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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "2" and "2a" have both been used to designate the upper band portion. This is also the case for reference characters “2” and “2b” referencing the lower band portion.
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. 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 Objections
Claims 8 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8, ln. 4 – “the second hole is penetrated in the width direction” is grammatically incorrect.
Claim 9, ln. 4 – “the second hole is penetrated in the width direction” is grammatically incorrect.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Silva-Plastic (CH 260676, hereinafter Silva).
Regarding claim 1, Silva discloses “A band for mounting to a main body case (Description, pg. 1, ln. 12, "watch strap"; fig. 2, elements 1 and 2), the band comprising: a band main body formed of a resin material (Description, pg. 1, ln. 12, "made of thermoplastic material"); and an insert part (Description, pg. 2, ln. 15 "metal tube"; fig. 7, element 11) disposed in the band main body on a side which is to be mounted to the main body case (the metal plates are arranged at the case attachment ends of the bands), wherein the insert part is entirely covered with the resin material of the band main body (Description, pg. 2, ln. 15-16, “a metal tube 11 can be completely embedded in the thermoplastic material as a fastening element”; fig. 7, element 11).”
Regarding claim 18, Silva discloses “the band according to claim 1 (Description, pg. 1, ln. 12, "watch strap"; fig. 2, elements 1 and 2); and a main body case (Description, pg. 2, ln 16, “the watch being mounted”; not illustrated).”
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 2, 4, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva in view of de Iuliis (US 10149518, hereinafter de Iuliis).
Regarding claim 2, Silva discloses the band according to claim 1. However, Silva fails to teach or disclose “the insert part is formed with a plurality of first holes filled with the resin material of the band main body in insert molding.”
De Iuliis teaches a band for a wearable electronic device (col. 4, ln 44, “wearable electronic device”; fig. 1, element 100) comprising an enclosure (col. 4, ln. 48, “housing”; fig. 1, element 110) which includes an insert part encased in the band.
De Iuliis further teaches “the insert part (col. 12, ln. 32, “rigid insert”; fig. 7, element 726) is formed with a plurality of first holes (col.12, ln. 60, "attachment features"; fig. 7, elements 740) filled with the resin material of the band main body (col. 13, ln. 23, "polymer filler"; fig. 8, element 828) in insert molding (col. 13, ln. 27-29, "a polymer filler 828 may be readily and cost-effectively injection molded to the rigid insert 726"). With regard to the insert, de Iuliis teaches (col 12, ln. 23-28) “To maintain a low profile, the head band 104 may contain an insert 726 as depicted in FIGS. 7-9F. The insert 726 may be rigid, and may serve as a structure through which the spring pin 321 attaching the head band 104 to the clasp 108 passes. The rigid insert 726 may also add structural rigidity to the head band 104 to improve its function and/or durability.” Further describing the insert part, de Iuliis teaches (col. 12, ln. 36-45) “The rigid insert 726 may be formed from a variety of suitable substantially rigid materials. . . . The rigid insert 726 may include a thick base 743 adjoined by thin flanges 741. The rigid insert 726 may be formed as a single piece, or it may be formed from multiple pieces bonded together ( e.g., through welding, an adhesive, mechanical attachment, etc.).” Though the attachment of de Iuliis is between the band an a clasp, the need for secure attachment between the case and the band is a well-known need in the art of horology. Additionally, the use of a spring pin for attaching watch bands to case bodies of timepieces is routine and ordinary in the art. Thus, adapting the rigid insert of de Iuliis for use as a connection between the case and the band is within the skills of one having ordinary skill in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve the insert part of Silva with the rigid insert having a plurality of holes of de Iuliis with the expected benefit of attaining a more durable and secure attachment between the insert part and the resin band.
Regarding claim 4, Silva discloses the band according to claim 1. However, Silva fails to teach or disclose “the insert part includes a main body and a connector, and the main body is a part that is longer in a width direction of the band than in a longitudinal direction of the band.”
De Iuliis teaches “the insert part (col. 12, ln. 23, “insert”; fig. 7, element 726) includes a main body (col. 12, ln. 41, "thick base") and a connector (col. 12, ln. 25, “spring pin”; fig. 3a, element 321), and the main body is a part that is longer in a width direction of the band than in a longitudinal direction of the band (the thick base (743) of the insert (726) is longer laterally that longitudinally with respect to the band).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the insert part and spring pin of de Iuliis along the width of the watch band to allow the spring pin to be free at the ends to make a connection with another part.
Regarding claim 19, the combined art of Silva and de Iuliis teaches the band according to claim 2. In particular, Silva further teaches “a main body case (Description, pg. 2, ln 16, “the watch being mounted”; not illustrated).”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5-17 and 20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J WALKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7599. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM ET Monday through Friday.
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.
/MICHAEL JAMES WALKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2831
/renee s luebke/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights