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
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 1-10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2014/097473 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 6 and 13, WO ‘473 discloses a reel loading device 1 (claim 13), and an automatic tape processing device 110 comprising a feeding device 120 (see figures 7-8) in which a cover tape 22 is adhered to an upper surface side of a base tape (a part of 21) in which cavities 24 (a number of empty cavities that do not accommodate the component 4 form the front end of the carrier tape 21, claim 6, see figure 5) configured to accommodate a component 4 are provided at a constant pitch (see figure 5), the feeding device 120 being configured to convey a carrier tape 21 to be loaded into a tape feeder 90 (see figure 2), a cutting device 160 configured to cut each of the base tape and the cover tape at a cutting portion (Q1-Q2, see figures 20-24), and a control device 100 (see figure 1) configured to determine the cutting portion of each of the base tape and the cover tape according to a type of the tape feed and control operation (using 101-104) of the feeding device 120 and the cutting device 160 so that the base tape and the cover tape are cut at each determined cutting portion, see figures 1-35.
Regarding claims 2-3 and 7, WO ‘473 discloses a state detection device (using 160, see figure 8) to detect a tape front end of the carrier tape (Lc, see figure 21), wherein the control device 100 (see figure 1) determines the cutting portion (Q1-Q2, which is a target tape area to cut as predetermined cutting positions, claims 3 and 7) of each of the base tape and the cover tape based on the tape front end state acquired from the state detection device, see figures 1-35.
Regarding claims 4-5, WO ‘473 discloses a peeled state of the cover tape peeled (i.e., no reference number, a length of d2 as a surplus length, claim 5) from the base tape (using 150, as same as applicant, see figure 22).
Regarding claims 8-9, WO ‘473 discloses a determination device (using 140, which has a photosensor/camera) configured to determine the type of the tape feeder and identify the tape feeder, wherein the control device 100 acquires a determination result by the determination device (i.e., 140 is in a part of 110, and 110 is connected to 100), see figures 1 and 8.
Regarding claim 10, WO ‘473 discloses a component presence/absence detection device (using 130) configured to detect presence/absence of the component 4 in the cavity 24 of the carrier tape (see paragraph [0044]), wherein the control device 100 determines the cutting portion of each of the base tape and the cover tape by using a distance from a front end of the base tape to the cavity accommodating the leading component (see figure 21, as same as applicant), which sends signal to a component detection or not accommodated to the cavity, see figures 1-35.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The claims 11-12 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claims 11-12, including every structural element recited in the claims.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the device as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the device in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
SK
2/13/26
/SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights