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
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
Misnumbered claims 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 have been renumbered 15, 11, 12, 13 and 14 respectively. New claim “11” will be changed to be claim 15 and “12-15” will return to being claims 11-14.
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 1-15 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.
The term “useful” in claims 1, 4, 8 and 9 is a relative term which render the claims indefinite. The term “useful” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear what makes a signal useful or not and therefore the term is indefinite. Claims 2-15 are rejected for depending from claim 1.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 6 recites the broad recitation “at least 1 mm”, and the claim also recites “preferably at least 1.5mm” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Claim 6 is further rejected because the use of the term “preferably wherein” on line 2.
Regarding claims 10 and 14, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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 present invention relates to” and “comprising”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-4, 6, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito, US 3,712,045.
Regarding claim 1, Ito discloses a watch comprising: a clock generator arrangement with a clock generator (clam 1), an electronic useful signal generating device (Fig 1, 12-14) and an electromechanical device (16), a gear train (16), a drive device (15) for driving the gear train, and a watch display device (col 1 line 15), which is connected to the gear train, wherein: the clock generator has a predetermined oscillation frequency (claim 1), the electronic useful signal generating device is set up to generate a useful signal based on the oscillation frequency of the clock generator (abstract), the electromechanical device is movable via the useful signal generated by the electronic useful signal generating device, whereby the electromechanical device engages directly or indirectly with the gear train in a clocked manner, and the watch display device is movable by the gear train (Fig 1 and also see Fig 7).
Regarding claim 2, Ito discloses the electromechanical device indirectly engages with the gear train, whereto the watch comprises an escapement (Fig 7, 161) which is in engagement with the gear train and is drivable by the electromechanical device.
Regarding claim 3, Ito discloses the electromechanical device is formed as an actuator (Fig 7).
Regarding claim 4, Ito discloses the actuator comprises a magnetic anchor and a magnetic coil that is set up to move the magnetic anchor via the useful signal (Fig 7, see magnet piece 66, and coils La and Lb).
Regarding claim 6, Ito discloses the clock generator is formed as piezoelectric oscillation crystal (claim 2 discloses a crystal vibrator having a relatively high natural frequency, and a temperature sensitive capacitor for compensating temperature coefficient of said vibrator.), preferably wherein: the piezoelectric oscillation crystal is designed in the form of a fork oscillator, and/or the piezoelectric oscillation crystal has a length, a width and a height each of at least 1 mm, preferably of at least 1.5 mm, and/or wherein the piezoelectric oscillation crystal is designed in the form of a cuboid.
Regarding claim 7, Ito discloses the piezoelectric oscillation crystal is a quartz oscillation crystal (abstract) or a tourmaline oscillation crystal.
Regarding claim 9, Ito discloses the electronic useful signal generating device has a frequency divider (12) and/or a pulse counter.
Claims 1, 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Evans, US 6,359,840.
Regarding claim 1, Evans discloses a watch comprising: a clock generator arrangement with a clock generator (Fig 2, 20), an electronic useful signal generating device (21) and an electromechanical device (22), a gear train (23), a drive device (22) for driving the gear train, and a watch display device (24), which is connected to the gear train, wherein: the clock generator has a predetermined oscillation frequency (32768 Hz), the electronic useful signal generating device is set up to generate a useful signal based on the oscillation frequency of the clock generator (1 Hz), the electromechanical device is movable via the useful signal generated by the electronic useful signal generating device, whereby the electromechanical device engages directly or indirectly with the gear train in a clocked manner, and the watch display device is movable by the gear train (Fig 2).
Regarding claim 5, Evans discloses the electromechanical device is formed as a stepper motor (22).
Regarding claim 10, Evans discloses a power supply device (27) for power supplying the electronic clock generator arrangement with electrical energy, which is formed as a rechargeable battery, and in particular also an energy-harvesting device, which is set up to charge the rechargeable battery.
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 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito in view of Aoki, US 2012/0195172.
Ito does not explicitly disclose a self-winding or hand winding mechanism.
The similar timepiece of Aoki discloses the use of self-winding mechanism [0087].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ito to include a self-winding mechanism for the purpose of generating power by taking in kinetic energy and thus prolonging the useful life the power supply.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito.
Ito does not explicitly disclose the claimed frequency. However, the frequency divider would have 8 Hz as an intermediate step and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a convenient frequency, such as 8 Hz, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in the instant application, page 12, paragraph [0071], applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 11, 12 and 15 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed clock generator is formed as an oscillation system, which comprises an optical fiber, a light transmitter for feeding a clocked light signal into the optical fiber and a light receiver for receiving the light signal and for generating an electrical signal based on the received light signal, wherein the electronic useful signal generating device is set up to generate the useful signal based on a frequency of the electrical signal.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest the drive device comprises a drive spring and the electromechanical device is set up to move such, that, in the case of exhausted tension of the drive spring, the electromechanical device drives the gear train.
Regarding claims 12 and 15, the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest further comprising a charge state measuring device, which is set up to measure a charge state of the rechargeable battery, and a control unit, which is set up to interrupt a power supply of the electromechanical device, when the charge state of the rechargeable battery is less than a predetermined charge state value.
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