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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/27/2026 has been entered.
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 2-3 and 15 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 2, the limitation “an upper surface” in line 2 is unclear. It is unclear whether reference is being made to an upper surface of the cover or to another upper surface.
For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret this as an upper surface of the cover.
Claims 3 and 15 depending from claim 2 are therefore also rejected.
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) 1-3, 7 and 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki JPH09321463A further in view of Jenkins US 6560840.
PNG
media_image1.png
795
847
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki JPH09321463A discloses (in Fig. 7) an electric equipment comprising:
a housing (19);
a printed circuit board (3) disposed inside the housing (19) and including a first hole (28); and
a cover (18) coupled to an upper surface of the housing (19) and including a second hole (18a),
wherein the housing (19) includes:
a first region (portion of 34 penetrating through 28) disposed to penetrate through the first hole (28);
a second region (portion of 34 penetrating through 18a) disposed at an upper portion of the first region (portion of 34 penetrating through 28) and disposed to penetrate through the second hole (18a); and
a third region (35) disposed at an upper portion of the second region (portion of 34 penetrating through 18a) and disposed on an upper surface of the cover (18),
wherein a lower surface (18L) of the cover (18) includes a protruded portion (18b) protruded downward, and a lower surface (18bs) of the protruded portion (18b) is in contact with an upper surface of the printed circuit board (3 as depicted in Fig. 7),
wherein an accommodating groove (26) that is recessed more upward than the first and second (portions of 34) is disposed on a lower surface of the protruded portion (18bs as depicted in Fig. 7), and
wherein an upper surface (surface at 26) of the first region (portion of 34 penetrating through 28) is in contact with a bottom surface of the accommodating groove (26 as depicted in Fig. 7).
Suzuki does not explicitly disclose the accommodating groove (26) that being recessed more upward than the third region.
However, Jenkins US 6560840 discloses an accommodating groove (10) that is recessed more upward than the first, second, and third regions (respective portions of 20 as depicted in Fig. 2e and 2g).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the accommodating groove of Suzuki recessed more upward than the third region, as taught by Jenkins, in order to further recess the end of the Suzuki’s coupling member.
Regarding claim 2, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim1, wherein the cover (18 of Suzuki) is more recessed downwardly from an upper surface than the first, second, and third regions (respective portions of 34 and 35; as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 the cover 18 is recessed downwardly while the first, second and third regions protrude upwardly of Suzuki) and includes a coupling groove (20 in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki) with the third region (35 of Suzuki) disposed inside thereof (as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 2, wherein a lower surface of the third region (35 of Suzuki) is in contact with a bottom surface of the coupling groove (20; as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 7, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1, wherein a groove (groove of 34 between 26 and 21in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki) being formed along an edge of the second region (portion of 34 penetrating through 18a of Suzuki) is disposed on an upper surface of the first region (portion of 34 penetrating through 28 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 11, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1.
Suzuki does not explicitly disclose that the housing and the cover comprise plastic.
However, Jenkins discloses a housing and a cover comprise plastic (see Col. 1 Ln. 15-18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the housing and the cover of Suzuki comprise plastic, as taught by Jenkins, as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Leshing, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Regarding claim 12, Suzuki in view of Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 11, wherein the third region (35 of Suzuki) is a fused area (as depicted in annotated Fig. 7; and in pg. 5 fourth paragraph from the bottom of Suzuki teaches the tip end of pin 35 is heated and caulked).
Regarding claim 13, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the first region (portion of 34 penetrating through 28 of Suzuki) is greater than a thickness of the printed circuit board (3 as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 14, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1, wherein an upper surface (upper surface of 35 in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki as modified by Jenkins in Fig. 2g) of the third region (35 of Suzuki) is disposed below an upper surface of the cover (18 of Suzuki as depicted in Fig. 2g of Jenkins).
Regarding claim 15, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 2, wherein a side surface (side surface of 35 in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki) of the third region (35 of Suzuki) is spaced apart from an inner surface (inner surface of 20 of Suzuki) of the coupling groove (20; as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 16, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1, wherein the housing (19 of Suzuki) includes a side portion (side portion of 19 in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki), a lower surface portion (lower outer surface of 19 in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki) disposed at a bottom of the side portion (side portion of 19 of Suzuki), and an upper surface portion (inner upper surface of 19 in annotated Fig 7 of Suzuki) disposed at an upper end of the side portion (side portion of 19 of Suzuki), and wherein the first region (portion of 34 penetrating through 28 of Suzuki) protrudes upward from the upper surface of the upper surface portion (inner upper surface of 19 as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 17, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1, wherein the third region (35 of Suzuki) has (a hemispheroid shape as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki; this is considered to be within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the usage of “hemispherical”).
Suzuki in view of Jenkins does not explicitly disclose a narrower interpretation of hemispherical shape, if such a shape is intended.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the third region of Suzuki in view of Jenkins have a hemispherical shape, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding claim 18, Suzuki in view Jenkins discloses the electric equipment according to claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the cover (18 of Suzuki) is disposed in the third region (35 as depicted in annotated Fig. 7 of Suzuki).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 21-23 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in the claim, a combination of limitations that “a coupling groove formed on an upper surface and protruded upward from a bottom surface of the coupling groove, and
a second hole penetrating a lower surface from the bottom surface of the coupling groove,
wherein the method comprises the steps of:
(a) penetrating through the first hole and the second hole by the first coupling portion; and
(b) forming a protrusion inside the coupling groove by fusing the first coupling portion with heat or laser
and wherein a height of the first coupling portion protruded from the bottom surface of the coupling groove is the same as a height of the second coupling portion protruded from the bottom surface of the coupling groove”.
None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Claim 22 depending from claim 19 is therefore allowable.
Regarding claim 21, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in the claim, a combination of limitations that “a coupling groove formed on an upper surface and protruded upward from a bottom surface of the coupling groove, and
a second hole penetrating a lower surface from the bottom surface of the coupling groove,
wherein the method comprises the steps of:
(a) penetrating through the first hole and the second hole by the first coupling portion; and
(b) forming a protrusion inside the coupling groove by fusing the first coupling portion or the second coupling portion with heat or laser, and
wherein a height of the first coupling portion protruded from a bottom surface of the coupling groove is greater than a height of the second coupling portion protruded from a bottom surface of the coupling groove”.
None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding claim 23, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in the claim, a combination of limitations that “a coupling groove formed on an upper surface and protruded upward from a bottom surface of the coupling groove, and
a second hole penetrating a lower surface from the bottom surface of the coupling groove,
wherein the method comprises the steps of:
(a) penetrating through the first hole and the second hole by the first coupling portion; and
(b) forming a protrusion inside the coupling groove by fusing the first coupling portion or the second coupling portion with heat or laser, and
wherein a protruding height of the second coupling portion from a bottom surface of the coupling groove is less than 1/2 of a protruding height of the first coupling portion from the bottom surface of the coupling groove”.
None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER L AUGUSTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 3 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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/CHRISTOPHER L AUGUSTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights