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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Embodiment 2, Figures 1-5 and 7, Claims 1-5,8, 10, 12 and 16-19 in the reply filed on 05/07/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a common inventive concept is shared by all embodiments. This is not found persuasive because all the alternative embodiments require further search and/or consideration. Applicant is reminded that upon allowance of a generic claim, all claims which depend therefrom are subject to rejoinder.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 05/29/2024 and 07/14/2025 is 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 § 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 (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 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 1-4, 8, 16, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al. [US 2009/0322454].
Claim 1, Tanaka et al. discloses a relay [figure 2], comprising: a fixed base [10]; a stationary contact [52/53], fixed with respect to the fixed base; a movable contact plate [60], provided with a movable contact [63] corresponding to the stationary contact [figure 2]; a push rod [61], slidable with respect to the fixed base, the movable contact plate being movably provided, in a direction parallel to a sliding direction of the push rod, with respect to the push rod [figure 2]; an electromagnetic assembly [30], used to driving the push rod to slide; a reset elastic member [41], used to provide an elastic force for disengagement of the movable contact from the stationary contact [paragraph 0069]; at least one set of elastic assemblies [65/66], whose elastic force acts on the push rod and the movable contact plate, the elastic assembly comprising at least two elastic members [65 and 66; paragraph 0073]; a first magnetically guiding sheet [62]; and a second magnetically guiding sheet [64], wherein the first magnetically guiding sheet [62] is provided on a side of the movable contact plate facing the stationary contact [figures 2 and 11A], the second magnetically guiding sheet [64] is provided on a side of the movable contact plate away from the stationary contact [figures 2 and 11A], both the first magnetically guiding sheet and the second magnetically guiding sheet are able to be magnetized by a current passing through the movable contact plate [paragraph 0070], the second magnetically guiding sheet and the first magnetically guiding sheet are able to form a closed magnetic loop [paragraph 0070], the electromagnetic assembly drives the push rod to slide, and, after the push rod drives the movable contact plate to move so as to close the movable contact and the stationary contact by means of at least one of the elastic members, and an elastic force of remaining elastic members acts on the movable contact plate to increase a pressing force between the movable contact and the stationary contact, as the push rod continues to slide [paragraph 0071].
Claim 2, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein a side of the first magnetically guiding sheet [62] facing the second magnetically guiding sheet [64] is provided with a first magnetic attraction surface, a side of the second magnetically guiding sheet facing the first magnetically guiding sheet is provided with a second magnetic attraction surface, and the first magnetic attraction surface and the second magnetic attraction surface are provided facing each other [the upper portions of the sidewalls of 64 that contact 60; figure 11B].
Claim 3, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein one of the first magnetically guiding sheet [62] and the second magnetically guiding sheet [64] is provided with a sliding protrusion, and the other one is provided with a sliding slot for the sliding protrusion to slide [figure 14D, matching inclined faces; paragraph 0055].
Claim 4, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein one of the first magnetically guiding sheet [62] and the second magnetically guiding sheet [64] is of a flat plate shape [62], the other one is U-shaped [64; figure 10]; or both the first magnetically guiding sheet [62] and the second magnetically guiding sheet [64] are provided as U-shaped [figure 14C]; or both the first magnetically guiding sheet [62] and the second magnetically guiding sheet [64] are provided as L-shaped [figure 14B].
Claim 8, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the movable contact plate [60] is provided with a through slot [not labeled, see figures 2 and 10], the push rod [61] is provided to pass through the through slot, and the movable contact plate slides with respect to the push rod [figure 2].
Claim 16, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein all elastic members have different elastic coefficients in a same elastic assembly [paragraph 0071].
Claim 17, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 16, wherein an elastic coefficient of the elastic member generating elastic force first is less than that of the elastic member generating elastic force later in a same elastic assembly [paragraph 0071; 65 compresses first followed by 66].
Claim 19, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic assembly comprises a coil support [31], a coil [32], a fixed iron core [40], a yoke [21/22], and an armature [42/46], the coil is sheathed to an exterior of the fixed iron core [figure 2], both the fixed iron core and the yoke are fixed to the coil support [figure 2], the armature is fixedly connected to the push rod [61; paragraph 0043], the yoke and the fixed iron core generate a magnetic flux when the coil is energized, and the magnetic flux tends to form a closed magnetic loop to drive the armature to move close to the fixed iron core [figure 2].
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.
Claims 5, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. [US 2009/0322454] in view of Swartzentruber [US 7,944,333].
Claim 5, Tanaka et al. discloses the relay according to claim 1, wherein the elastic assembly [65/66] comprises a first elastic member [65] and a second elastic member [66], the first elastic member is a compression spring [coil spring; paragraph 0047] and the second elastic member plate spring [paragraph 0047], and both the first elastic member and the second elastic member are provided on a side of the movable contact plate away from the stationary contact [figure 10].
Tanaka et al. fails to teach that both the first elastic member and the second elastic member are compression springs
Swartzentruber teaches a relay [10] comprising a reset elastic member [22], used to provide an elastic force for disengagement of a movable contact [34] from stationary contact [36/38]; at least one set of elastic assemblies [26/28] comprising at least two elastic members [26 and 28]; wherein the first elastic member [26] and the second elastic member [28] are compression springs [col. 5 line 55 to col. 6 line 10].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the two-compression spring arrangement of Swartzentruber in the relay of Tanaka et al. as both perform the same task of increasing the closed contact pressure since a simple substitution of one known element for another, producing a predictable result, renders the claim obvious.
Claim 10, Tanaka et al. as modified discloses the relay according to claim 5, wherein Swartzentruber further teaches that all elastic members [65/66] are provided in a nested configuration in a same elastic assembly [figure 3].
Claim 12, Tanaka et al. as modified discloses the relay according to claim 5, wherein Tanaka et al. further disclose that all elastic members [65/66] are provided in parallel along a stretching direction in a same elastic assembly [figure 2].
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. [US 2009/0322454].
Claim 18, Tanaka et al. relay according to claim 16, wherein an elastic coefficient of the elastic member generating elastic force first is less than that of the elastic member generating elastic force later in a same elastic assembly [paragraph 0071; 65 compresses first followed by 66].
Tanaka et al. fails to teach that an elastic coefficient of the elastic member generating elastic force later is less than that of the elastic member generating elastic force first in a same elastic assembly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the elastic force of the second elastic member to be less than the first elastic member in order to adjust the resulting contact pressure during relay actuation.
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
Prosecution Insights