DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/07/2026have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-12, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connell (US 9484172) in view of Kato et al. (US 11615931).
In re claim 1, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses a relay, comprising: a base (24) having a middle area, a first contact area and a second contact area (contact areas are areas where the contacts are positioned), the middle area is arranged between the first contact area and the second contact area, the first contact area and the second contact area are arranged spaced with each other along the first direction (as seen in figures 1-2); a pair of contact parts respectively arranged in the first contact area and the second contact area; each contact part comprising two sets of the movable contact part, each set of the movable contact part comprising a movable contact piece (40,54), a movable contact and a static contact (50,70), the movable contact piece having a first end and a second end in a second direction, the movable contact being provided on the first end and the static contact being provided on the second end (as seen in figures 1-2); two movable contacts corresponding to two static contacts respectively in each contact part; wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction; and a magnetic circuit part arranged on the middle area of the base (as shown in figure 2), and configured to drive four movable contact pieces of the pair of contact parts through a push rod assembly (shown in figure 2) to move, thereby realizing connection or disconnection of the movable contact and the static contact. Connell does not teach the first and second partitions. Kato however, in figures 1-26 teaches a similar device having first and second partitions (41-42) arranged between the contact areas and the middle areas (this can be seen in figure 11 and other figures). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged first and second partitions as taught by Kato between the contact areas and the middle area of Connell, to provide protection for the middle area from arcs that can be produced by switching of the contacts.
In re claim 2, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that each set of movable contact part further comprises a movable contact leading-out piece (12-18) connected to the movable contact piece.
In re claim 3, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that four movable contact leading- out pieces in a pair of contact part are located at four corners of the base respectively (as seen in figure 2).
In re claim 4, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that in each set of the movable contact part, the static contact is located at a connection position of the second end and the movable contact leading-out piece of the movable contact piece (as seen in figure 2).
In re claim 5, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that a length of the movable contact piece extends along the second direction (as shown in figures 1-2).
In re claim 7, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that the base further has a first moving area and a second moving area (areas where the pushrods are positioned) spaced from each other along the second direction, and the middle area is located between the first moving area and the second moving area; the push rod assembly comprises a first push rod and a second push rod (122), the magnetic circuit part respectively drivably connected to the first push rod and the second push rod, so that the first push rod movably arranged in the first moving area, and the second push rod movably arranged in the second moving area; one end of the first push rod is connected to the first end of one of the movable contact pieces of the contact part in the first contact area, the other end of the first push rod is connected to the first end of one of the movable contact pieces of the contact part in the second contact area (as seen in figure 2); one end of the second push rod is connected to the first end of one of the other movable contact pieces of the contact part in the first contact area, the other end of the second push rod is connected to the first end of the other movable contact piece of the contact part in the second contact area (as seen in figure 2).
In re claim 8, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that the magnetic circuit part comprises a coil assembly (94-96) and an armature assembly (114), the armature assembly is pivotally connected to the base under a magnetic driving action of the coil assembly; the armature assembly is respectively connected to the first push rod and the second push rod and configured to drive the first push rod and the second push rod to reciprocate in the first direction.
In re claim 9, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that the first push rod and the second push rod move in opposite directions (as seen in figure 2).
In re claim 10, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that the first contact area, the first moving area, the second contact area and the second moving area are sequentially connected end-to-end to form a rectangular structure (as seen in figures 2 and 4).
In re claim 11, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that in a pair of contact part, four sets of the movable contact and the static contact are located at four corners of the rectangular structure respectively (as seen in figures 1-2).
In re claim 12, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that each set of the movable contact part further comprises a movable contact leading-out piece (12-16) connected to the movable contact piece, the static contact is arranged on the movable contact piece and/or the movable contact leading-out piece; four movable contact leading-out pieces in a pair of contact part are located at four corners of the rectangular structure respectively (as seen in figure 2).
In re claim 14, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that the movable contact piece comprises a plurality of sub-contact pieces stacked with each other (see last paragraph of column 8 and first paragraph of column 9).
In re claim 15, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that two movable contact pieces in the contact part are parallel with each other, and the two movable contact pieces have inner surfaces facing each other (as seen in figures 1-2).
In re claim 16, Connell, in figures 1-8, discloses that a length direction and the second direction of the movable contact piece are parallel with each other; opposite ends of the movable contact piece in the length direction are respectively provided with the first end and the second end (as seen in figures 1-2).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connell (US 9484172) in view of Kato et al. (US 11615931) and Hoffmann (US 10541097).
In re claim 13, Connell discloses partitions but does not disclose third and fourth partitions. Hoffmann however teaches that partitioning first and second moving areas from the middle area is known in the art (structures 90a and 90b partition the moving areas from the middle area). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have positioned additional partitions between the middle area and the moving areas of Connell/Kato as taught by Hoffmann to provide more support.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Talpalatski whose telephone number is (571)270-3908. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM PT.
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 Ismail can be reached at 5712723985. 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 Talpalatski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights