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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1-3b and 5A-5C are not clear and suitably legible. The gray lines and gray backgrounds sharply reduce the photo reproduction quality and legibility. Figure 4 is in black and is acceptable. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning. See 37 CFR 1.84(L). 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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The objected to language is “The invention discloses”.
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 1-16 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 1, the limitation “including a chamber at its top” is indefinite because it is not apparent what the scope of “its top” is since top has not been defined.
Further, “the rotating components” lack proper antecedent basis. It appears this refers to the “rotatably couple segments” and one of the two should be changed for consistency.
Additionally, “the controlled movement”, “the operation” and “the number” also lack antecedent basis.
Claims 2-16 are rejected for depending from rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, the “restive” touch display should be changed to “resistive”.
Regarding claim 11, “the first segment”, “the second segment” and “the third segment” lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 12 “the load-bearing support” and “the gimbal and gyroscope assembly” lack antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation “the first segment further comprising a second set of actuators for rotating a second segment about the X-axis” is unclear. Does the first segment of the at least three rotatably coupled segments comprise the set of actuators for rotating the second segment? Is “the second segment” from claim 11 the same segment as “a second segment” in claim 13? The claim is indefinite because there is doubt to what is being claimed and the resulting scope of the first segment.
Regarding claim 15, the limitation “the top of the second segment” lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “the height” and “the timepiece chamber”. The timepiece chamber appears to be the same as “a gimbal including a chamber”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed watch winder apparatus comprising: a housing configured to support a gyroscope and gimbal mechanism; a gimbal within the housing, the gimbal including a chamber at its top configured to hold a watch and comprising at least three rotatably coupled segments, each segment being capable of rotating about a distinct axis, thereby allowing for movement in three dimensions; at least three corresponding sets of actuators, each set of actuators coupled to a respective one of the rotating components of the gimbal, to facilitate the controlled movement of each component; a power supply: and a programmable microprocessor circuit housed within the apparatus, the microprocessor circuit configured to control the operation of the actuators to enact one or more pre-programmed movements of the gimbal and chamber, and to track the number of rotations executed by each of the rotating components.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-3994. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM - 6:00 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, Regis Betsch can be reached at (571) 270-7101. 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.
/JASON M COLLINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2844
/EDWIN A. LEON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833