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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/27/2024, 08/27/2024, 07/18/2025 and 11/26/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim 2 is 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.
Claim2 recites the limitation "the second magnetizer" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the location of the second magnetizer.
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 1-6 ,15-18, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xiamen [CN 218385036U], Applicant cited Art, see machine translation.
Claim 1, Xiamen discloses a relay [figure 5], comprising: a contact container [10] comprising an insulating cover [11a] and a yoke plate [13], the insulating cover being connected [via 12] with a side surface of the yoke plate [figure 3], the insulating cover and the yoke plate together enclosed to form a contact chamber [101; figure 3], the insulating cover being provided with a pair of first through holes [102], each first through hole is in communication with the contact chamber [figure 3]; a pair of static contact leading-out terminals [20] passing through the pair of first through holes [figure 3], respectively; a fixing member [70; figure 11], arranged within the contact container and fixedly connected with the yoke plate [figure 11]; a movable member [53] movably arranged within the contact chamber and comprising a movable contact piece [54], the movable contact piece configured to come into contacted with or separated from the pair of static contact leading-out terminals; a moving part [40] movable connected to the fixing member [70, via 42/44]; and a first magnetizer [40] arranged within the contact chamber and connected with the moving part [figure 3]; the first magnetizer being arranged at one side of the movable contact piece facing the static contact leading-out terminals [figure 3]; wherein the first magnetizer is movable relative to the movable member through the moving part and is configured to adjust a distance between the first magnetizer and the movable member according to a value of a current flowing through the movable contact piece [figures 65 and 8].
Claim 2, as best understood, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the distance between the first magnetizer [40] and a second magnetizer [55] is a maximum distance between the first magnetizer and the second magnetizer.
Claim 3, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the first magnetizer [40] moves between a first position [P1] and a second position [P2] through the moving part; at the first position, the distance between the first magnetizer and the movable member is a first distance [figure 6], and at the second position, the distance between the first magnetizer and the movable member is a second distance, and the first distance is greater than the second distance [figure 8].
Claim 4, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 3, wherein at the second position, the second distance between the first magnetizer and the movable member is equal to zero [figure 8].
Claim 5, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 3, wherein the first magnetizer [40] is located at the first position [figure 6], and the value of the current flowing through the movable contact piece [54] is less than or equal to a threshold current; when the value of the current flowing through the movable contact piece is greater than the threshold current, the first magnetizer [40] moves from the first position to the second position [page 2 highlighted portion].
Claim 6, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, further comprising: a first elastic part [44] for providing an elastic force to the moving part [40], so that the first magnetizer has a trend to move away from the movable member [53].
Claim 15, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 6, wherein both the first magnetizer [40] and the first elastic part [44] are arranged between the pair of the static contact leading-out terminals [20; figure 3].
Claim 16, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 6, wherein the first elastic part comprises a reed or a spring [44].
Claim17, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein a moving direction of the first magnetizer relative to the movable member is a direction in which the movable contact piece is in contact with or separated from the static contact leading-out terminals [both move vertically as shown in figure 3].
Claim 18, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the moving part [40] is movably arranged at a side of the movable member [53] facing the static contact leading-out terminals [20, figure 4] and the moving part [40] is located between the pair of the static contact leading-out terminals.
Claim 20, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the fixing member [70] and the yoke plate [13] form an accommodation space, and both the movable member [53] and the first magnetizer [40] are movably arranged within the accommodation space [figures 6, 8 and 11].
Claim 21, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the movable member [53] further comprises: a second magnetizer [55], being fixedly connected to one side of the movable contact piece facing away from the first magnetizer [40; figure 5], and the second magnetizer is configured to form a magnetic circuit together with the first magnetizer.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiamen [CN 218385036U], Applicant cited Art, see machine translation.
Claim 19, Xiamen discloses the relay according to claim 1, with the exception of both the moving part and fixing member are made of a metal material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention select the material of the moving part and fixing member to achieve a desired magnetic interaction therebetween since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select one particular material or another are obvious variants to those skilled in the art so long as the substitution of materials is not beyond the abilities of the person skilled in the art. See Ritchie v. Vast Resources, 563 F3d 1334, 90 USPQ2d 1668 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-14 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 Bernard Rojas whose telephone number is (571)272-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. thru Fri. 7:00 am - 4:00 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, Shawki S Ismail can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/BERNARD ROJAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837