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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10, filed 4/13/2024, are pending and are currently being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/13/2024 was filed before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. However, the examiner notes that the disclosed references do not appear to be relevant to the claimed invention in any way and therefore they are struck-through in the annotated IDS as they should not be considered part of the relevant art of record for this application. It is possible these references were mistakenly submitted and belong in a different application.
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 quantity of second transmission mechanism between one of the two rotating members and the output shaft being different from a quantity of second transmission mechanism between the other one of the two rotating members and the output shaft (claim 3), a light-emitting member arranged on the main body and/or a sound production member arranged on the main body (claim 9) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains implied language (ex. The present disclosure discloses…”). Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 4-5, “to two second gear tooth structures” should likely read “to two of the second gear tooth structures”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 7 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the bionic structure” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kramer US Pat. No. 3,331,463.
Kramer teaches:
In Reference to Claim 1
A swinging toy (toy with movable swinging portions, Fig. 1-7), comprising:
a main body member (main body 15);
a first transmission mechanism, comprising two rotating members arranged in a first direction, wherein the rotating members are rotatably arranged on the main body member (gears 20 and cam/cams 28/34 are rotatably arranged in the main body 15 and spaced laterally apart in a first lateral direction);
two swinging mechanisms, spaced apart from each other in the first direction and rotatably arranged on the main body member, wherein the two swinging mechanisms and the two rotating members are connected in a one-to-one correspondence transmission manner (swinging mechanisms 19 are laterally spaced apart in the first direction and rotatably arranged on body 15 pivotal about pins 23 and moved via cams 26 which are in transmission with gears and cams 20/28/34); and
a driving mechanism, arranged on the main body member (motor 18/35 having a drive shaft with a gear mounted in the body), wherein the driving mechanism is respectively connected to the two rotating members in a transmission manner (motor 35 connected to the rotating members via a transmission means of gears 20 and pair of cams 28 (Fig. 1-5) or single cam 34, Fig. 6-7),
wherein rotation directions of the two rotating members are opposite; and rotation axes of the two rotating members and rotation axes of the two swinging mechanisms are parallel to each other and are perpendicular to the first direction (rotation axes (through pivot pins 23 via 26) of the rotating members 19 are parallel to each other (horizontal from the front to rear of the body through the respective rotational portions) and are parallel to rotational axes of the cam(s) 28/34 and gears 20 which is perpendicular to the lateral first direction, wherein each rotatable member 19 rotates outward and inward as the cams rotate in opposite directions (the movable arms/members are positioned and function in mirror image to move outward from one another, then inward to one another as shown by the directional arrow lines of Fig. 7, Fig 3 shows the other embodiment (two cams) with the same opposite pivotal motion relative to the body)).
In Reference to Claim 2
The swinging toy according to claim 1, wherein the driving mechanism is provided with an output shaft; the output shaft is respectively connected to the two rotating members in a transmission manner; a rotation axis of the output shaft is perpendicular to the first direction; and wherein the rotation axis of the output shaft, the rotation axes of the two rotating members, and the rotation axes of the two swinging mechanisms are parallel to each other (rotation axes (about pivot pins 23) of the rotating members 19 are parallel to each other (horizontal from the front to rear of the body through the respective rotational portions) and are parallel to rotational axes of the cam(s) 28/34 and gears 20 as well as the output shaft of the motor 18/35 which is perpendicular to the lateral first direction, Fig. 1-7).
In Reference to Claim 4
The swinging toy according to claim 2, wherein a first gear tooth structure is arranged on the output shaft; second gear tooth structures are arranged on the two rotating members; and the first gear tooth structure is in engaged transmission to two second gear tooth structures (the output shaft of motor 18/35 has a toothed gear thereon and second gears 20 having teeth are positioned between the guide wheels 26/cams 28/34 and the output shaft, Fig. 4-5, further wherein cutout portions of cams 28/34 may also broadly be considered teeth, Fig. 3/7).
In Reference to Claim 5
The swinging toy according to claim 4, wherein quantities of teeth of the second gear tooth structures on the two rotating members are the same (the quantities of teeth one each portion of the gear train for each respective side/rotating member 19 is the same to provide the synchronized movement of the rotating members and as shown in Fig. 1-5, Col. 3 lines 5-7).
In Reference to Claim 8
The swinging toy according to claim 1, wherein the swinging toy further comprises a control device arranged on the main body member; the control device is electrically connected to the driving mechanism; and the control device is configured to controllably control a switch of the driving mechanism (the driving mechanism may be controlled by a user via manually controlled position producing mechanisms (switches) to steer the device via control of the cams/motor, further, wherein an electric motor inherently has an on/off switch to turn the device and driving mechanism on and off, and the motor is reversible (also requires an inherent switch member), Col. 3 lines 1-27).
In Reference to Claim 10
The swinging toy according to claim 1, wherein the swinging toy further comprises a speed change mechanism arranged on the main body member; and the speed change mechanism is connected between the rotating members and the driving mechanism in a transmission manner (the driving mechanism speed/steering may be controlled by a user via manually controlled position producing mechanisms (switches) to steer the device via control of the cams/motor, further, wherein an electric motor inherently has an on/off switch to turn the device and driving mechanism on and off, and the motor is reversible (also requires an inherent switch member), wherein on/off, reversible switches, and steering are all capable of operating the device at different relative speeds, Col. 3 lines 1-27).
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 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 3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kramer as applied to claim 2/1 above.
In Reference to Claim 3
Kramer teaches:
The swinging toy according to claim 2, wherein the swinging toy comprises at least one second transmission mechanism; at least one of the two rotating members is connected to the output shaft in a transmission manner through the at least one second transmission mechanism (the other of the gears 20 and cams 28/34 may be considered the second transmission mechanism provided between the output shaft of the driving motor and the swinging mechanisms);
wherein a quantity of the second transmission mechanism between one of the two rotating members and the output shaft is the same as a quantity of the second transmission mechanism between the other one of the two rotating members and the output shaft (Fig. 1-5, shows a generally evenly distributed gear train transmission means).
Though Kramer generally shows the gears and teeth of the gears within the transmission mechanism being the same amount of gears appearing to have the same amount of teeth thereon, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have formed the transmission gearing with different gears and/or different amounts of teeth on the gears in order to change the relative transmission speeds and/or torques applied to each of the end members as desired by the user as is known and common in the art. Further, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (St. Regis Paper. Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8) and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)). In this case, the exact amount of relative teeth on the rotatable transmission gears is merely a matter of obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide a desired rotation of the end members relative one another and/or relative to the driven gear/motor shaft.
In Reference to Claim 6
Kramer teaches:
The swinging toy according to claim 1, wherein each swinging mechanism comprises a transmission member and a swinging member: the transmission member is connected to the corresponding rotating member in a transmission manner; and the swinging member is detachably connected to the transmission member (swinging members 19 are rotatably attached to cams 26 at inner ends which engage respective transmission members, and are detachable from the transmission member as they are capable of being pivoted about pin 23 against bias spring 32 which would disengage cam 26 from the cam 28, Fig. 3, 5, 7).
Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have formed the swinging mechanism and transmission member as detachable members in order to allow a user to replace the parts as needed and as it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art (Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179).
In Reference to Claim 7
Kramer teaches:
The swinging toy according to claim 6, wherein the swinging member and the transmission member are detachably connected in a clamping manner (transmission guide wheel 26 is clamped about the end of each leg 19, and the guide wheels 26 are clamped via spring 32 onto the respective cam 2/34); and/or
the swinging member comprises at least one swinging sub-member, and each transmission member is detachably connected to the at least one swinging sub-member (legs 19 have subsections (bended portions) and guide wheels 26 rotatably attached at the inner ends); and/or
the swinging member is constructed as an imitated structure; and
the bionic structure comprises an animal wing imitated structure (the swinging member(s) 19 structurally imitates legs of an animal in a manner similar to wings).
Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have formed the swinging mechanism and transmission member as detachable members in order to allow a user to replace the parts as needed and as it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art (Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kramer as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Nagashima et al. US Pub. No. 2021/0060789.
In Reference to Claim 9
Kramer teaches:
The swinging toy according to claim 8 as rejected above.
Kramer fails to teach:
A light-emitting member arranged on the main body member and electrically connected to the control device; and/or the swinging toy further comprises a sound production member arranged on the main body member and electrically connected to the control device.
Further, Nagashima teaches:
A similar toy, wherein the swinging toy further comprises a light-emitting member arranged on the main body member and electrically connected to the control device; and/or the swinging toy further comprises a sound production member arranged on the main body member and electrically connected to the control device (light output 77, speaker output 23/76 (Fig. 7) are mounted on the body, [0041], [0055], [0058], [0060]-[0063], [0069]-[0071] to provide entertainment features to the toy (playing music, dancing, lighting up, etc.)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Kramer to have further included a light emitting member and/or speaker in the device in order to make it more fun and interesting to use and as sound and light producing members are known and commonly used in the art as taught by Nagashima ([0041], [0055], [0058], [0060]-[0063], [0069]-[0071]).
Brief Discussion of Other Prior Art References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the references cited page for publications that are noted for containing similar subject matter as the applicant. For example, Lin (CN 218421001), Chung (9,597,605), Jung (9,168,462), Willett (7,946,902), Wang (6,962,518), Chung (6,503,123), Nishikawa (6,488,560), McKittrick (4,629,440), Tanimura (3,568,363), and Kuen (1,707,735) teach similar toys having gear driven rotatable portions.
Conclusion
If the applicant or applicant’s representation has any questions or concerns regarding this office action or the application they are welcome to contact the examiner at the phone number listed below and schedule and interview to discuss the outstanding issues and possible amendments to expedite prosecution of this application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER R NICONOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7419. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8-6 MST.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/ALEXANDER R NICONOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711