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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the locking portions that “are driving teeth formed on the drive transmission gear to mesh with the tooth portions of the inner rotating ring” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The figures and specification label the locking portions has the teeth 78 meshing with lock receiving portions 81 (see Fig. 7), while a separate set of teeth 77 are the driving teeth that mesh with the teeth 61 of the inner rotating ring. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 8 recites that “the locking portions are driving teeth formed on the drive transmission gear to mesh with the tooth portions of the inner rotating ring.” Because the figures and specification show teeth of the locking portions meshing with the lock receiving portion and a separate set of driving teeth meshing with the tooth portions of the inner rotating ring, this limitation has been read as -the locking portions are driving teeth formed on the drive transmission gear-.
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 1-8 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.
Claims 1-7 all recite “the locking portion.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations because claim 1 recites “a plurality of locking portions.” For the purposes of examination, “the locking portion” has been read as -the locking portions- and “is” has been read as -are- where appropriate.
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 1-2 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Yao (US 20250076815) in view of Oshio (JP 2010139399).
Regarding claim 1, Yao discloses (Figs. 5 and 7-8) a timepiece comprising: a case (abstract); a dial having a circular plate shape (all timepieces have a dial, and Fig. 1 shows a circular plate shape) and accommodated in the case (all dials are in a watch case); and a rotation restriction unit (3) configured to restrict an operation of the rotation operation unit ([0016]), the rotation operation unit includes a rotation shaft portion (22) rotatable around a shaft center (201) along a radial direction of the dial (Fig. 5), and a drive transmission gear (203) provided on the rotation shaft portion, a plurality of locking portions (81) is formed in the drive transmission gear at different positions in a direction around a shaft (of 203), the rotation restriction unit includes a lock receiving portion (30) biased toward the locking portions and detachably locked to the locking portions (Fig. 5 shows 30 locked to the locking portions of 203, and Fig. 6 shows 30 unlocked), and the lock receiving portion restricts rotation of the drive transmission gear by being locked to the locking portion ([0016]: the lock receiving portion prevents rotation of the drive transmission gear with respect to the lock receiving portion).
Yao does not show an inner rotating ring formed in a ring shape along an outer peripheral edge of the dial and rotatable in a circumferential direction, the rotation operation unit being configured to rotate the inner rotating ring, the inner rotating ring including a plurality of tooth portions, and the drive transmission gear meshing with the tooth portions to rotate the inner rotating ring.
Oshio teaches (Fig. 2) an inner rotating ring (23) formed in a ring shape along an outer peripheral edge of a dial and rotatable in a circumferential direction ([0030]), a rotation operation unit (42) being configured to rotate the inner rotating ring, the inner rotating ring including a plurality of tooth portions (233), and a drive transmission gear (423) meshing with the tooth portions (233) to rotate the inner rotating ring ([0043] of the translation).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Oshio’s drive transmission gear and inner rotating ring with Yao’s drive transmission gear. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide a scale with rotatable, shifting indices for a user to control so as to provide accurate information based on different situations ([0003] of Oshio).
Regarding claim 2, Yao discloses (Figs. 13-14) the timepiece according to claim 1, wherein the locking portion (81) is formed in a convex shape protruding outward in a radial direction of the drive transmission gear (Fig. 14), and the lock receiving portion has a receiving recess (30 and grooves between 82) to be engaged with the locking portion in a concave-convex manner ([0062]).
Regarding claims 4-6, Yao discloses (Figs. 13-14) the timepiece according to claim 1, wherein the number of locking portions is the same as that of driving teeth (810) of the drive transmission gear (Fig. 14), and the positions of the locking portions in the direction around the shaft are positions corresponding to the driving teeth. The drive transmission gear (203) meshes with the lock receiving portion (30 and Figs. 7-8), and since the drive transmission gear and lock receiving portion have revolutionary symmetry, the number of ways to mesh, i.e., the number of locking portions, is the same as the number of driving teeth.
Regarding claim 7, Yao discloses (Figs. 7, 14) the timepiece according to claim 1, wherein the locking portions (81) are flat portions formed on the drive transmission gear (formed on 202 in Fig. 7), and the lock receiving portion is locked to the flat portion by surface contact (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Yao discloses (Figs. 7, 14) the timepiece according to claim 1, wherein the locking portions are driving teeth (810) formed on the drive transmission gear (203), and the lock receiving portion (30, 82) is engaged with the driving teeth in a concave-convex manner (Figs. 5-6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 3, the prior art does not show or suggest a rotation restriction unit including a biasing unit configured to bias a lock receiving portion toward the locking portion by a bending elastic force, in combination with the other limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jang et al. (US 20220074731) discloses a crown of a watch coupled to an inner structure that measures the crown’s angular rotation (abstract, [0061]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Hwang whose telephone number is (571)272-1191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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.
/MATTHEW DANIEL HWANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2833
/EDWIN A. LEON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833