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 . Claims 1-10 and Claims 21-25 are pending in the current application. Claims 11-20 have been cancelled.
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.
Claims 2-5, 7, and 21-23, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Specifically, Claims 2-5 and 21-23 are rejected as the term “optionally” is indefinite.
Additionally, Claim 7 is rejected since there is no antecedent basis for the language “one or more convexly shaped regions.”
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, 6-10, 21, 22, 24, and 25, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ludwig et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 4,713,798, hereinafter “Ludwig”).
Specifically, regarding Claim 1, Ludwig discloses a switch comprising: a first cam (45; FIG. 19) engageable by a user and axially rotatable around a first axis by an operating angle (FIGS. 1 and 2) between an on position and an off position (FIGS. 3 and 5), a second cam (47) contacting the first cam (45), wherein: rotation of the first cam (45) causes rotation of the second cam (47) around the first axis (inherent after assembly; FIG. 19), and the second cam (47) comprises an axial cam portion (a portion of 47 in which 89 is inserted, hereinafter “89A”; FIG. 19, reproduced and annotated below) and a transverse cam portion (an outer perimeter of 47, hereinafter “TCP”; FIG. 19), the transverse cam portion (TCP) comprising a protrusion (PR) extending along a direction perpendicular to the first axis and two detents (D3, D4) arranged symmetrically either side of the protrusion (PR), wherein the two detents (D3, D4) are arranged at an oblique angle (FIG. 19), with respect to each other (FIG. 19), and one or more biasing members (50, 51) configured to exert a force on the transverse cam portion (TCP) of the second cam (47; FIG. 19), wherein the axial cam portion (89A) is configured, upon rotation of the second cam (47) by the first cam (45) and/or a rotation of the second cam (47) in response to the force exerted by the one or more biasing members (50, 51), to cause opening (FIG. 3) and closing (FIG. 5) of a current conduction path through the switch (col. 6, ll. 36-43).
PNG
media_image1.png
606
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Ludwig discloses a cam follower (91; FIG. 19) coupled to the one or more biasing members (50, 51), wherein a toggle point of the switch occurs when the protrusion (PR) of the transverse cam portion (TCP) aligns with an opposing protrusion of the cam follower (e.g., when one of PR is in contact with 91; FIG. 19).
Regarding Claim 3, Ludwig discloses that rotation of the second cam (47) towards the toggle point is caused by a user rotation of the first cam (45; via 44; FIGS. 1 and 3), and wherein said rotation of the second cam (47) causes the transverse cam portion (TCP) to compress the one or more biasing members (50, 51; FIGS. 3 and 5), wherein maximum compression of the one or more biasing members (50, 51) occurs at the toggle point (e.g., when one of PR is in contact with 91; FIG. 19).
Regarding Claim 4, Ludwig discloses that the one or more biasing members (50, 51) are configured to act on the transverse cam portion (TCP) after the toggle point to cause independent rotation of the second cam (47), wherein the independent rotation of the second cam (47) occurs until the protrusion of the cam follower (91) aligns with and is received by one of the two detents (D3, D4) of the transverse cam portion (TCP; as shown in the position of FIG. 19).
Regarding Claim 6, Ludwig discloses that the second cam (47) has a second protrusion (PR2) arranged opposite the first protrusion (PR), and a further two detents (detents into which each of 91 is inserted in FIG. 19, hereinafter “D3, D4”) arranged symmetrically either side of the second protrusion (PR), wherein the further two detents (D3, D4) are arranged at the oblique angle with respect to each other (FIG. 19).
Regarding Claim 7, Ludwig discloses that the protrusion (PR) of the transverse cam portion (TCP) of the second cam (47) is arranged at [an] end of one or more convexly shaped regions of the transverse cam portion (TCP; FIG. 19).
Regarding Claim 8, Ludwig discloses that there is a first rotational offset (i.e., zero degrees), between the rotation of the second cam (47) relative to the rotation of the first cam (45) around the first axis.
Regarding Claim 9, Ludwig discloses a bridge cam (52, 53, 54) contacting the axial cam portion (89A) of the second cam (47), wherein rotation of the axial cam portion (89A) of the second cam (47) causes rotation of the bridge cam (52, 53, 54) around the first axis, and wherein the rotation of the bridge cam (52, 53, 54) is configured to open and close the current conduction path through the switch (col. 6, ll. 54-59).
Regarding Claim 10, Ludwig discloses that rotation of the axial cam portion (89A; via 45 and rotary handle 44) of the second cam (47) causes rotation of the bridge cam (52, 53, 54) around the first axis after a second rotational off set (i.e., zero degrees; col. 6, ll. 54-59).
Regarding Claim 21, Ludwig discloses a bridge (61) that is axially displaceable along the first axis in response to rotation of the bridge cam (52, 53, 54), wherein the bridge comprises one or more moveable contacts (above 61; FIG. 4).
Regarding Claim 22, Ludwig discloses one or more fixed contacts (on each of 9, 12, and 13; see, e.g., FIG. 4), wherein the bridge is configured to bring the one or more moveable contacts into contact with the one or more fixed contacts of the switch (FIGS. 4 and 6), when the first cam (45) is in the on position (FIG. 3), to close the current conduction path (FIG. 5).
Regarding Claim 24, Ludwig (inherently) discloses a system comprising: the switch of claim 1, and, an electrical circuit configured to be electrically coupled to one or more fixed contacts of the switch (col. 4, ll. 8-11).
Regarding Claim 25, Ludwig (inherently) discloses a method for operating the switch of claim 1 to open and close a current conduction path (Abstract), the method comprising: rotating, by a user, the first cam (45; FIG. 19) around the first axis by at least the operating angle (via rotary handle 44), in response to the rotation of the first cam (45), rotating the second cam (47) which contacts the first cam (45) around the first axis (via the coupling shown in FIG. 19), exerting a force on the transverse cam portion (TCP) of the second cam (47) by the one or more biasing members (50, 51; FIG. 19), and causing, by rotation of the second cam (47) by the first cam (45) and/or a rotation of the second cam (47) in response to the force exerted by the one or more biasing members (50, 51), the axial cam portion (89A) to open or close the current conduction path through the switch (col. 6, ll. 36-43).
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 5 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ludwig.
Regarding Claim 5, Ludwig discloses substantially all of the limitations of the present invention but does not disclose the claimed angle. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such an angle between detents to effect activation and deactivation of the movable and stationary contacts since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (i.e., Ludwig, as discussed above with respect to Claim 1), discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 23, Ludwig discloses substantially all of the limitations of the present invention but does not disclose the claimed angle. However, it would have been obvious one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such angles to alter open and close switching dynamics. It has been concluded that absent any convincing showing of the criticality of the design, this particular design is nothing more than the inventor choice without departing from the scope of the invention. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Bentley (U.S. Pat. No. 2,399,906) discloses a switch comprising a cam and biasing members, but does not disclose the claimed second cam comprising an axial cam portion and transverse cam portion, as recited in Claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY R. JIMENEZ whose telephone number is 313-446-6518. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 1030am - 9pm.
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.
/ANTHONY R JIMENEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833