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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai (JP 2004319854 A).
Regarding claim 1, Kumagai discloses a mounting machine, comprising: a head (118; see Fig. 1) that includes a suction nozzle (206; see Fig. 2), the head being configured to suck a component at a distal end portion of the suction nozzle and mount the component on a board (see Para. 0028-0029); a sensor (208; see Fig. 2) that includes a light source (see Para. 0041) and a light receiver (see Para. 0041), the light source being configured to emit a light ray to the distal end portion of the suction nozzle (see Para. 0046), the light receiver being configured to receive the light ray emitted from the light source (see Para. 0046), the sensor being configured to output light intensity of the light ray received by the light receiver (see Para. 0041); and a controller that computes a first differential value by differentiating the light intensity of the light ray output from the sensor, and determines whether or not a suction state of the component sucked to the distal end portion of the suction nozzle when the suction nozzle passes through the light ray is defective based on the computed first differential value, wherein the controller determines that the suction state of the component is not defective when the first differential value is more than or equal to a first threshold value and is less than a second threshold value more than the first threshold value (see Para. 0066-0073).
Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a controller that computes a first differential value by differentiating the light intensity of the light ray output from the sensor, and determines whether or not a suction state of the component sucked to the distal end portion of the suction nozzle when the suction nozzle passes through the light ray is defective based on the computed first differential value, wherein the controller determines that the suction state of the component is not defective when the first differential value is more than or equal to a first threshold value and is less than a second threshold value more than the first threshold value on the mounting machine of Kumagai, as setting a certain range of numerical values denoting a suction state and determining that the suction state is normal if within a range is a design matter choice that a person skilled in the art could have selected, in order to determine the suction state of a component. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 2, Kumagai discloses the mounting machine as claimed in claim 1, wherein the controller determines that the component is not sucked to the distal end portion of the suction nozzle and generates and outputs a notification indicating that the suction state of the component is defective when it is determined that the first differential value is less than the first threshold value (see Para. 0078).
Regarding claim 3, Kumagai discloses the mounting machine as claimed in claim 1, wherein the controller generates and outputs a notification indicating that the suction state of the component is defective when it is determined that the first differential value is more than or equal to the second threshold value (see Para. 0078).
Regarding claim 10, Kumagai discloses the mounting machine as claimed in claim 1, wherein the head (118; see Fig. 1) includes a plurality of the suction nozzles (206; see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Kumagai discloses the mounting machine as claimed in claim 10, wherein the plurality of suction nozzles are aligned in a direction perpendicular to a direction in which the light source emits the light ray, and the head moves in the direction in which the plurality of suction nozzles are aligned (see Para. 0043; angle is 90 degrees).
Regarding claim 12, Kumagai discloses a suction state determination method executed by a terminal device including one or more computers connected to communicate with a mounting machine being configured to suck a component at a distal end portion of a suction nozzle and mount the component on a board (see Abstract), the method comprising: acquiring light intensity of a light ray emitted to the distal end portion of the suction nozzle and received by a light receiver (see Para. 0041); computing a differential value by differentiating the acquired light intensity of the light ray; and determining that a suction state of the component sucked to the distal end portion of the suction nozzle when the suction nozzle passes through the light ray is not defective when it is determined that the computed differential value is more than or equal to a first threshold value and is less than a second threshold value more than the first threshold value (see Para. 0066-0073).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4-9 is/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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REHMAN A QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)272-6262. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00am-5:00pm.
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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/REHMAN A QURESHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/GENE O CRAWFORD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights