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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
The claims objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, ln. 4 – reads “a current to the coil”, should read “current to the coil”
Claim 4, ln. 5-6 – reads “a current flowing through the coil”, should read “current flowing through the coil”
Claim 4, ln. 8 – reads “performs a control” should read “performs the control”
These informalities appear to be simple typographical errors induced by the translation of the claims into English.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The claim set uses the term “vibration” in regards to the motion of the balance. Vibration is a broadly defined word, and questions may arise during the examination of the claims as to whether the “vibration” referred to is the oscillatory motion of the balance wheel or a transient vibration caused by motion or shock to the timepiece. Based on a reading of the specification and review of the associated drawings, the term vibration is definite and clearly refers to the normal oscillating motion of the balance wheel. However, to avoid any potential ambiguity in the reading of the claims, the term “vibration” will be interpreted by the examiner to refer to the “vibration cycle” to further clarify the meaning. For example, in claim 1, the terms “a vibration detection unit”, “a vibration of the balance”, etc. will be interpreted as “a vibration cycle detection unit”, “a vibration cycle of the balance”, etc.. Support for this interpretation is found in the specification at para. [0024] “controls the rotational speed of a train wheel 20 in accordance with the vibration cycle of the speed governor” and at para. [0035], which recites “The frequency of the reference clock is set based on the vibration cycle of the balance”.
Regarding claim 1, which recites “... the speed governing control unit switches a state to a stop state”. As no physical or electronic switch is recited in claim 1, the recitation of “switches” will be interpreted to mean “changes states to a stop state”. A “power switch” and first through forth operational switches are recited in claim 2, which resolves this interpretation in the claims that depend from claim 2 (claims 3-4).
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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tombez (US 20190187623, hereinafter Tombez) in view of Takyo (WO 2022176453, hereinafter Takyo).
Regarding claim 1, Tombez teaches “A mechanical watch (para. [0057] "a timepiece"; fig. 1, element 2) comprising: a spiral spring (para. [0057], "a barrel with a driving spring", fig. 1, element 12); a balance configured to be driven by power from the spiral spring (para. [0057], "a balance"; fig. 1,element 18); an oscillation circuit configured to output a clock signal (para. [0061], "electronic circuit and auxiliary oscillator"; fig. 1, elements 30 and 32, respectively); a vibration detection unit configured to detect a vibration of the balance and output a vibration detection signal (para. [0076], "regulating device comprising an auxiliary oscillator 58 & CLK and a measuring device arranged to be able to measure a potential time drift of the mechanical oscillator relative to the auxiliary oscillator"); a speed governing unit including a permanent magnet and a coil (para. [0074], "an electromagnetic assembly comprising a coil... and a magnet"; fig. 2, elements 22 and 28, respectively); a speed governing control unit configured to control the speed governing unit to perform a speed governing control of the balance (para. [0061]; "system for regulating the frequency of the mechanical oscillator"; fig. 1, element 8); a storage unit configured to store an electrical energy to be supplied to the speed governing control unit ([0075] a power supply capacitor CAL arranged to be able to store the electrical energy supplied by the electromechanical transducer); and a generator configured to generate the electrical energy (para. [0074], "an electromechanical transducer arranged to be able to convert mechanical power from the mechanical oscillator into electrical power"), wherein one of the permanent magnet and the coil is held by the balance (para. [0074], "a coil ..., mounted on the support ... of the mechanical resonator, and a magnet mounted on this mechanical resonator", fig. 1, elements 28 and 22, respectively), the speed governing control unit compares the clock signal and the vibration detection signal and performs the speed governing control of the balance by exerting an electromagnetic force on the permanent magnet, the electromagnetic force being generated by outputting a current to the coil (para. [0076], "a device for regulating the frequency of the mechanical oscillator, this regulating device comprising an auxiliary oscillator ... and a measuring device arranged to be able to measure a potential time drift of the mechanical oscillator relative to the auxiliary oscillator"; fig. 7, element 52; and para. [0064], "the magnet-coil coupling enables contactless action via a magnetic torque on the magnet attached to the balance.")” Tombez further teaches “”
However Tombez fails to teach “when a stored energy amount of the storage unit is equal to or smaller than a predetermined value, the speed governing control unit switches a state to a stop state where the speed governing control of the balance is stopped.”
Takyo (para. [0248]) teaches “when a stored energy amount of the storage unit is equal to or smaller than a predetermined value, the speed governing control unit switches a state to a stop state where the speed governing control of the balance is stopped.”. Specifically, Takyo (para. [0247]-[0249]) teaches “[0247] When the winding of the power spring 11 is released, the rotational force of the rotor 41 is weakened, and the counter electromotive voltage does not exceed the threshold Vth. In this case, the power generation amount is reduced, and the power storage amount of the capacitor C is also reduced. That is, the mechanical timepiece 1 is easily stopped, and the power supply circuit 60 is easily stopped. In such a case, it is preferable not to output the speed control pulse for power saving. That is, it is preferable not to perform the rate adjustment. [0248] Therefore, in the example illustrated in FIG. 29 and FIG. 30, a configuration is adopted in which a third counter that counts the number of times that the detection signal DE has failed continuously and a fourth counter that counts the number of times that the detection signal DE was continuously successful are used to switch between the "speed adjustment pulse output setting" for outputting the speed adjustment pulse and the "speed adjustment pulse stop setting" for stopping the output of the speed adjustment pulse. [0249] Specifically, when the third counter reaches 10, that is, when the detection signal DE is continuously detected ten times continuously, the configuration is switched to the speed adjustment pulse stop setting. When the fourth counter reaches 20, that is, when the detection signal DE is continuously detected for 20 times, the configuration is switched to the speed control pulse output setting. The number of counts to be the trigger of the setting switching is an example, and is not limited to the number shown here.” Takyo also teaches “[0257] When the count number of the third counter is 10 in ST42 (Y in ST42), the third count is reset (ST61), and the speed adjustment pulse stop setting is switched (ST62). When the operation is started after the power supply circuit 60 stops, the power storage amount of the capacitor C is small, and thus it can be said that the power supply circuit 60 is easily stopped again. Therefore, when the operation is started after the power supply circuit 60 stops, the number of consecutive success times of the detection signal DE required until the rate adjustment is started may be increased. For example, in ST51 of FIG. 31, when the count number of the fourth counter is 60, that is, when the detection signal DE is successfully detected continuously 60 times, the speed adjustment pulse output setting may be switched.”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the electromechanical oscillator regulation system of Tombez with the detection and switching circuit of Takyo to create a mechanical watch wherein exists an electromechanical oscillator regulation system which is further configured to detect a low power condition in the system and switch the system to a stopped state with the expected benefit of finely regulating the timekeeping of a mechanical timepiece via electromechanical control.
This method for improving the electromechanical oscillator regulation system of Tombez with the detection and switching circuit of Takyo was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the teachings of Tombez.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tombez and Takyo to obtain the invention as claimed in claim 1.
Thus, the combined art of Tombez and Takyo makes obvious the invention according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Tombez and Takyo make obvious the mechanical timepiece according to claim 1 wherein Tombez teaches the watch and regulation system for the mechanical oscillator and Takyo teaches the switching from a regulating state to a stop state. Tombez further teaches “the generator (para. [0075], “electric converter”, fig. 7, element 56) is an electromagnetic generator including the permanent magnet and the coil and configured to generate power through a relative movement of the permanent magnet and the coil along with a vibration of the balance”. Specifically, Tombez teaches “an electric converter 56 connected to the two output terminals of the electromechanical transducer so as to be able to receive an induced electric current IRec ... from this electromechanical transducer”.
Thus the combined art of Tombez and Takyo makes obvious the invention according to claim 5.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tombez and Takyo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nagano (US 20150138935, hereinafter Nagano).
Regarding claim 6, Tombez and Takyo make obvious the mechanical watch according to claim 1. However Neither Tombez nor Takyo teach “the generator is a solar generator including a solar panel.”
Nagano teaches “the generator is a solar generator including a solar panel (para. [0062], “solar cell”; fig. 2, element 10).” Specifically, Nagano teaches that, in a particular embodiment, the solar cell is used to charge a secondary cell. “[0062] The power supply device 1050 supplies the movement 1004 with electrical power. The power supply device 1050 includes a secondary cell (not shown) charged by the solar cell module 10.”
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the mechanical watch of Tombez and Takyo with the solar cell and secondary power storage cell of Nagano to create a mechanical watch with a balance regulating system wherein exists a solar cell which is further configured to charge a secondary power source for operating the regulation device with the expected benefit of maintaining the operation of the speed governing control unit in low-power situations where the mainspring of the timepiece outputs insufficient energy for the governor to function.
This method for improving the mechanical watch of Tombez and Takyo with the solar cell and secondary power storage cell of Nagano was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the teachings of Tombez.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tombez, Takyo and Nagano to obtain the invention as claimed in claim 6.
Thus, the combined art of Tombez, Takyo, and Nagano makes obvious the invention according to claim 6.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tombez and Takyo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Koike (US 6973010, hereinafter Koike).
Regarding claim 8, Tombez and Takyo make obvious the mechanical watch according to claim 1. However Neither Tombez nor Takyo teach “the generator is an electromagnetic generator including a power generation coil, a rotor, and a rotating mechanism configured to rotate the rotor.”
Koike teaches “the generator (col. 11, ln. 33, “generator”; fig. 1, element 120) is an electromagnetic generator (col. 11, ln. 33, “an electromagnetic converter”) including a power generation coil (col. 11, ln. 34, “coil blocks”; fig. 1, elements 121 and 131), a rotor (col. 11, ln. 35, “rotor”; fig. 1, element 12), and a rotating mechanism (col. 11, ln. 36, “rotor inertia disk”; fig. 1, element 12c) configured to rotate the rotor”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the mechanical watch of Tombez and Takyo with the with the electromagnetic generator of Koike to create a mechanical watch with a balance regulating system wherein exists an electromagnetic generator with the expected benefit of keeping the power source for the regulation charged by the motion of the timepiece on the user’s wrist.
This method for improving the mechanical watch of Tombez and Takyo with the electromagnetic generator of Koike was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the teachings of Tombez.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tombez, Takyo, and Koike to obtain the invention as claimed in claim 8.
Thus, the combined art of Tombez, Takyo, and Koike makes obvious the invention according to claim 8.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tombez and Takyo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Low (US 20140143933, hereinafter Low).
Regarding claim 9, Tombez and Takyo make obvious the mechanical watch according to claim 1. However Neither Tombez nor Takyo teach “the generator includes a power generation coil configured to generate power through electromagnetic induction with a magnetic field applied from outside”.
Low teaches “the generator (para. [0033], “wireless charging system”) includes a power generation coil (para. [0031], “one or more induction coils”) configured to generate power through electromagnetic induction with a magnetic field applied from outside (para. [0032], “an inductive charging circuit configured such that when it is placed within an electromagnetic field generated by an inductive charger, an electrical current is generated in the device”)”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the mechanical watch of Tombez and Takyo with the wireless charging system of Low to create a mechanical watch wherein exists a mechanical watch with a balance regulating system wherein exists an inductive wireless electromagnetic charging system with the expected benefit of easily keeping the regulator system in a charged and powered state while not being worn by the user.
This method for improving the mechanical watch of Tombez and Takyo with the inductive charging system of Low was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention based on the teachings of Tombez.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tombez, Takyo, and Low to obtain the invention as claimed in claim 9.
Thus the combined art of Tombez, Takyo, and Low makes obvious the invention according to claim 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 are 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. Specifically, including the subject matter of claims 2 and 3 into independent claim 1 would distinguish the instant application over the found prior art.
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim (claim 6), 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:
No art was found wherein a mechanical timepiece with an oscillator speed regulation system actively switches between a powered and unpowered state via a switch between the power supply and the coil of the device which turns the regulator system off. Though the device disclosed by Takyo switches the regulation system between a running state and a stopped state when the power from the mainspring is reduced, the device continues to monitor the pulsations generated by the motion of the balance until the mainspring is sufficiently wound so that the regulation system receives enough power and may be restarted.
Regarding claim 7, no art was found wherein a mechanical timepiece with an oscillator speed regulation system has a transparent case back with a solar panel configured to receive the light for charging the device through the transparent case back.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Tokoro – EP 1241538 – Mechanical Timepiece with Timed Annular Balance Power Generating Control Mechanism – Discloses a multi-coil version of a balance regulation system similar to the device disclosed in the instant application.
Born – US 7016265 – Timepiece Having A Mechanical Movement Associated With An Electronic Regulator – Discloses another implementation of an electronically regulated mechanical timepiece movement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J WALKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7599. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM ET Monday through Friday.
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.
/MICHAEL JAMES WALKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2844
/REGIS J BETSCH/ SPE, Art Unit 2844