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 § 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, 2, 6-9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oh (US20190316381).
Regarding claim 1, Oh teaches a safety switch for guarding accesses to industrial machines or plants suitable for being mounted close to an access to interact with an actuating device at the opening/closing of the access, the safety switch comprises: a case 4 which extends along a dimension defining a longitudinal axis of development; control means (20, 110) housed in said case and adapted to receive and exchange signals with the actuating device and/or with the machine or plant and provided with a first PCB 20 (paragraphs 39, 42); a head 30 connected to said case and adapted to interact with the actuating device upon the opening/closing of the access (the head houses the solenoid 32, and the solenoid drives the pin 33, and the pin 34 engages the actuator bolt 41); wherein said first PCB comprises a first longitudinal portion 128 housed in said case and a second longitudinal portion 55 housed in said head (the terminal section 55 of the PCB is positioned or housed within the head 30, see Figs. 5, 11b).
Regarding claim 2, Oh teaches the safety switch wherein said first longitudinal portion and said second longitudinal portion of said first PCB are integral and in physical continuity with each other (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 6, Oh teaches the safety switch comprising detection 115 and signaling means 21a/21b connected to said control means and suitable for detecting the presence of the actuating device and for signaling a status of the access and/or of the machine or plant (paragraph 44).
Regarding claim 7, Oh teaches the safety switch wherein said detection and signaling means comprise a first remote communication element 21a housed in said transverse arm (the cover 6 is the arm and its transverse with respect to the side walls of the base 4, see Figs. 5, 9, ) and adapted to detect the presence of an actuating device of the electronic type by exchanging a proximity signal with a second communication element 21b associated with the actuating device (paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 8, Oh teaches the safety switch wherein said first communication element is an antenna adapted to detect RFID signals (paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 9, Oh teaches the safety switch wherein the detection 115 and signaling means 21a-b housed in said transverse arm (the cover 6 is the arm and its transverse with respect to the side walls of the base 4, see Figs. 5, 9, ) comprise one or more signaling lights or indicators (LEDs as indicators, see paragraph 30).
Regarding claim 17, Oh teaches a safety assembly for guarding accesses to industrial machines or plants, comprising a safety switch according to claim 1 adapted to be anchored to one between a fixed part and a movable part (door) of the access to be guarded and an actuating device 2 adapted to be anchored to the other between the fixed or movable part 101 (door) of the access to be guarded and adapted to interact with said safety switch upon the closing/opening of the access for the opening/closing (paragraphs 25, 40-45) of one or more power and/or service circuits of the machine or plant (paragraph 49).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 and 10-16 remain 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “there is no way that the circuit substrate 20 may extend within the cap 3, since there is no passage or similar opening allowing the circuit substrate 20 to extend also on the cap 3”. The examiner agrees with the applicant on this point. However, the head is interpreted or defined as element 30, not as the cap 3. As shown in figures 5 and 11b, a portion 55 of the circuit board 20 is housed or positioned within the head 30.
Conclusion
Alternative rejection
Regarding claim 1, Pizzato teaches a safety switch for guarding accesses to industrial machines or plants suitable for being mounted close to an access to interact with an actuating device at the opening/closing of the access, which the safety switch comprises: a case 6 which extends along a main dimension defining a longitudinal axis of development; control means 12 housed in said case and adapted to receive and exchange signals with the actuating device 7 and/or with the machine or plant and provided with a first PCB 12;- a head 3 connected to said case and adapted to interact with the actuating device upon the opening/closing of the access (paragraph 34); wherein said first PCB comprises a first longitudinal portion 13 housed in said case and a second longitudinal portion 14 housed in said head (Figs. 1-4 and paragraph 37).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED M SAEED whose telephone number is (571)270-7976. The examiner can normally be reached 10-8pm.
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.
/AHMED M SAEED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
