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 .
This office action is in response to amendments filed on January 12, 2024.
Claims 1-12 have been amended.
Claims 13-15 have been added.
Claims 1-15 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submission of the Information Disclosure Statement dated January 12, 2024 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609, a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the office action.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a suction state recognition unit configured to recognize, a data generator configured to generate, an operating unit configured to input, a display controller configured to control in claim 1, a data generator configured to generate, an operating unit configured to input, a display controller configured to control in claim 2, the display controller configured to control in claim 3, the display controller configured to control in claim 4, the display controller configured to control in claim 5, the display controller configured to control in claim 6, the display controller configured to control in claim 7, the display controller configured to control in claim 8, the display controller configured to control in claim 9, the data generator configured to generate, the display controller configured to control in claim 10, the data generator configured to generate, the display controller configured to control in claim 11, the display controller configured to control in claim 12, the display controller configured to control in claim 13, the display controller configured to control in claim 14, and the display controller configured to control in claim 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification states a suction state recognition unit is software ([0023]), a data generator is hardware ([0050] and Figure 5 reference element 1452), an operating unit is hardware ([0048]), and a display controller is hardware ([0050] and Figure 5 reference element 1453).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-3, 6-9, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (US20240027364A1) in further view of Yamazaki et al. (US20150296629A1) and Serizawa (JP2008077644A).
Regarding claim 1, Mori teaches a component mounting system comprising:
a component mounting line including at least a mounting machine configured to produce a component loading board with a component loaded (FIG. 4 schematically illustrates an example of the structure of a manufacturing facility in a surface mounting line for printed circuit boards ... As illustrated in FIG. 4 , in the surface mounting line, as manufacturing devices, there are provided ... a mounter X2)([0083] and [0084]); and
a management device configured to manage production of the component loading board in the mounting machine (The manufacturing devices X1 to X3 and the inspection devices Y1 to Y4 described above are connected to a management device 1)([0091]),
wherein the mounting machine includes:
a feeder that supplies the component (FIG. 6 is a diagram schematically illustrating the structure of the mounter X2. The mounter X2 includes ... a plurality of feeders 21 for supplying electronic components P)([0097]);
a loading head including a suction nozzle that suctions the component to obtain the component loading board by loading the component suctioned by the suction nozzle on a board (a movable head 22 for picking up the electronic components P, a plurality of nozzles 23 attached to the head 22, a vacuum pump 24 for controlling the air pressure of each nozzle ... which causes the nozzles 23 to suck and convey necessary electronic components P from the feeders 21, and to sequentially place the electronic components P on the board B)([0097] and [0098]); and
a suction state recognition unit configured to recognize a suction state of the component by the suction nozzle and output suction error information when a suction error indicating an abnormality in the suction state occurs (contact sensors 27 for measuring the contact pressures at the nozzle end surfaces, pressure sensors 28 for measuring the air pressures of the nozzles, and the like, as an observation system for detecting abnormalities of operations of the mounter X2 itself)([0097]; sensors recognize current suction state (i.e., pressure) and transmits operational abnormalities),
the management device includes:
a storage configured to accumulate and store management data in which production factor information to identify production factors indicated by one of the component, the feeder, the suction nozzle, and the loading head used in the production of the component loading board is associated with the suction error information for each suction of the component by the suction nozzle (As illustrated in FIG. 5 , the management device 1 includes ... a manufacturing abnormality information acquisition section 13, a manufacturing abnormality information DB 131 ... the manufacturing log information includes ... manufacturing abnormality information associated with information (nozzle IDs, feeder IDs) about the device members which processed the respective components ... The manufacturing abnormality information acquisition section 13 acquires the aforementioned manufacturing log information ... stores the manufacturing log information in the manufacturing abnormality information DB 131)([0094], [0098], and [0103]; a management device obtains production factor information (i.e., log) which identifies production factors (e.g., devices such as nozzle/feeder) associated with abnormalities and stores the log in a database);
a display configured to display various data (management device 1 is constituted by a general-purpose computer system including ... a display device 10)([0091]);
an operating unit configured to input a command about a display mode of the display (an input device (a keyboard, a mouse, a controller, a touch panel or the like)([0091]; an input device (e.g., mouse) provides input into a user interface); and a
display controller configured to control the display in response to the command input into the operating unit …. the display controller is configured to control the display such that an error data set is displayed with the error count data … (management device 1 is constituted by a general-purpose computer system … … FIG. 8 illustrates an example of a screen displayed on the display device … device members and components are collectively displayed ... as numerical values, the aggregated values of abnormalities of respective sorts regarding respective devices)([0091], [0107], and [0108]; a display controller in a general purpose computing system generates a user interface for user interaction; exemplary generated user interface including abnormality information such as number of errors for devices is shown in Figure 8).
Although Mori discloses presenting a user interface including a displaying errors (The display device 10 may display, thereon, a screen similar to the screen (see FIG. 3 ) outputted in the manufacturing facility management system 9 according to the aforementioned example of application. However, the screen displayed on the display device 10 is not limited thereto. FIG. 8 illustrates an example of a screen displayed on the display device)([0107]; Figures 3 and 8 – a user interface including manufacturing errors is shown). Mori differs from the claim in that Mori fails to teach a command to select production factors and displaying associated error information.
However, a command to select production factors and displaying associated error information is taught by Yamazaki (When any one of the “component” 32 d, the “feeder” 32 e, and the “nozzle” 32 f is operated, a mounting error display method can be switched by component (electronic component), by feeder (tape feeder), and by nozzle (suction nozzle) and can be displayed in an error display field 32 g ... In the illustrated example, the “component” 32 d is selected in the display switch button 32 c, the type of the component that is an operation object is displayed in each row of the “type” 32 h, and the occurrence frequencies of the occurring errors are displayed in respective cells of the error display field 32 g)([0034-0035]; user interaction selects production factors (e.g., devices such as feeder/nozzle) and a corresponding error display is presented).
The examiner notes Mori and Yamazaki teach displaying errors of mounting components. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mori to include the commanding and displaying of Yamazaki such that a command to select production factors is inputted and associated error information is displayed. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid a user in diagnosing errors by filtering them according to user selection.
Although Mori-Yamazaki discloses of generating error count data about an occurrence count of suction error in associating with production factor information (Mori - manufacturing abnormality information (the number of image determination processing errors, the number of component non-suction errors))([0099]). Mori-Yamazaki differs from the claim in that Mori-Yamazaki fails to teach generating an error loss amount about component amount loss caused by suction error.
However, generating an error loss amount about component amount loss caused by suction error is taught by Serizawa (FIG. 11 shows a component loss screen of the electronic component mounting apparatus ... During the operation of the line, each electronic component mounting apparatus 1 loses an electronic component (component loss) due to a suction mistake ... The host computer device 170 also collects information on component loss in each electronic component mounting device 1 and stores it ... For each of these electronic components, the “number of picked up” and “number of picked up errors” ... the “unit price of the parts”, and the “total number of error parts” multiplied by the number of picked up errors and the unit price of the parts are displayed)([0053-0055]; Figure 11 – generating an error lost amount (i.e., total amount loss (i.e., number of errors x unit price)) due to suction error is shown).
The examiner notes Mori, Yamazaki, and Serizawa teach displaying errors of mounting components. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mori-Yamazaki to include the generating of Serizawa such that an error lost amount caused by suction error is generated. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid in managing operational efficiency by identifying lost revenue.
Regarding claim 2, Mori teaches a component mounting system comprising:
a component mounting line including a mounting machine that produces a component loading board with a component mounted, and an inspection device that inspects a loading state of the component on the component loading board (FIG. 4 schematically illustrates an example of the structure of a manufacturing facility in a surface mounting line for printed circuit boards ... As illustrated in FIG. 4 , in the surface mounting line, as manufacturing devices, there are provided ... a mounter X2 … A component inspection device Y2 is a device for inspecting the state of placement of electronic components with respect to the board carried out from the mounter X2)([0083], [0084], and [0087]); and
a management device configured to manage production of the component loading board in the mounting machine (The manufacturing devices X1 to X3 and the inspection devices Y1 to Y4 described above are connected to a management device 1)([0091]),
wherein the mounting machine includes:
a feeder that supplies the component (FIG. 6 is a diagram schematically illustrating the structure of the mounter X2. The mounter X2 includes ... a plurality of feeders 21 for supplying electronic components P)([0097]); and
a loading head including a suction nozzle that suctions the component to obtain the component loading board by loading the component suctioned by the suction nozzle on a board (a movable head 22 for picking up the electronic components P, a plurality of nozzles 23 attached to the head 22, a vacuum pump 24 for controlling the air pressure of each nozzle ... which causes the nozzles 23 to suck and convey necessary electronic components P from the feeders 21, and to sequentially place the electronic components P on the board B)([0097] and [0098]),
the inspection device is configured to output loading error information when a loading error indicating an abnormality in the loading state of the component on the component loading board occurs (The component inspection device Y2 measures components (which may be portions of components such as component bodies or electrodes) placed ... from the result of the measurement, the component inspection device Y2 determines whether or not the components have normal values … The inspection information acquisition section 14 acquires information about the result of inspection of the board after mounting (in particular, information about actual defects and overlooking), from the component inspection device Y2)([0087] and [0104]; abnormality information is transmitted),
the management device includes:
a storage configured to accumulate and store management data in which production factor information to identify production factors indicated by one of the component, the feeder, the suction nozzle, and the loading head used in the production of the component loading board is associated with the loading error information for each suction of the component by the suction nozzle (As illustrated in FIG. 5 , the management device 1 includes ... a manufacturing abnormality information acquisition section 13, a manufacturing abnormality information DB 131 ... the manufacturing log information includes ... manufacturing abnormality information associated with information (nozzle IDs, feeder IDs) about the device members which processed the respective components ... The manufacturing abnormality information acquisition section 13 acquires the aforementioned manufacturing log information ... stores the manufacturing log information in the manufacturing abnormality information DB 131)([0094], [0098], and [0103]; a management device obtains production factor information (i.e., log) which identifies production factors (e.g., devices such as nozzle/feeder) associated with abnormalities and stores the log in a database);
a display configured to display various data (management device 1 is constituted by a general-purpose computer system including ... a display device 10)([0091]);
an operating unit configured to input a command about a display mode of the display (an input device (a keyboard, a mouse, a controller, a touch panel or the like)([0091]; an input device (e.g., mouse) provides input into a user interface); and
a display controller configured to control the display in response to the command input into the operating unit … the display controller is configured to control the display such that an error data set is displayed with the error count data … (management device 1 is constituted by a general-purpose computer system … … FIG. 8 illustrates an example of a screen displayed on the display device … device members and components are collectively displayed ... as numerical values, the aggregated values of abnormalities of respective sorts regarding respective devices)([0091], [0107], and [0108]; a display controller in a general purpose computing system generates a user interface for user interaction; exemplary generated user interface including abnormality information such as number of errors for devices is shown in Figure 8).
Although Mori discloses presenting a user interface including a displaying errors (The display device 10 may display, thereon, a screen similar to the screen (see FIG. 3 ) outputted in the manufacturing facility management system 9 according to the aforementioned example of application. However, the screen displayed on the display device 10 is not limited thereto. FIG. 8 illustrates an example of a screen displayed on the display device)([0107]; Figures 3 and 8 – a user interface including manufacturing errors is shown). Mori differs from the claim in that Mori fails to teach a command to select production factors and displaying associated error information.
However, a command to select production factors and displaying associated error information is taught by Yamazaki (When any one of the “component” 32 d, the “feeder” 32 e, and the “nozzle” 32 f is operated, a mounting error display method can be switched by component (electronic component), by feeder (tape feeder), and by nozzle (suction nozzle) and can be displayed in an error display field 32 g ... In the illustrated example, the “component” 32 d is selected in the display switch button 32 c, the type of the component that is an operation object is displayed in each row of the “type” 32 h, and the occurrence frequencies of the occurring errors are displayed in respective cells of the error display field 32 g)([0034-0035]; user interaction selects production factors (e.g., devices such as feeder/nozzle) and a corresponding error display is presented).
The examiner notes Mori and Yamazaki teach displaying errors of mounting components. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mori to include the commanding and displaying of Yamazaki such that a command to select production factors is inputted and associated error information is displayed. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid a user in diagnosing errors by filtering them according to user selection.
Although Mori-Yamazaki discloses of generating error count data about an occurrence count of loading error in associating with production factor information (Mori - manufacturing abnormality information (the number of image determination processing errors, the number of component non-suction errors))([0099]). Mori-Yamazaki differs from the claim in that Mori-Yamazaki fails to teach generating an error loss amount about component amount loss caused by loading error.
However, generating an error loss amount about component amount loss caused by loading error is taught by Serizawa (FIG. 11 shows a component loss screen of the electronic component mounting apparatus ... During the operation of the line, each electronic component mounting apparatus 1 loses an electronic component (component loss) due to a suction mistake ... The host computer device 170 also collects information on component loss in each electronic component mounting device 1 and stores it ... For each of these electronic components, the “number of picked up” and “number of picked up errors” ... the “unit price of the parts”, and the “total number of error parts” multiplied by the number of picked up errors and the unit price of the parts are displayed)([0053-0055]; Figure 11 – generating an error lost amount (i.e., total amount loss (i.e., number of errors x unit price)) due to loading error is shown).
The examiner notes Mori, Yamazaki, and Serizawa teach displaying errors of mounting components. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mori-Yamazaki to include the generating of Serizawa such that an error lost amount caused by loading error is generated. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid in managing operational efficiency by identifying lost revenue.
Regarding claim 3, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 1 or 2, wherein when the plurality of pieces of production factor information is set for the production factors, the display control unit is configured to control the display unit such that a data set group of a plurality of the error data sets associated with the plurality of pieces of production factor information is displayed (Serizawa - When any one of the “component” 32 d, the “feeder” 32 e, and the “nozzle” 32 f is operated, a mounting error display method can be switched by component (electronic component), by feeder (tape feeder), and by nozzle (suction nozzle) and can be displayed in an error display field 32 g)([0034]; a user can select multiple production factors (e.g., feeder, nozzle, etc.) and a corresponding error display is presented).
Regarding claim 6, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 3, wherein when a command to set a narrowing condition for narrowing the plurality of pieces of production factor information set for the production factors is input via the operating unit, the display controller is configured to control the display such that the data set group including a specific error data set associated with the production factor information that satisfies the narrowing condition among the plurality of pieces of production factor information is displayed (Yamazaki - When any one of the “component” 32 d, the “feeder” 32 e, and the “nozzle” 32 f is operated, a mounting error display method can be switched by component (electronic component), by feeder (tape feeder), and by nozzle (suction nozzle) and can be displayed in an error display field 32 g ... In the illustrated example, the “component” 32 d is selected in the display switch button 32 c, the type of the component that is an operation object is displayed in each row of the “type” 32 h, and the occurrence frequencies of the occurring errors are displayed in respective cells of the error display field 32 g)([0034-0035]; user selection of a production factor (e.g., component) results in narrowing error display to present only associated error occurrences).
Regarding claim 7, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 3, wherein with the data set group associated with the plurality of pieces of production factor information displayed in the display, when a command to display temporal transition of data associated with one piece of production factor information among the plurality of pieces of production factor information is input via the operating unit, the display controller is configured to control the display such that an error count transition graph indicating temporal transition of the error count data associated with the one piece of production factor information and an error loss amount transition graph indicating temporal transition of the error loss amount data are displayed (although Mori does not disclose of a command selecting a singular piece of information and displaying an error count and error loss chart, said selecting and displaying is taught by Yamazaki (When a selection operation such as a double click is performed for a pointer 32 m to point to a specific row in the error display field 32 g, the display screen 18 a is shifted to ... FIG. 5 ... Details of the error occurrence situation of the type specified in the display switch button 33 c is displayed, in a graphical form, in the error occurrence situation display field 33 h with the horizontal axis corresponding to a time axis 33 i and the vertical axis corresponding to two types of indices, one being an occurrence frequency index axis 33 m that shows an error occurrence frequency and the other being a productivity index axis 33 p that shows an actual operation capacity such as measured actual operation time)([0036] and [0038]). The examiner notes Mori and Yamazaki teach displaying errors of mounting components. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mori to include the selecting and displaying of Yamazaki such that a command to select singular piece of information is inputted and associated error loss amount transition graph indicating temporal transition of the error loss amount data is displayed. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid a user in diagnosing errors by filtering them according to user selection).
Regarding claim 8, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 3, wherein the display controller is configured to control the display such that the plurality of error data sets that constitute the data set group is displayed in order of the amount of loss of the component (Serizawa - as shown in FIG. 11, the information regarding the component loss for every component supply apparatus 18 of the electronic component mounting apparatus 1 can be displayed)([0054]; Figure 11 - displaying amount of loss in order is shown).
Regarding claim 9, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 3, wherein the display controller is configured to control the display such that the plurality of error data sets that constitute the data set group is displayed in order of the occurrence count of the error (Mori - As illustrated in FIG. 8 , in the another example of the screen displayed thereon, device members and components are collectively displayed as candidates for improvement ... Further, there are displayed, as numerical values, the aggregated values of abnormalities of respective sorts regarding respective devices as the candidates for improvement ... The respective devices are displayed in descending order of number of actual defects)([0108]).
Regarding claim 12, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 3, wherein
the component mounting line includes a plurality of mounting lines (Moni - the management device 1 according to the aforementioned embodiment may also include a notification unit as follows. Namely, when an abnormality has been detected in the manufacturing lines)([0120]; plurality of lines are monitored), and
when a command to display the data set group for each of the plurality of mounting lines is input via the operating unit, the display controller is configured to control the display such that the data set groups corresponding to the plurality of mounting lines are simultaneously displayed in display regions individually set for the plurality of mounting lines (Mori - As illustrated in FIG. 8 , in the another example of the screen displayed thereon, device members and components are collectively displayed as candidates for improvement ... Further, there are displayed, as numerical values, the aggregated values of abnormalities of respective sorts regarding respective devices as the candidates for improvement)([0108]; user input results in display of a line; an exemplary display of data corresponding to line 2 is shown in Figure 8).
Regarding claim 13, Mori-Yamazaki-Serizawa teach the component mounting system according to claim 2, wherein when a plurality of pieces of production factor information is set for the production factors, the display controller is configured to control the display such that a data set group of a plurality of the error data sets associated with the plurality of pieces of production factor information is displayed (Serizawa - When any one of the “component” 32 d, the “feeder” 32 e, and the “nozzle” 32 f is operated, a mounting error display method can be switched by component (electronic component), by feeder (tape feeder), and by nozzle (suction nozzle) and can be displayed in an error display field 32 g)([0034]; a user can select multiple production factors (e.g., feeder, nozzle, etc.) and a corresponding error display is presented).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 10, 11, 14, and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider the reference fully when responding to this action. The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for monitoring a production line for mounting error.
US5088187
US6633782B1
US20020073536A1
US20180364687A1
US20210105920A1
US20210233226A1
US20240061408A1
US20240085896A1
US20240319703A1
WO2013183201A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yongjia Pan whose telephone number is (571)270-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/YONGJIA PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights