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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the method of claim 1” should be -the method of claim 11-. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3,7,11,13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nozawa (US 3,782,105).
Regarding claim 1, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) a wrist-worn device comprising: a main body (10) including one of a retention recess (19) and a retention projection; and a bezel (20) configured to cover at least a portion of the main body (Fig. 1), the bezel including one other of the retention recess and the retention projection (21); wherein the at least one retention projection engages with the at least one retention recess to removably attach (column 1, lines 44-47) the bezel to the main body. Fig. 1 shows the bezel 20’s protrusion 21 engaging with the main body 10’s retention recess 19. See also column 3, lines 28-37.
Regarding claim 11, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) a method of customizing a wrist-worn device comprising the steps of: providing a main body (10) including one of a first retention recess (19) and a first retention projection; providing a first bezel (20) including one other of the first retention recess and the first retention projection (21); and moving the first retention projection into engagement with the first retention recess (Fig. 1) to removably attach (column 1, lines 44-47) the first bezel to the main body, such that the bezel covers a portion of the main body (Fig. 1 and column 3, lines 28-37).
Regarding claim 16, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) a wrist-worn device comprising: a main body (10) including a plurality of side faces (top and bottom side faces in Fig. 2), each one of the side faces having a retention recess (19); a bezel (20) including a plurality of sides (Fig. 3), each one of the sides having a retention projection (21-22); and a band (12) configured to affix the wrist-worn device to a user; wherein each one of the retention recesses receives a respective one of the retention projections to removably attach (column 1, lines 44-47) the bezel to the main body such that the bezel covers at least a portion of the main body. See Fig. 1 and column 3, lines 28-37.
Regarding claim 2, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) the wrist-worn device of claim 1, wherein the main body (10) includes one of an alignment recess (19) and an alignment projection, and wherein the bezel (20) includes one other of the alignment recess and the alignment projection (21), the alignment recess (19) and the alignment projection (21) being configured to align the bezel (20) with the main body (19) during attachment of the bezel to the main body (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 13, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) the method of claim 11, wherein the step of providing the main body (10) includes providing the main body with one of an alignment recess (19) and an alignment projection, and wherein the step of providing the first bezel (20) includes providing the first bezel with one other of the alignment recess and the alignment projection (21), the alignment recess and the alignment projection being configured to align the first bezel with the main body during the step of moving the first retention projection into engagement with the first retention recess to removably attach the first bezel to the main body Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 17, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) the wrist-worn device of claim 16, wherein the main body (10) includes a plurality of alignment recesses (19) and the bezel (20) includes a plurality of alignment projections (21-22), the alignment recesses and the alignment projections being configured to align the bezel with the main body during attachment of the bezel to the main body (column 3, lines 28-37).
Regarding claim 3, Nozawa teaches (Figs. 1, 3) the wrist-worn device of claim 2, wherein the main body (10) includes a plurality of retention recesses (19) and a plurality of alignment recesses (19), and wherein the bezel (20) includes a plurality of retention projections (21-22) and a plurality of alignment projections (21-22).
Regarding claim 7, Nozawa teaches the wrist-worn device of claim 1, further comprising a band (12, Fig. 2) that is configured to affix the wrist-worn device to a user.
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 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Dinstman (US 2,716,328) and Peng (US 2024/0126211).
Regarding claims 4-5, Nozawa discloses (Figs. 1, 3) the wrist-worn device of claim 3, wherein the main body and bezel are substantially rectangle shaped in plan view (Figs. 1-3) plurality of retention recesses (19) are provided on side faces of the main body (Figs. 1-3) and the plurality of retention projections are provided on sides of the bezel (Fig. 3).
Nozawa does not show the main body being substantially square shaped in plan view, the plurality of alignment recesses being provided at corners of the main body, and the plurality of alignment projections being provided at corners of the bezel.
Dinstman teaches (Fig. 1) a main body (42) and bezel (18) which are substantially square shaped in plan view (title).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nozawa’s rectangular main body and bezel to be substantially square shaped, as suggested by Dinstman. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as a known and predictable aesthetic design variation that meets/answers market forces/demands.
The combination of Nozawa and Dinstman does not show the plurality of alignment recesses being provided at corners of the main body and the plurality of alignment projections being provided at corners of the bezel.
Peng teaches (Figs. 1-2, 4) a plurality of alignment projections (103) being provided at corners of a main body (1) and a plurality of alignment recesses being provided at corners of a bezel (2). See [0050].
One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a first structure having a projection that engages with a recess of a second structure and a second structure having a projection that engages with a recess of a first structure are two identifiable, symmetric solutions for engaging a projection with a recess.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have tried combining Peng’s alignment projections with Nozawa’s bezel corners and Peng’s alignment recesses with Nozawa’s main body corners. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination as a predictable solution for centering the bezel onto the main body and reducing undesired play ([0050] of Peng).
Claims 6, 15, and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Sun (US 20190079459).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Nozawa discloses (Fig. 1) the wrist-worn device of claims 1 and 16, respectively, wherein the main body includes a front face (C) and a rear face (11).
Nozawa does not show a display on the front face and a sensor pad on the rear face.
Sun teaches (Figs. 1, 6-7) a display on a front face (Fig. 1) and a sensor pad (25) on a rear face (24). See [0021].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Sun’s display and sensor pad with Nozawa’s front and rear faces, respectively. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to create a functional watch that tells time and enhances user experience ([0002] of Sun).
Regarding claim 15, Nozawa discloses (Fig. 1) the wrist-worn device of claim 11 wherein the step of providing the main body includes providing a front face (C) and a rear face (11).
Nozawa does not show providing a display on the front face and a sensor pad on the rear face.
Sun teaches (Figs. 1, 6-7) providing a display on a front face (Fig. 1) and a sensor pad (25) on a rear face (24). See [0021].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Sun’s display and sensor pad provisions with Nozawa’s front and rear face provisions, respectively. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to create a functional watch that tells time and enhances user experience ([0002] of Sun).
Claims 8, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Vuilleumier (US 4,845,694).
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Nozawa discloses the wrist-worn device of claims 7 and 16, respectively, wherein the band includes a first band part and a second band part (Fig. 2, top and bottom straps 12).
Nozawa does not show the first band having at least one adjustment hole, the second band part having a buckle and buckle tongue, and the adjustment hole being configured to receive the buckle tongue.
Vuilleumier teaches a wrist-worn device including first and second bands, the first band having at least one adjustment hole, the second band part having a buckle and buckle tongue, and the adjustment hole being configured to receive the buckle tongue (column 5, lines 18-20).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted Nozawa’s straps for Vuilleumier’s straps. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this substitution to achieve the predictable result of creating a wrist-worn device that securely attaches to a user’s wrist.
Regarding claim 14, Nozawa discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising the step of providing a band connected to the main body, the band having a first band part and a second band part (12 in Fig. 2).
Nozawa does not show the first band having at least one adjustment hole, the second band part having a buckle and buckle tongue, and the adjustment hole being configured to receive the buckle tongue.
Vuilleumier teaches a wrist-worn device including first and second bands, the first band having at least one adjustment hole, the second band part having a buckle and buckle tongue, and the adjustment hole being configured to receive the buckle tongue (column 5, lines 18-20).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted Nozawa’s straps for Vuilleumier’s straps. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this substitution to achieve the predictable result of creating a wrist-worn device that securely attaches to a user’s wrist.
Claims 9-10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Dinstman.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Nozawa discloses the wrist-worn device of claims 1 and 16, respectively, wherein the main body has a first shape in plan view and the bezel has a second shape in plan view, the first shape and the second shape both being rectangular (column 1, lines 42-48 teach that the main body (“watch casing”) and bezel are both rectangular in shape). See also Figs. 1-3.
Nozawa does not explicitly show the first shape and second shape being the same.
Dinstman teaches (Fig. 1) a main body (42) with a first shape (square) in plan view and a bezel (18) with a second shape (square) in plan view, the first and being the same as the second shape. Squares, by definition, have the same shape. See claim 7.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nozawa’s first and second shapes to be the same, as taught by Dinstman. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as a known shape that predictably allows a bezel to securely hold a watch main body together.
Regarding claim 10, Nozawa discloses the wrist-worn device of claim 1, wherein the main body and the bezel are each substantially rectangular shaped in plan view (Figs. 2-3).
Nozawa does not show the main body and bezel being substantially square shaped in plan view.
Dinstman teaches (Fig. 1) a main body (42) and a bezel (18) being substantially square shaped in plan view (Fig. 1 and claim 7).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nozawa’s main body and bezel to be square-shaped in plan view, as suggested by Dinstman. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification as a known shape that predictably allows a bezel to securely hold a watch main body together.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nozawa in view of Wahler (US 20190187619).
Regarding claim 12, Nozawa discloses (Figs. 1, 3) the method of claim 11, wherein the main body (10) includes the first retention recess (19) and the first bezel (20) includes the first retention projection (21), and the method includes a step of moving the moving the first retention projection out of engagement with the retention recess to remove the first bezel from the main body (column 4, lines 49-60).
Nozawa does not show the method further comprising steps of: providing a second bezel including a second retention projection; and moving the second retention projection into engagement with the first retention recess to removably attach the second bezel to the main body.
Wahler teaches interchangeable bezels that allow for easy replacement, personalization, and adaptation for sporting activities ([0006]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have duplicated Nozawa’s bezel so that a second bezel with a second retention projection may be moved into engagement with the first retention recess to removably attach the second bezel to the main body when the first bezel has been moved out of engagement. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this duplication and included this step to fix a worn or broken bezel or to allow a user to achieve a personal aesthetic appearance with their watch.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gerber (US 2006/0114753) discloses a watch with an interchangeable bezel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Hwang whose telephone number is (571)272-1191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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.
/MATTHEW DANIEL HWANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2833
/EDWIN A. LEON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833