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 of Claims
Claims 3-4, 6, 13, 15-17, and 19 are cancelled while claims 1, 5, 7, and 11 are amended. Claims 1-2, 5, 7-12, 14, 18, and 20 filed February 17, 2026 are pending and are hereby examined.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kobayashi et al (US 2017/0354070).
6. Re Claim 14: Kobayashi discloses comprising:
a component mounter that has a plurality of holders each capable of holding a feeder that supplies a component, and is configured to mount a component supplied by the feeder on a board (see [0048-0049] component mounter); and
the feeder insertion/removal device according to claim 1 for inserting and removing the feeder into and from each of the plurality of holders (see [0057, 0059] feeder).
Examiner Notes
7. The Examiner suggests incorporating all of the elements in independent claim 1 into independent claim 14, or write it as a dependent claim (dependent upon claim 1, make it clear). Finally, the Examiner suggests incorporating more hardware from the Specification and any unique arrangements of hardware, unique hardware, or unique ways the hardware is communicating. The aforementioned claim suggestions, in combination together, is suggested to help advance prosecution forward, although further search, examination, and consideration is required.
8. Claims 1-2, 5, 7-12, 18, and 20 are novel and unobvious over the prior art. After further search and consideration, the most pertinent U.S. prior art was found to be Kobayashi et al (US 2017/0354070) and Hoshikawa (US 2020/0383252). Kobayashi et al (US 2017/0354070) is directed to a component mounting system. Hoshikawa (US 2020/0383252) is directed to a maintenance management device.
9. However, the most pertinent U.S. prior art fail to disclose all of the limitations particularly:
the insertion and removal controller is configured to execute the retry control so that after stopping movement in one direction side of one of an insertion direction and an extraction direction in the insertion and removal direction in the retry operation, the feeder moves in another direction side opposite to the one direction side by a predetermined opposite direction traveling distance, and then moves in the one direction side again, and wherein the insertion and removal controller is configured to:
input the drive signal to the insertion and removal movement mechanism so that the feeder repeats the retry operation when the load index value detected by the detector becomes equal to or larger than the allowable threshold while the feeder is moving in the one direction side again in the retry operation, and
when the feeder repeats the retry operation, input the drive signal to the insertion and removal movement mechanism so that the opposite direction traveling distance in each retry operation becomes longer as the retry operation is repeated.
10. No prior art cited here or in any previous Office Action neither fully anticipates nor supports a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the subject matter present in the independent claims, either alone or in combination. The limitations lacking in the prior art, in combination with the other limitations clearly claimed in the application, are novel and unobvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 1-2, 5, 7-12, 18, and 20 are allowed.
12. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Response to Arguments
13. Applicant’s arguments filed 2/17/26 are found to be convincing with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections except for claim 14, which is addressed above.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAWAAD HAIDER whose telephone number is (571)272-7178. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 AM to 5 PM.
15. 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).
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Florian Zeender can be reached on 571-272-6790. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
19. 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.
/FAWAAD HAIDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627