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 .
Claims 1-12 are pending.
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, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda et al. (US 20190329403), hereinafter Ueda, in view of Ryosuke (JP 2020087725).
Regarding claim 1, Ueda discloses an electronic device assembly method in which a leading end of a flexible flat cable (Par. 0046, cable 91, “cable 91 having flexibility using the end effector 19”) is inserted into a connector (Par. 120, second connector 98) attached to a circuit board (Par. 0120, circuit board 96), with use of a robot (Par. 0046, robot arm 10) including a gripping device (Par. 0046, end effector 19) that grips the cable, the method comprising: gripping the cable with use of the gripping device.
However, Ueda fails to disclose disposing a guide member in front of an opening of the connector on the circuit board in such a manner that the guide member faces the opening, the guide member restricting the leading end of the cable in a thickness direction of the cable toward the opening of the connector; gripping the cable with use of the gripping device; and inserting the leading end of the cable into the connector via the guide member.
Ryosuke teaches disposing a guide member (ground member 80, see Fig. 11) in front of an opening of the connector (connector 30) on the circuit board in such a manner that the guide member faces the opening, the guide member restricting the leading end of the cable in a thickness direction of the cable toward the opening of the connector (see Fig. 12); and inserting the leading end of the cable into the connector via the guide member (see Fig. 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ryosuke to modify the invention of Ueda to provide an electronic device assembly method in which a leading end of a flexible flat cable is inserted into a connector attached to a circuit board with the use of a robot and a gripping device wherein a guide member is disposed in front of an opening of the connector to restrict the leading end of the cable in the thickness direction of the cable. One would be motivated to make this modification to aid the insertion of the cable into the connector by the robot and prevent incorrect coupling.
Examiner’s Note: Although the cited references do not explicitly recite method steps, the disclosed structure is capable of performing the recited the steps. When the device of Ueda and Ryosuke is used in its intended manner, the claimed steps necessarily occur.
Regarding claim 2, Ueda discloses the electronic device assembly method according to claim 1.
However, Ueda fails to disclose wherein the guide member is fixed in front of the opening of the connector on the circuit board.
Ryosuke teaches wherein the guide member (ground member 80) is fixed in front of the opening of the connector on the circuit board (see Fig. 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ryosuke to modify the invention of Ueda to provide an electronic device assembly method in which a leading end of a flexible flat cable is inserted into a connector attached to a circuit board with the use of a robot and a gripping device wherein a guide member is disposed in front of an opening of the connector to restrict the leading end of the cable in the thickness direction of the cable. One would be motivated to make this modification to aid the insertion of the cable into the connector by the robot and prevent incorrect coupling.
Regarding claim 4, Ueda discloses the electronic device assembly method according to claim 1.
However, Ueda fails to disclose wherein the guide member has a frame shape in which one of a pair of lateral sides is open as viewed in a direction in which the cable is inserted.
Ryosuke teaches wherein the guide member (ground member 80) has a frame shape in which one of a pair of lateral sides is open as viewed in a direction in which the cable is inserted (see Fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ryosuke to modify the device of Ueda to provide a guide member disposed in front of an opening of the connector wherein the guide member has a frame shape in which one of the pair of lateral sides is open as viewed in a direction in which the cable is inserted. One would be motivated to make this modification to aid the insertion of the cable into the connector by the robot and prevent incorrect coupling.
Regarding claim 6, Ueda discloses the electronic device assembly method according to claim 2.
However, Ueda fails to disclose wherein the guide member has a frame shape in which one of a pair of lateral sides is open as viewed in a direction in which the cable is inserted.
Ryosuke teaches wherein the guide member (ground member 80) has a frame shape in which one of a pair of lateral sides is open as viewed in a direction in which the cable is inserted (see Fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ryosuke to modify the device of Ueda to provide a guide member disposed in front of an opening of the connector wherein the guide member has a frame shape in which one of the pair of lateral sides is open as viewed in a direction in which the cable is inserted. One would be motivated to make this modification to aid the insertion of the cable into the connector by the robot and prevent incorrect coupling.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, and 7-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, allowability resides, at least in part, with the prior art of record not fairly showing, suggesting, or teaching the electronic device assembly method according to claim 1, wherein the guide member is supported by a leading end of the gripping device, as recited in claim 3. These limitations are neither taught nor suggested by the prior art of record taken alone or in combination. Claims 7, 9, and 12 are dependent on claim 3 and are therefore allowable for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 5, allowability resides, at least in part, with the prior art of record not fairly showing, suggesting, or teaching the electronic device assembly method according to claim 1, wherein the guide member includes a guide-side opening through which the leading end of the cable is passed, and an inlet side of the guide-side opening has a height that is larger than a height of an outlet side of the guide-side opening, and the height of the guide-side opening gradually decreases from the inlet side toward the outlet side, as recited in claim 5. These limitations are neither taught nor suggested by the prior art of record taken alone or in combination.
Regarding claim 8, allowability resides, at least in part, with the prior art of record not fairly showing, suggesting, or teaching the electronic device assembly method according to claim 2, wherein the guide member includes a guide-side opening through which the leading end of the cable is passed, and an inlet side of the guide-side opening has a height that is larger than a height of an outlet side of the guide-side opening, and the height of the guide-side opening gradually decreases from the inlet side toward the outlet side, as recited in claim 8. These limitations are neither taught nor suggested by the prior art of record taken alone or in combination.
Regarding claim 10, allowability resides, at least in part, with the prior art of record not fairly showing, suggesting, or teaching the electronic device assembly method according to claim 4, wherein the guide member includes a guide-side opening through which the leading end of the cable is passed, and an inlet side of the guide-side opening has a height that is larger than a height of an outlet side of the guide-side opening, and the height of the guide-side opening gradually decreases from the inlet side toward the outlet side, as recited in claim 10. These limitations are neither taught nor suggested by the prior art of record taken alone or in combination.
Regarding claim 11, allowability resides, at least in part, with the prior art of record not fairly showing, suggesting, or teaching the electronic device assembly method according to claim 6, wherein the guide member includes a guide-side opening through which the leading end of the cable is passed, and an inlet side of the guide-side opening has a height that is larger than a height of an outlet side of the guide-side opening, and the height of the guide-side opening gradually decreases from the inlet side toward the outlet side, as recited in claim 11. These limitations are neither taught nor suggested by the prior art of record taken alone or in combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
See PTO-892 for details
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey Mountain whose telephone number is (703)756-1939. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am - 6:30pm 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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at (571)272-2098. 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.
/JEFFREY MOUNTAIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights