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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 1 in the reply filed on 6/3/26 is acknowledged.
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 “enclosure is a cylindrical protector that is fixed to the case with a first insertion hole formed to extend through from inside to outside, has a second insertion hole corresponding to the first insertion hole in a fixed-side surface, and is open on an unfixed side” (claim 7) 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.
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 6-7, 15-17 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.
Claim 6 recites “cylindrical protector that is fixed to the case with a first insertion hole formed to extend through from inside to outside, has a second insertion hole corresponding to the first insertion hole in a fixed-side surface, and is open on an unfixed side.” Given the premise that the hole is fixed. It is unclear what applicant means by the unfixed side. This doesn’t define a clear or definite limitation. Therefore claim 6 is indefinite. Claim 7 recites the same language and is indefinite for the same reasons.
Claims 15-17 recite a doughnut shape. However it is unclear if applicant is trying to claim a full toroid shape or merely a cylindrical ring shape. The metes and bounds of doughnut is not established because a donut can have a number of different shapes and it is not a strict geometric definition. See for instance applicant’s element 7 figure 4. Therefore claims 15-17 are indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-7, 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuda (JP 2023038546) in view of Wyssbrod (US 2001/0050884). Yasuda (US 2023/0070965) is used for translation purposes.
With regard to claim 1 a switching device (figures 1, 2) comprising:
an enclosure (best depicted in figure 2 as the enclosed space of the wristwatch. There are numerous reference numerals, but the enclosure refers to the negative space formed by those structures which lacks a clear reference numeral) that is provided on an outer part of a case and opens toward an outside of the case (figure 2);
a filter arranged in the enclosure (porous member 18 figure 2);
an operation receiver (16, 12, 21) that is arranged on an outer side of the case relative to the filter (figure 2) and includes:
a shaft (20) having one end side inserted in an insertion hole provided to extend through from the enclosure toward an inside of the case (through hole 15 figure 2; 30a and/or 30b figure 5); and
an operation head (21) provided on the other end side of the shaft and arranged at least partially in the enclosure (figure 2).
It is unclear if Yasuda teaches the claim language:
a rotation restrictor that restricts rotation of the operation receiver
and thus it is being treated as not taught for clarity of the rejection.
Wyssbrod teaches a noncircular push button with features that support anti-rotation.
PNG
media_image1.png
416
575
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Yasuda’s system with anti rotation features as taught by Wyssbrod including a rotation restrictor that restricts rotation of the operation receiver. The reason for doing so would have been to give the user interface element excellent structural characteristics and a desirable spring interface structure, as taught by Wyssbrod.
With regard to claim 2 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 1, wherein a first recess or a first protrusion as the rotation restrictor is formed on an opening side of the enclosure (see previous modification and figures 1-3 of Wyssbrod).
With regard to claim 3 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 2, wherein a second protrusion or a second recess fitted within or over the first recess or the first protrusion of the enclosure is formed on the operation head of the operation receiver (see previous modification and figures 1-3 of Wyssbrod; the operational element and corresponding receiving structure are sized and shaped to match each other to facilitate the other features including anti-rotation).
With regard to claim 4 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 3, wherein the shaft of the operation receiver is arranged in the case so as to allow switching (see 9, 9a figure 2- Yasuda).
With regard to claim 5 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 4, wherein the filter is deformed to contract in accordance with an operation on the operation receiver (figure 2, the system is a push button. See “elastic porous member 18 being an elastic member; figures 2, 3).
With regard to claim 6 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 3, wherein the enclosure is a cylindrical protector that is fixed to the case (figure 2) with a first insertion hole formed to extend through from inside to outside (figure 2), has a second insertion hole corresponding to the first insertion hole in a fixed-side surface, and is open on an unfixed side (figure 2).
Figure 2:
PNG
media_image2.png
454
656
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Note also the 112b rejection above. It’s unclear how applicant is interpreting this claim in light of the invention. See applicant’s figure 2 and figure 4.
PNG
media_image3.png
328
406
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
373
613
media_image4.png
Greyscale
For comparison relative to the claims and to provide for broadest reasonable interpretation analysis.
With regard to claim 7 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 4, wherein the enclosure is a cylindrical protector (23) that is fixed to the case (2) with a first insertion hole (between sidewalls 23) formed to extend through from inside to outside, has a second insertion hole corresponding to the first insertion hole in a fixed-side surface (22a), and is open on an unfixed side (figure 2).
With regard to claim 10 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 1, wherein the filter is formed of an elastic porous material (elastic porous member 18 – paragraph 20).
With regard to claim 11 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 2, wherein the filter is formed of an elastic porous material (elastic porous member 18 – paragraph 20).
With regard to claim 12 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 3, wherein the filter is formed of an elastic porous material (elastic porous member 18 – paragraph 20).
With regard to claim 13 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 4, wherein the filter is formed of an elastic porous material (elastic porous member 18 – paragraph 20).
With regard to claim 14 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 5, wherein the filter is formed of an elastic porous material (elastic porous member 18 – paragraph 20).
With regard to claim 15 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 1, wherein the filter (18) is formed in a doughnut shape (18 figure 2) so as to surround the insertion hole concentrically with the insertion hole (15 figure 2)
With regard to claim 16 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 2, wherein the filter (18) is formed in a doughnut shape (18 figure 2) so as to surround the insertion hole concentrically with the insertion hole (15 figure 2)
With regard to claim 17 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 3, wherein the filter (18) is formed in a doughnut shape (18 figure 2) so as to surround the insertion hole (figure 2) concentrically with the insertion hole (15 figure 2).
With regard to claim 18 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach the switching device according to claim 6, further comprising a biasing member (31) that is provided on an outer periphery of the shaft (20) and formed to have a diameter larger than an inner diameter of the second insertion hole (30 figure 6).
With regard to claim 19 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach an electronic device comprising: the switching device according to claim 1; and the case (2, 3; title, abstract).
With regard to claim 20 Yasuda and Wyssbrod teach a timepiece comprising: the switching device according to claim 1; the case (2, 3); and a timepiece module (8) enclosed in the case (figures 3-4; title).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuda (JP 2023038546) in view of Wyssbrod (US 2001/0050884) in further view of Sakurazawa (US 2014/0286146)
Yasuda (US 2023/0070965) is used for translation purposes.
With regard to claim 8 (depends from claim 3) Yasuda does not disclose the claimed: wherein the first recess or the first protrusion of the enclosure is formed at three locations at equal intervals along an outer periphery of the enclosure on an opening side.
Sakurazawa teaches matching three location protrusions and notes - figures 4, 7, 9. This is done to allow the system to be secured – abstract.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Yasuda’s system to comprise wherein the first recess or the first protrusion of the enclosure is formed at three locations at equal intervals along an outer periphery of the enclosure on an opening side, as taught by Sakurazawa. The reason for doing so would have been to allow the system to be protected against rotation, environmental concerns, and/or be secured as taught by Sakurazawa.
With regard to claim 9 (depends from claim 8) Yasuda does not disclose the claimed: wherein the second protrusion or the second recess corresponding to the first recess or the first protrusion of the enclosure is formed at three locations on a periphery of the operation head of the operation receiver.
Sakurazawa teaches matching three location protrusions and notes - figures 4, 7, 9. This is done to allow the system to be secured – abstract.
Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Yasuda’s system to comprise wherein the second protrusion or the second recess corresponding to the first recess or the first protrusion of the enclosure is formed at three locations on a periphery of the operation head of the operation receiver, as taught by Sakurazawa. The reason for doing so would have been to allow the system to be protected against rotation, environmental concern, and/or be secured as taught by Sakurazawa.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN KAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-8931. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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.
/SEAN KAYES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights