier access to the internal components of the ice making device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the cover part is capable of being attached and detached” in view of the teachings of Liable to provide an easier access to the internal components of the ice making device.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito, Amonett, and Laible as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Saito et al. (US 20120240613 A1, herein after referred to as Saito’13).
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the inner face of the cover part and the opposing face of the board case are provided with a protrusion and a recess whose shapes are paired, and the protrusion and the recess are fitted to each other by attaching the cover part to the board case”.
However, Saito’613 teaches wherein an inner face (inner surface of top plate 44 Fig. 3 corresponds to the inner face of Saito) of a cover part (frame body 4 Fig. 3 corresponds to the cover part of Saito) and an opposing face (bottom surface of drive part 3 Fig. 2 corresponds to the opposing face of Saito) of a board case (drive part 3 Fig. 2 corresponds to the board case of Saito) are provided with a protrusion (pawl pieces 34a and 34b Fig. 3) and a recess (pawl insertion parts 45a and 45b Fig. 3) whose shapes are paired (Fig. 5), and the protrusion and the recess are fitted to each other by attaching the cover part to the board case (Fig. 5) to provide an easier way of assembling/disassembling the cover to the case.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the inner face of the cover part and the opposing face of the board case are provided with a protrusion and a recess whose shapes are paired, and the protrusion and the recess are fitted to each other by attaching the cover part to the board case” in view of the teachings of Saito’13 to provide an easier way of assembling/disassembling the cover to the case.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito and Amonett as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morimoto (US 20230081123 A1).
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach further comprising: a first board (motor circuit board 340 Fig. 14 of Saito) which is the circuit board, a converter (paragraph [0054] of Saito) which converts an alternating current to a direct current (disclosed “AC-DC converter” in paragraph [0054]), and a second board (first circuit board 51 Fig. 10 of Saito) which is the another component with which a part (motor 34 Fig. 7 of Saito) operated by the direct current is connected (paragraphs [0054] and [0057] of Saito), a controller (second circuit board 52 Fig. 10 of Saito) which controls an operation of the ice making device (paragraph [0054] of Saito).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the terminal of the first board is connected with the second board through an inter-board connector which is the connection part”.
However, Morimoto teaches a terminal (plug 62 Fig. 12 corresponds to the terminal of Saito) of a first board (second circuit board 20 Fig. 12 corresponds to the first board of Saito) is connected with a second board (first circuit board 60 Fig. 11 corresponds to the second board of Saito) through an inter-board connector (receptacle 61 Fig. 11) which is a connection part (paragraph [0114] where receptacle 61 corresponds to the connection part of Saito) to provide a floating connector (paragraph [0114]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the terminal of the first board is connected with the second board through an inter-board connector which is the connection part” in view of the teachings of Morimoto to provide a floating connector.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the circuit board comprising the converter, wherein the second board comprises the controller”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having “the circuit board comprising the converter, wherein the second board comprises the controller” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing an ice maker with a controller and an AC to DC converter. Since it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings and meet the claimed limitations in order to provide the predictable results of providing an ice maker with a controller and an AC to DC converter.
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach wherein the inter-board connector perpendicularly connects the first board with the second board (Fig. 13 of Saito).
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach wherein no lead wire is used for connection of the first board with the second board (Fig. 13 of Saito).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito, Amonett, and Morimoto as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Tanimura (US 20190063811 A1).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the first board comprises a relay which opens and closes a water supply valve for supplying water to the ice making tray”.
However, Tanimura teaches wherein a first board (disclosed “second circuit board” in paragraph [0037] corresponds to the first board of Saito) comprises a relay (relay 39 Fig. 4) which opens and closes a water supply valve (water supply valve 53 Fig. 4 and paragraph [0040]) for supplying water to an ice making tray (ice making tray 2 Fig. 2 corresponds to the ice making tray of Saito) to automate the water supply process of the ice making device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the first board comprises a relay which opens and closes a water supply valve for supplying water to the ice making tray” in view of the teachings of Tanimura to automate the water supply process of the ice making device.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito, Amonett, and Morimoto as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Smolik (US 20200303912 A1).
Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the first board comprises a varistor”.
However, Smolik teaches wherein a first board (circuit board 420 Fig. 4 corresponds to the first board of Saito) comprises a varistor (disclosed “metal oxide varistors” in paragraph [0034]) to provide surge protection for the electrical circuitry.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the first board comprises a varistor” in view of the teachings of Smolik to provide surge protection for the electrical circuitry.
Claims 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito and Morimoto.
Regarding claim 15, Saito teaches an ice making device (ice making device 1 Fig. 2) comprising: an ice making tray (ice tray 2 Fig. 2); an outer shell case (frame 4 Fig. 2) which is a case body (Figs. 1-2) structuring an outer shape of the device (Figs. 1 and 3); a board case (second case member 72 Fig. 7) which is disposed in an inside of the outer shell case (Figs. 2-3); a first circuit board (motor circuit board 340 Fig. 7) which is disposed in the board case Fig. 7); a first connector (terminals 550 Fig. 14) which is electrically connected with the first circuit board (paragraph [0077]); a slide plate (see below annotated Fig. 5 of Saito) which is disposed on a surface of the board case (see below annotated Fig. 5 of Saito); an inner case (the combination of first case member 71 and third case member 73 Figs. 2 and 5) which is disposed in the inside of the outer shell case (Figs. 1-3), a second circuit board (first circuit board 51 Fig. 13); a second connector (terminal holes 515 Fig. 10) which is electrically connected with the second circuit board (paragraph [0077]); and a slide guide (frame-shaped protruded parts 791 and 792 Figs 5-6) which is disposed on a surface of the inner case (Figs. 5-6); wherein the slide plate is fitted with the slide guide (referring to Figs 5-6, a person skilled in the art would recognize that the protrusions provided on both sides of second case member 72 will slide into position in the holes provided in frame-shaped protruded parts 791 and 792), and the first connector is fitted and electrically connected with the second connector (Fig. 10 and paragraph [0077]) in which a fitting direction of the first and second connectors (First direction “X” Figs. 5-6) is parallel to the slide guide (Figs. 5-6).
PNG
media_image6.png
580
648
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Saito teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the first connector is a first inter-board connector; the second circuit board is disposed in the inner case; the second connector is a second inter-board connector”.
However, Morimoto teaches a first connector (plug 62 Fig. 12 corresponds to the first connector of Saito) is a first inter-board connector (paragraph [0114] and Fig. 12); a second circuit board (first circuit board 60 Fig. 11 corresponds to the second circuit board of Saito) is disposed in an inner case (Fig. 7 where the combination of first housing 930 and second housing 11 corresponds to the inner case of Saito); a second connector (receptacle 61 corresponds to the second connector of Saito) is a second inter-board connector (paragraph [0114] and Fig. 11) to provide a floating connector (paragraph [0114]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Saito to include “the first connector is a first inter-board connector; the second circuit board is disposed in the inner case; the second connector is a second inter-board connector” in view of the teachings of Morimoto to provide a floating connector.
Regarding claim 16, the combined teachings teach wherein the inner case is assembled with a drive unit (drive mechanism 15 Fig. 7 of Saito) which comprises: a motor (motor 34 Fig. 7 of Saito) electrically connecting with the second circuit board (paragraphs [0054] and [0057] of Saito); a gear train (worm gear 350, first gear 351, second gear 352, and third gear 353 Fig. 7 of Saito) which is configured to transmit a rotation of the motor (paragraph [0057] of Saito); a gear (cam gear 32 Fig. 7 of Saito) which mechanically connects with the gear train (paragraph [0057] of Saito); and a connection part (output shaft 33 Fig. 5 of Saito) mechanically connecting with the gear and the ice making tray (Fig. 5 and paragraph [0052] of Saito); and wherein the outer shell case comprises a box part (mounting part 40 Fig. 1 of Saito) which covers the drive unit except the connection part (Fig. 1 of Saito).
Regarding claim 17, the combined teachings teach wherein respective face directions of the first (second direction "Y" Fig. 13 of Saito is the face direction of motor circuit board 340) and the second circuit boards (first direction "X" Fig. 13 of Saito is the face direction of first circuit board 51) are perpendicularly arranged (Fig. 13 of Saito).
Regarding claim 18, the combined teachings teach wherein a first wall of the board case (bottom 115 Fig. 7 of Morimoto) is provided with a first opening (opening of hole 119 located on bottom 115 Fig. 7 of Morimoto), a second wall of the inner case (flat heat dissipation surface 112 Fig. 9 of Morimoto) is provided with a second opening (opening of hole 119 located on flat heat dissipation surface 112 Fig. 9 of Morimoto), and a combination of the first and the second inter-board connectors (paragraph [0114] of Morimoto) which are fittingly connected penetrates the first and the second walls through the first and the second openings (paragraph [0014], Fig. 7, and Fig. 9 of Morimoto).
Regarding claim 19, the combined teachings teach wherein the first inter-board connector is a male terminal (plug 62 Fig. 12 of Morimoto) penetrating the first wall through the first opening (paragraph [0014] of Morimoto).
Regarding claim 20, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the first inter-board connector penetrates the second wall through the second opening”.
However, Applicant has not disclosed that having the first inter-board connector penetrating the second wall through the second opening instead of the second inter-board connector does anything more than produce the predictable result of connecting the first and second circuit boards together. Since it has been held that a reversal of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI. A, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings and meet the claimed limitations in order to provide the predictable results of connecting the first and second circuit boards together.
Regarding claim 21, the combined teachings teach wherein the board case comprises a terminal housing (terminal holder 55 Fig. 14 of Saito) which surrounds the first inter-board connector in a tube shape (Fig. 14 of Saito).
Regarding claim 22, the combined teachings teach wherein the inner case comprises a rib on the second wall (body part 712 Fig. 4 of Saito where first end plate part 701 corresponds to the second wall of Morimoto), and the first wall of the board case (partition member 703 Fig. 11 of Saito corresponds to the first wall of Morimoto) is abutted with the rib (paragraph [0067] of Saito).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 09/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments on pages 18-19 that Saito fails to disclose “the slide fitting parts are fitted to each other by sliding the board case on the case disposing part in a fitting direction of the terminal with the connection part, and wherein the fitting direction of the terminal is parallel to a fitting direction of the slide plate with the slide guide” as recited in amended claim 1, Examiner disagrees.
As recited above in the rejection of amended claim 1 and for clarity purposes, Saito teaches: slide fitting parts (see below annotated Fig. 5 of Saito) are fitted to each other by sliding a board case (second case member 72 Fig. 7) on a case disposing part (the combination of first case member 71 and third case member 73 corresponds to the case disposing part and referring to Figs 5-6, a person skilled in the art would recognize that the protrusions provided on both sides of second case member 72 will slide into position in the holes provided in frame-shaped protruded parts 791 and 792) in a fitting direction of the terminal (First direction “X” Figs. 5-6) with a connection part (terminal holes 515 Fig. 10), and wherein the fitting direction of the terminal is parallel to a fitting direction of the slide plate with the slide guide (Figs. 5-6 where the fitting direction of the slide plate with the slide guide and the fitting direction of the terminal with the connection part are both in the same first direction “X”).
PNG
media_image7.png
468
712
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are maintained.
Conclusion
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 SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM.
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, Jerry -Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763